Curious about the music industry? Find out stuff.

Recommended Videos

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
xedi said:
Will metalcore die like nu-metal or rather stay in some form as one of the numerous metal genres?

Do you think it is too soon or is the world ready for a nu-metal revival?

I am a huge progressive metal/rock fan so it feels for me like forever waiting for a new Tool album. In case you have any info or opinion: When do you expect it to be released?

Thanks a lot for all the long answers you are giving us, it is an incredibly interesting read.
Metalcore is probably going to stick around - it'll no doubt change and evolve as other metal styles have done, but I don't see it dying. The reason why, I think, is because metalcore is a bit more honest than nu-metal. The rap-metal hybrid of nu-metal was never really going to fly for long, because metal singers simply aren't hip-hop guys, no matter how much they try to be. Even though rap and metal are in many ways equivalents of each other, the rhythmic rules are totally different and I've heard very, very few good combinations, as few metalheads really understand how to make good rap and vice versa. Metalcore might be a bit emo and whiny sometimes but it doesn't have the vocalists trying to be something that they're simply not and I think that's helping its longevity - ultimately it's music that's easier for their fanbase to relate to directly, because it has lyrics that resonate a bit better with the average teenage metalhead, rather than some fake hip-hop pose being inserted into metal as a gimmick which nobody can really relate to at all.

Nu-metal died fairly recently, it is definitely too soon for a revival and to be honest I doubt one will ever come for the aforementioned reasons.

Tool are still touring, their tour just hit Australia. I wouldn't expect new material anytime soon.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
campofapproval said:
BonsaiK said:
Scrumpmonkey said:
Wow erm... thankyou for your comprehensive and well formatted reply it is very much apprecitated = ) . So things in terms of studio are THAT dire are they? Wow i didn't quite realise we had got to that stage. I still buy a lot of albums albums, CDs at that, but i do also tend not to buy much merch.

Ok i more open question, how do YOU think the music industry could make studio acts viable again? How can things be improved out there?
If you do decide to buy merch, buy it at gigs. Don't buy it anywhere else.

The only way the music industry could make studio acts viable in the future is to eliminate piracy. I can't see that happening, so I think that it's safe to say that things are not going to get better in the forseeable future.
the press has covered how the riaa has spent tens of millions (at least) going after file-sharers and the like with little to show for it ($60-some million from '06-'08, with a little more than $1 million in return.) you think this is due to industry execs choosing to throw money down a black hole, or do you think this is something labels would be doing at the requests of their shareholders and outside pressures?
They're going after pirates because they want to hurt them, because they believe that what pirates are doing is wrong and they want to shut these people down, not because they think they're actually going to get their money back.
 

campofapproval

New member
Jan 25, 2011
116
0
0
BonsaiK said:
campofapproval said:
BonsaiK said:
Scrumpmonkey said:
Wow erm... thankyou for your comprehensive and well formatted reply it is very much apprecitated = ) . So things in terms of studio are THAT dire are they? Wow i didn't quite realise we had got to that stage. I still buy a lot of albums albums, CDs at that, but i do also tend not to buy much merch.

Ok i more open question, how do YOU think the music industry could make studio acts viable again? How can things be improved out there?
If you do decide to buy merch, buy it at gigs. Don't buy it anywhere else.

The only way the music industry could make studio acts viable in the future is to eliminate piracy. I can't see that happening, so I think that it's safe to say that things are not going to get better in the forseeable future.
the press has covered how the riaa has spent tens of millions (at least) going after file-sharers and the like with little to show for it ($60-some million from '06-'08, with a little more than $1 million in return.) you think this is due to industry execs choosing to throw money down a black hole, or do you think this is something labels would be doing at the requests of their shareholders and outside pressures?
They're going after pirates because they want to hurt them, because they believe that what pirates are doing is wrong and they want to shut these people down, not because they think they're actually going to get their money back.
i'm guessing you've already addressed your thoughts on piracy and intellectual property somewhere in this thread. if you're not interested in summing up your views on the subjects, any hints on where to look in this thread?
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
campofapproval said:
BonsaiK said:
campofapproval said:
BonsaiK said:
Scrumpmonkey said:
Wow erm... thankyou for your comprehensive and well formatted reply it is very much apprecitated = ) . So things in terms of studio are THAT dire are they? Wow i didn't quite realise we had got to that stage. I still buy a lot of albums albums, CDs at that, but i do also tend not to buy much merch.

Ok i more open question, how do YOU think the music industry could make studio acts viable again? How can things be improved out there?
If you do decide to buy merch, buy it at gigs. Don't buy it anywhere else.

The only way the music industry could make studio acts viable in the future is to eliminate piracy. I can't see that happening, so I think that it's safe to say that things are not going to get better in the forseeable future.
the press has covered how the riaa has spent tens of millions (at least) going after file-sharers and the like with little to show for it ($60-some million from '06-'08, with a little more than $1 million in return.) you think this is due to industry execs choosing to throw money down a black hole, or do you think this is something labels would be doing at the requests of their shareholders and outside pressures?
They're going after pirates because they want to hurt them, because they believe that what pirates are doing is wrong and they want to shut these people down, not because they think they're actually going to get their money back.
i'm guessing you've already addressed your thoughts on piracy and intellectual property somewhere in this thread. if you're not interested in summing up your views on the subjects, any hints on where to look in this thread?
It was one of the first things I was asked in this thread. Read posts 21 and 27 on page 1 for my replies. Further to that I'll just say that I really don't like piracy, but I can't realistically see any way to stop it, so it's just something that the industry is going to have to work around somehow.
 

ChaoticKraus

New member
Jul 26, 2010
598
0
0
Thanks for the answers! Informative and Comprehensive.


Since i noticed you knew a bit about hip-hop i figured i might ask you another thing. Where do you think mainstream hip-hop is going from here? Gangsta rap are becoming less and less relevant and it feels like a lot of rappers (B.O.B, Drake, Wale, Nicki Minaj, Kid Cudi) are fighting for attention to be the "upcomer".

My prediction was that it would become more electronic in nature, but that doesn't seem to ring very true (except for Cudi, who i think did it very well). And now Kanye West released an album that the world collectively shat their pants over (including me) which wasn't very electronic at all. Will it have an affect ala "Straight Outta Compton" or "Only Build 4 Cuban Linx"? I'm not really sure if it's getting more or less lyrical either.

Then again it's kind of refreshing that there is variety in the marketplace. The older big rappers (Nas, Eminem, Jay-Z) seems to continue releasing stuff aswell so maybe we will see some kind of "golden age" of variety and innovation again in the future.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
ChaoticKraus said:
Thanks for the answers! Informative and Comprehensive.


Since i noticed you knew a bit about hip-hop i figured i might ask you another thing. Where do you think mainstream hip-hop is going from here? Gangsta rap are becoming less and less relevant and it feels like a lot of rappers (B.O.B, Drake, Wale, Nicki Minaj, Kid Cudi) are fighting for attention to be the "upcomer".

My prediction was that it would become more electronic in nature, but that doesn't seem to ring very true (except for Cudi, who i think did it very well). And now Kanye West released an album that the world collectively shat their pants over (including me) which wasn't very electronic at all. Will it have an affect ala "Straight Outta Compton" or "Only Build 4 Cuban Linx"? I'm not really sure if it's getting more or less lyrical either.

Then again it's kind of refreshing that there is variety in the marketplace. The older big rappers (Nas, Eminem, Jay-Z) seems to continue releasing stuff aswell so maybe we will see some kind of "golden age" of variety and innovation again in the future.
Rap music has always been "electronic" right from the very beginning. There's a few "live" rap groups out there like The Roots and so forth, but they'll always be the exception, not the rule. Part of the reason for rap's popularity has always been that like punk, musical skill isn't a barrier, and while it can be performed with skill (see scratching DJs, and some of the MCs I'll discuss below) it's still very "everyman" music in a way. This is aided by the fact that it can be electronically generated on the cheap. The permeation of electronic instruments in rap has always been there and that's not going to be going away. And Kanye's album is electronic up the ass. He might be using a few "natural" sounding drum and guitar samples but there's also electronic treatments in there. if there weren't it probably wouldn't even sound like a rap record.

Lyrically, rap has definitely gotten more sophisticated over time. Early rap sounded like this:


In other words, rhyming couplets, just like a pop or rock song, with everything in a fairly strict order. That was the standard for rap music, until Rakim came along:


That was recorded in 1988 and in terms of lyrical sophistication sounds like something Eminem could have done last week. Rakim raised the bar for lyrical sophistication in rap, forcing the competition to become more complex in the rhyming department. For years nobody even got close to Rakim, and Nas owes a lot of his fame to the fact that on his first album "Illmatic" he was able to take the essence of what Rakim did with lyrical flow and take it a little further than anybody else at the time:


Nas has backed off a little on the complexity of his flow since then but he's still much more sophisticated than Kanye West even now. Eminem has always rhymed very sharp but accents all his rhyming syllables, I personally find this irritating because it's as if he's trying to prove that he can do it instead of just doing it, it's like rap but with training wheels, however it's probably that very same accentuation that has made him so popular because breaking down the flow in such a way probably helps aspiring rappers to get into the style and figure out how it works. It's probably a similar situation to how Ice-T was so popular in the late 80s and early 90s - he wasn't the best MC out there at the time but his lyrics were very clean and articulate - anybody could understand them, there wasn't a lot of jargon, so he appealed to a broad audience.

Likewise Kanye is hugely successful despite being relatively "simple" and that proves that sometimes simple things just resonate with a large amount of people, and there's nothing wrong with that. The guitarist who can only play a few chords may not be as good as the guitarist who can play all up and down the neck, but if your audience would rather just hear a few chords played reasonably well, why does it matter? So what I'm saying is that there's room for everything out there.

Rap is definitely never going away, as for where it's going to I don't think anybody really knows. Most of the changes in the style that have happened were things that nobody saw coming except the people at the forefront of those changes, and even those people probably weren't sure if they were on the right track or not. Rap will probably just continue to fragment and splinter into different offshoots just like it's spiritual equivalent heavy metal has been doing for the last 30 years or so.
 

ChaoticKraus

New member
Jul 26, 2010
598
0
0
Oh yeah, i know about rap's production method and the evolution of the lyrical ability. I was just wondering in what direction you (having knowledge of the industry) thought it would evolve in the future now that the whole "gangsta"/"street" persona seems to matter less. I just probably got all long-winded and diffuse as usual.

When i said electronic sound i meant something that really sounds "digital". Kinda like dance music but with rapping. I just figured that with electronic dance music being so popular it might influence hip-hop. Like the one below.



I know Kanye is nothing more than an okay rapper, but he is one heck of a producer. And since his new record was so acclaimed i figured it might influence the genre musically. Kind of like how the production on "The Chronic" influenced hip-hop throughout the 90's. I like speculating about such things.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
ChaoticKraus said:
Oh yeah, i know about rap's production method and the evolution of the lyrical ability. I was just wondering in what direction you (having knowledge of the industry) thought it would evolve in the future now that the whole "gangsta"/"street" persona seems to matter less. I just probably got all long-winded and diffuse as usual.

When i said electronic sound i meant something that really sounds "digital". Kinda like dance music but with rapping. I just figured that with electronic dance music being so popular it might influence hip-hop. Like the one below.



I know Kanye is nothing more than an okay rapper, but he is one heck of a producer. And since his new record was so acclaimed i figured it might influence the genre musically. Kind of like how the production on "The Chronic" influenced hip-hop throughout the 90's. I like speculating about such things.
Well, hip-hop is electronic dance music I guess, so yeah, they're going to influence each other a lot, and always have. Even going right back to the start of DJing hip-hop Djs were playing stuff like Kraftwerk etc.

"Gangsta" rap is often criticised as being a trend or fad that will soon die, but ironically it's this form of rap which has had the most longevity since the style was created. On the other hand the "political" rap movement that Public Enemy spearheaded has almost completely fallen by the wayside - to the horror of politically-correct listeners everywhere, that stuff was the fad! It's panned out this way because rap has always been, first and foremost, competition/party music, and the gangsters/money/hoes stuff actually fits in really well with that. If you're going to brag about something, you might as well brag about getting all the girls and having the most cash, after all. Bragging about changing the state of the world doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

I don't think Kayne will be that influential personally, but who knows. personally I see his new album as just picking up on currents that have been left by other artists - to me he's a follower, not a leader. He's very good at making a refined product though. And yeah we industry types don't know shit about where rap is going to go, really. Maybe Kanye will enact some great musical change in hip-hop, but I doubt it. If anything I'd say he already did that by helping to popularise Auto-tune and that particular torch is now going to go to some up-and-comer.
 

ajh93

New member
Feb 11, 2010
169
0
0
two questions:
1:eek:n average how much money does a band get paid by the record company?do they get more/less money depending on how popular they are?
2:how do you determine which bands get record deals ("they sound good" or "they'll make us money!")?
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
ajh93 said:
two questions:
1:eek:n average how much money does a band get paid by the record company?do they get more/less money depending on how popular they are?
2:how do you determine which bands get record deals ("they sound good" or "they'll make us money!")?
1. I answered this question earlier in the thread. I'll cut and paste my own reply to someone else's very similar question:

me said:
That's a really good question. It varies wildly from case to case.

Firstly, does the artist owe the record label money? When big artists get signed they often get a big chunk of money to record their album. However that money is not a gift, it's a loan, which then needs to be paid back through album sales. The band typically sees no money at all until the debt is repaid. Let's take the example of a pop band who had a couple of huge and I mean huge singles that they released off their own bat, a record label picks them up and likes them so much that they give then $100,000 to record their album. The band goes "fuck yeah $100,000 thanks a bunch", records their album, and spends the change on cars, clothes, hookers, drugs, whatever. Their album does okay, they do end up selling a few thousand copies of their album, enough to repay the loan, but they still never see any money. Why not? Because every time the label does things to promote that artist, that money gets added to the existing debt. More sales fuel more promotion and it just goes around and around, the band never gets in the black. A few years later, the band goes cold in the marketplace as music fashion changes, their albums stop selling, and they're in debt up to their eyeballs, they eventually go "fuck this" and pack it in. Ever wonder what happens to those bands that were huge for a few years and then suddenly dropped off the radar, now you know...

So, let's assume that the band were clever, and were offered $100,000 and said "actually, no - we'll record our album for $5000, and by the way we'll have our lawyer look over the contract and make sure that you can't do any promotion and charge our debt without our collective authorisation" so the label gives them the $5000, they record their album, it does reasonably well, the label doesn't go crazy with stupid advertising, and they're in the black in a few months. So how much money are they getting?

Well, did they write their own songs? If not - uh oh. Cover songs - the original songwriters are the ones who collect the royalties. A band I'm friends with (who shall remain nameless) had a massive national hit a few years ago - with a cover song. I took the singer to lunch one day and said "so how much money have you seen?" - the answer - "we get a wage from the label, which is about enough money for pizza and cigarettes, but we don't see any CD sales money at all, we owe them too much money. The only other money we see is from merch sales". If you're selling a single that's a cover song and it becomes a big hit, you'd better at least hope that you wrote track 2.

If the band did write their own material, well it varies depending on what's in the contract. The lowest royalty rate you'll see on a major label is about 5%, and the highest might be 25%. Obviously a band who is hot in the marketplace or has a significant track record of sales weilds more negotiating power and can demand better treatment here. Independent labels sometimes offer better deals than this, sometimes not. Really small labels will often go 50/50 with artists once expenses are covered as a matter of principle, but then getting a big monster hit on one of these small labels is unlikely because they might not be able to give you the promotional push a larger label with more money can. Of course if you release completely independently, then you get all the money, but then you're also paying your own production, promotional and logistic costs, the stuff a label would normally take care of for you.

This is a wild oversimplification, I haven't talked about "reserves", "overruns" or what happens when you sell music on the internet (where royalties are less due to legal technicalities) but that'll give you some general idea. The short answer to your question is "probably not much - but as a general rule, the bigger the label, the more potential sales you can make, but the less money you see per unit".
2. Several factors:

* Are they good enough at what they do, to be able to do it professionally? Note, the key word here is "enough". A technical expert is nice (because that's an extra marketing point) but usually isn't required for most styles. Most artists just need to be competent.

* Are they making music that there is a market for? There's no point signing some band whose music style has only just gone out of fashion, because nobody's going to buy it no matter how "good" it is. There's no point signing a nu-metal band in 2011 for the same reason that nobody was ever going to sign a disco band in 1986, or a new-romantic pop band in 1992.

* If they're not making music that's recognised as "in" right now, are they making music that there is potentially a market for? It's okay to do stuff that isn't in fashion as long as it wasn't in fashion recently. In other words, if you're going to be different, be different with something in a new way, not an old way. These bands represent more of a risk, but then there are labels willing to take risks like that.

* Are they genuinely committed to making music? Nobody wants to sign up a band and then have them quit 6 months later because someone got married a la the first verse of Bryan Adams' "Summer Of 69". Drug habits, strange lifestyles and so forth are fine as long as the music comes first and the other stuff comes second. It's when the debauchery takes first place that problems emerge.

...and most importantly:

* Will people realistically like the material the band is performing? This is the one thing that trumps all others, and if a label senses "the public are going to go off for that particular song" they will sign a band often regardless of other factors. Your question of "sounds good" vs "makes money" is a false dichotomy, as what sound good generally makes the most money. If you're now thinking "but... but... [insert favourite but obscure artist here] doesn't make money compared to [insert hated but extremely popular artist here]!" then I'd say the amount of people who agree with you that the obscure artist sound good is probably dwarfed by the amount of people who like the popular artist. More people thought the popular artist sounded good, so they sent their money in that direction.
 

MisterGobbles

New member
Nov 30, 2009
747
0
0
What do you think about this whole Paramore business, with the lead singer being the only one signed to the record label and the rest of the band basically following around?
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
mistergobbles said:
What do you think about this whole Paramore business, with the lead singer being the only one signed to the record label and the rest of the band basically following around?
Given that the label originally wanted to market her as a solo artist, her band are lucky that they even exist at all. It's only through Hayley's insistence that the band unit has been kept.
 

bigwon

New member
Jan 29, 2011
256
0
0
hiya Bonsaik! just a few curiositys...going to browse through this thread of gems you've provided, but just wanted to get some things out before i forget.

I'm an aspiring hiphop artist, and I'm confident that i have a 'new' sound established. I've gone as far as phone tag with a label affiliate from a contest submission, exchanged words with a manager for an aftermath artist regarding collaboration, etc. it's not too much, but i feel something.

-My main hindrance seems to be that instead of paying for studio time to get the best absolute mix i can, i go with my home set-up which provides 'listenable enough' is that the standard for labels? the only way they'd take you seriously regardless of your potential?

I'm just positive that hiphop differs alot from rock bands in this regard.

-I'm also developing my singing technique and feel i have a potential for it and am wondering, if initially someone took interest in my rapping (being my prominent area) would it be likely they'd look into my singing voice (evaluation, singing lessons, etc.) if nothing but to profit from it? would they take the chance?

-Probably asked a million times (gonna look after) but, do you think label associates with the means to connect you find benifit from browsing the 4 corners of the web? are there situations were they actually find your lazy ass? on a forum perhaps? heh...

haha! ironic that the escapist is the place that i'm finding more of the information.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
bigwon said:
I'm an aspiring hiphop artist, and I'm confident that i have a 'new' sound established.

-My main hindrance seems to be that instead of paying for studio time to get the best absolute mix i can, i go with my home set-up which provides 'listenable enough' is that the standard for labels? the only way they'd take you seriously regardless of your potential?

I'm just positive that hiphop differs alot from rock bands in this regard.
You'd be right. A lot of the classic rap tracks out there are lo-fi as fuck. Listen to the muddy mix on this one:


Someone obviously felt that we didn't need any information above about 2kHz, and that's a pretty good rip by YouTube standards, not much lower quality than the original, as I'm sure you already know, I mean, everyone has "36 Chambers". That whole album is far less-produced than the rock music that was coming out at the time - even grunge acts had far superior production values.

Also, as I keep saying to many people in both this thread and the demo submission thread, a demo is just a demo, it doesn't have to be golden quality, it just has to be good enough that people can hear what you do and assess it. Don't worry, if a label really loves you but your mix is bad quality, they'll give you money for that studio.

bigwon said:
-I'm also developing my singing technique and feel i have a potential for it and am wondering, if initially someone took interest in my rapping (being my prominent area) would it be likely they'd look into my singing voice (evaluation, singing lessons, etc.) if nothing but to profit from it? would they take the chance?
Most rappers have bad singing voices, but if rapping is your main thing you only need a very functional voice anyway. Look at 50 Cent, he does the singy choruses, his vocal range is about two notes, and by rap standards he's considered commercial. Rap is a lot like metal in many, many ways, and one of them is that labels don't expect you to be able to sing - if you can, it's nice (and I'd recommend vocal lessons anyway just so you can get your vocal and mic technique straight because if you're anything like the rappers I know, you know nothing about how to use a microphone and project your voice properly into it) but it's far from a requirement. In other words, it's you who is going to be taking the chance, not them.

bigwon said:
-Probably asked a million times (gonna look after) but, do you think label associates with the means to connect you find benifit from browsing the 4 corners of the web? are there situations were they actually find your lazy ass? on a forum perhaps? heh...
Doubtful. It has happened but it's damn rare, wouldn't count on it. Like stratospherically rare, we're talking "asteroid crashing into your bedroom Donnie Darko style" rare. You'd be better off getting out on the live circuit and doing some shows, and then approaching labels directly once you've got some experience and have refined your thing in front of an audience.
 

bigwon

New member
Jan 29, 2011
256
0
0
thank you so much for the quick response! sorry the last was just curiousity, heh just wondering if there were any interesting storys like that.

I'll try to think of something interesting in the meantime. lol
 

zen5887

New member
Jan 31, 2008
2,923
0
0
Considering so many people are doing it, and there is so much of it around. how hard it is it get recognized in the world of Electronic Music?

Are there any tricks in getting noticed that are unique to this style? Or is it the same as being in a band.

Do Electronic Music artists even need label support to do their shit?

Thanks homie :)
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
zen5887 said:
Considering so many people are doing it, and there is so much of it around. how hard it is it get recognized in the world of Electronic Music?

Are there any tricks in getting noticed that are unique to this style? Or is it the same as being in a band.

Do Electronic Music artists even need label support to do their shit?

Thanks homie :)
Same thing, really. The same type of things will make an act stand out. The only thing that changes besides slightly lighter gear to lug around, is that in many genres, electronic artists have a more symbiotic relationship with DJs who play their stuff in clubs, so that becomes another promotional platform. A lot of people who get into specific electronic artists do so through DJ mixtapes and things like that, rock music doesn't really have that kind of a network. Both types of artists benefit equally from label support though - you still need someone to promote your shit if you want to get reasonably well-paid off it. You can promote it yourself, or a label can do it for you and take a fee, same applies to any musician. I'd say that in this day and age it's slightly easier to make career progress as an electronic musician because of the aforementioned factors, plus there's more venues that cater to that sort of thing than to rock bands.
 

zen5887

New member
Jan 31, 2008
2,923
0
0
BonsaiK said:
Knowledge
Neato!!

A follow up question, how does one get their music to DJs?

I'm guessing (apart from being shit hot at production.. Still working on that part :p) it all comes down to networking?
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
Scrumpmonkey said:
I have another question that has been bugging me for a little while;

As the music industry moves in phases (when certain acts breakthrough there seems to be a wave of similar acts picked up or certain genres etc) what kinds of acts/ sounds are the record companies currently looking for? Is there a real "Hire dudes that sound/look like X" culture or not?
Speaking as someone who does this, probably the best way I can describe it is this: meeting an act that you really want to take further is a bit like falling in love. If you try to pin down exactly what you're looking for, or develop a pre-conceived idea in your head of exactly what you want, it's impossible to accurately do. However, you sure damn well know it when you've found it and it happens to you. And you also know for sure what you definitely are not looking for.

This paragraph is going to sound like I've been taking the brown mushrooms to most readers I'm sure, but what really sticks out to talent scouts when they see an artist is uniqueness. Even in the world of Justin Beiber, Britney Spears, etc, this is important. Most bands and artists sound more or less the same, or a real hazy mish-mash of different things, or they look bland or whatever. The reason why uniqueness is important is because it gives labels something to sell. If there are four big labels (and there are) and they are all selling the same type of product (and they are) then what makes label A's product something that people might be attracted to as opposed to label B's product? More appealing music might be one thing, or it might be a certain type of image, or an ideology, or all three, or something else entirely. Many people who listen to music like the idea of music more than the actual music itself on at least some level, and thus marketing music is all about marketing the ideas and concepts around the music, because music is just music, but music plus an idea is something else. The average Justin Beiber fan and the average Justin Beiber hater both don't really register that "Baby" is a standard I-vi-IV-V doo-wop progression, and that the song is nearly identical to ones which were released in the late 1950s. That doesn't factor even 1% into their like or dislike of that song. They both have other reasons for feeling the way that they do. The idea of Justin Beiber as an ideological entity representing certain things takes primacy over the music of Justin Beiber (which is neither here nor there). That's what's called "branding" and that's why I love those musical hate-threads that The Escapist spits out roughly once per month because it shows to me the primacy of this type of thing in action. Justin Beiber represents a powerful "brand" and the reason why is his uniqueness - the particular image, the music, his upbringing, whatever sexuality might be perceived correctly or falsely, what he stands for (or doesn't stand for), the whole "never say never" thing and what that represents to people, his face with that signature hair... all of that stuff, in that configuration, is something very unique. Nobody else is doing that right now, in that way. He's so unique that you could put a silhouette of him on a TV and a one-second sample of any of his songs and 99% of girls living in western society between the ages of 10 and 15 would recognise who that was in less time than the sample took to play. Hell, you wouldn't even need the sample for most of them.

All bands that get anywhere know that this stuff is important. Groups shouldn't neglect the image side of things. Image is more than just what you look like, it's a whole ideology and philosophy behind what you do which, when it works, blends seamlessly into whatever physical image you present. Even bands who deliberately don't show their faces any more than they have to, still have an image - look at Pink Floyd, a classic example of a band who have constructed a bunch of ideas which has supplanted the traditional "band image". As soon as you read the words "Pink Floyd" just then you probably conjured up a visual image in your head and it probably wasn't David Gilmour's face, it was probably something from one of their album covers, or maybe the circle of lights at their live shows, or the concept of "The Wall", or whatever. This stuff is so important that if you come to a label without this type of thing in place, the first thing they will do is try to figure out how to make it for you from scratch. On the other hand, if you've already got some semblance of a completely ideological branding package, labels love that, it saves them work thinking up the shit themselves. That's why something "against the system" like a political rock group can exist on a major label and it's really not a problem as long as they do it with a certain amount of style.

I hope that all made some sort of sense. I guess the way to summarise the concept would be to say that we don't "hire someone that sounds like x", we try to "hire someone who IS x".