Sunday, May 7, 2017
Sunday, March 19, 2017
One of my pet peeves is when a judge on a show like American Idol asks a contestant, "What kind of artist do you want to be?” To ask this question, and to answer it, is to fundamentally misunderstand the term in question. You cannot choose what kind of artist you want to be. You simply are an artist, or you're not. This is to say, to be an artist is to have a specific mindset and psychology. The real question being asked here is “what kind of entertainer do you want to be?” This is an intelligible question, and one that can be answered.
One might also confuse a discussion about creators with that of their resulting creations. To be clear, we’re discussing the former, not the latter. So we don’t need to debate whether the byproduct of a creator is or isn’t art, or if it’s good or bad, etc. Those are subjective determinations that will vary from person to person. But whether the creator is an artist is not subjective. That is a fact. It may be a fact we are not privy to, or one that we suspect but can’t be certain of, but there is no debating that every creator has a set of intentions and motivations, whatever they may be. And I contend there is merit to unpacking these, both as consumers and creators - for it fosters clearer conceptions of what artistry entails, which ultimately serves to enhance both the creation of art and our appreciation for it.
Wednesday, May 4, 2016
When It Comes to YouTube, Google Is Only Half The Problem…The Other Half Is Major Labels And Publishers
1 "Here's why the music labels are furious at YouTube. Again." Re/Code. April 11, 2016.
2 "Europe's divi-boss tells YouTube to cough up proper music royalties". The Register. April 19, 2016.
3 "Debbie Harry: "Music matters. YouTube should pay musicians fairly". The Guardian. April 26, 2016.
4 "Nikki Sixx launches campaign to get YouTube to 'do the right thing' over music royalties". The Guardian. April 24, 2016.
5 "Nelly Furtado: "YouTube pays more than nothing. That doesn't make it fair". The Guardian. May 2, 2016.
6 "What Major Music Streaming Services Pay Artists, Visualized". Co.Design. July 15, 2015.
7 "YouTube Music Is Growing 60% Faster Than All Other Streaming Music Services Combined". Digital Music News. September 14, 2015.
8 "How Much Do the Most Popular Streaming Services Pay Per Stream". Sonicbids Blog. July 20, 2015.
9 "YouTube - Not Spotify, Pandora Or Apple Music - Is The Number One Music Streaming Service Worldwide: Here's Why". Tech Times. July 8, 2015.
10 "YouTube to Tv Networks: No More 'Sweetheart' Ad Deals for You!" Ad Age. October 31, 2013.
11 "How YouTube Pays Artists by East Bay Ray". Janky Smooth. December 3, 2015.
12 "Shining Some Light On The Dark Side Of YouTube". Zack Hemsey Official Blog. January 28, 2016.
13 "YouTube Revenue Explainer". Music Tech Solutions. March 10, 2016.
14 10% off the top means content owners would be getting 55% of the remaining 90% of revenue, which equates as follows: .55 X .9 = .495 (49.5%).
15 Assuming a commission of between 15-25% on the artist portion of earnings (49.5% in this scenario), this would leave the artist with 75-85% of their original share: .85 X .495 = .42075 (42%) / .75 X .495 = .37125 (37%).
16 "Sell Your Music on iTunes". Tunecore Official Website.
17 "How we pay royalties: an overview". Spotify Official Website.
18 "Here's how much Apple Music is going to pay artists". Business Insider. June 22, 2015.
19 "Pricing". Bandcamp Official Website.
20 "No other platform gives as much money back to creators". The Guardian. April 28, 2016.
21 "The Dark Side Of YouTube". Zack Hemsey Official Blog. January 28, 2015.
22 "What should I do about YouTube?" Official Zoe Keating Blog. January 22, 2015.
23 "YOUTUBE SAYS IT'S PAID $2BN TO MUSIC RIGHTSHOLDERS. BUT WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN?" Music Business Worldwide. October 26, 2015.
Saturday, April 23, 2016
Thursday, January 28, 2016
There is also the matter of YouTube’s Content ID System - a digital audio fingerprinting system that is a necessary tool for copyright owners to police UGC, but a system that YouTube selectively allows access to (access which I was denied for reasons unknown), thus creating the ability of those with access to fraudulently utilize Content ID to illegally claim and monetize the content of those without access (with no mechanism in place for the rightful copyright owner to notify YouTube of the fraudulence in question or properly dispute it).
1 "YouTube to Tv Networks: No More 'Sweetheart' Ad Deals for You!" Ad Age. October 31, 2013. ↩
2 "YouTube Standardizes Ad-Revenue Split for All Partners, But Offers Upside". Variety. November 1, 2013. ↩
3 "YouTube still doesn't make Google any money". Business Insider. February 25, 2015. ↩
4 "YouTube Revenue Explainer". Music Tech Solutions. March 10, 2016. ↩
5 "How YouTube Pays Artists by East Bay Ray". Janky Smooth. December 3, 2015. ↩
6 "The Dark Side Of YouTube". Zack Hemsey Official Blog. January 28, 2015. ↩
7 "What should I do about YouTube?" Official Zoe Keating Blog. January 22, 2015. ↩
8 "Forget CDS. Teens Are Tuning Into YouTube". The Wall Street Journal. August 14, 2012. ↩
9 "YouTube as you know it is about to change dramatically". The Verge. August 28, 2015. ↩
10 "YouTube boosted by music videos to pull behind Facebook". BBC. October 26, 2011. ↩
11 "YOUTUBE IS THE NO.1 MUSIC STREAMING PLATFORM - AND GETTING BIGGER". Music Business Worldwide. July 6, 2015. ↩
12 "YouTube Music Is Growing 60% Faster Than All Other Streaming Music Services Combined". Digital Music News. September 14, 2015. ↩
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Let’s begin by examining the often-cited motivation for releasing singles - generating a “buzz” - that electric gossip over something so cool and interesting that no one can stop talking about it. Without a buzz, your album will be released into anonymous oblivion amidst the endless sea of content that humanity swims in; the world won’t stop to take notice of your contribution, and no one will realize you even exist. But fear not, for the single has the potential to avert this creative and existential disaster. This is that one song that will change everything. A song so special, it makes you believe in magic. Yes, the single holds the power to generate that coveted buzz, but…and this is the important part…it must be released in advance of the album to which it belongs! Failure to abide by this tenant will render the single powerless; for reasons unknown, people simply will not feel the same way about the song otherwise.
In light of the above, I have been and will continue to be a conscientious objector to this indefensible pastime. The only singles you will find from me are self-contained songs that do not belong to a larger body of work. After all, that’s what a single should be…one single fucking song!!!!
Friday, September 11, 2015
On first glance, it may look like my daughter is being suffocated, or attacked by a face sucker out of the Alien franchise, but rest assured she is alive and well (and not carrying an alien pod inside her…as far as we know). The baby is sucking on my wife’s pinky finger, with the remaining fingers covering her eyes and face, while all of the weight is distributed across two hands, two boobs, and one forearm, working in concert to form the perfect baby cocoon. This was typically accompanied by a soft rocking up and down, while walking about.