• 72
  • 16
  • 3086
Image for I paid $750 for an album

I paid $750 for an album

Artists connecting with fans in a tangible and meaningful way is the real solution to piracy, writes DAVID SWAN.

If anyone asks what my favourite moment of life has been, without blinking, I’d point to a 2010 gig in Portsmouth, UK. It was Circa Survive, and my friend and I travelled to an oppressively grey sea town we’d never heard of a few hours out of London just to hear them play songs. But what we got was a band playing with fierce, demented energy, and smashing it out of the park. Towards the end of the set, frontman Anthony Green leaned heavily on my shoulders as he preached to the audience, then looked at me and asked if I was OK. I nodded, and he ruffled my hair and resumed jumping around the stage in a spastic frenzy. After the gig we met in the merch area and talked about music and life for 10 minutes, and I left with a grin that greets my face whenever I think about that night.

Money can’t buy experiences like that. Money can, however, make sure experiences like that can be replicated by music fans the world over.

When you support stuff you love, more stuff you love gets made. It’s a simple concept but one that gets forgotten when talk of torrents, Spotify and record labels failing dominates the industry discourse. When the band decided to leave Atlantic Records and self-release new album Violent Waves this year, they put it up as a $5 download, but I didn’t hesitate paying $750 for the highest tier package. Limited to 11, the package included a handwritten lyric sheet, a video call with the band, pencil sketches and artwork, a vinyl copy of the record and vinyl jacket hand-painted by the band.

$750 is a lot of money, sure. But how much is an emotional connection worth? What price do you put on hours of singing along in the car or the raw catharsis of crowd-surfing at a gig? With 100 percent of the funds going to the band through their choice to self-release, compare that to one third of one cent, which is what a band makes when a song is played on Spotify.

I’d illegally downloaded each of the band’s previous albums, and thousands of others since the days of Napster and Kazaa. This was penance, I’d taken hours of enjoyment for granted and hadn’t felt guilty. If everyone had that same mindset, who knows how music would survive at all. Everyone talks about how the music industry is “dying” and there’s no money it in anymore, but the good news is that artists are just being forced to become more creative with how they earn a living.

American indie outfit Murder By Death used Kickstarter to fund their new album Bitter Drink, Bitter Moon, and offered up a $6500 ‘Kentucky Bourbon Trail Blowout’ package, in which two people could tour whisky distilleries with the band in a limo, followed by a restaurant dinner (flights included). No one bought it, but the band raised $187,000, including one person paying $750 for the privilege of dictating what tattoo the band’s drummer, Dagan, would be next subjected to. The $250 option was a one year’s subscription to the “MDB book club”. Once a month the fan receives some recommended reading from the band, with each book containing an inscription from a member of the band describing why they love the book.

Serial Nine Inch Nails/Devo collaborator Josh Freese was probably taking the piss when he offered a $75,000 package for his solo album where a fan could take shrooms in Danny from Tool’s Lamborghini and have Josh join their band for a month, but the $20,000 package included a minigolf session with Maynard James Keenan and Mark Mothersbaugh, and someone actually bought that. The $10,000 package included Josh’s old Volvo, and that went too.

“When you support stuff you love, more stuff you love gets made.”

Fans of American angst-rock outfit Say Anything can pay $150 for lead singer Max Bemis to write and record an acoustic song about anything of their choice, and I took up that offer several years ago as a birthday present to one of my close friends, who then had a three-minute chronicle of our friendship in audio form. Is Bemis “selling out” by singing songs about stuff he doesn’t actually give a shit about in order to make some extra money? Maybe, but if the fans are happy and Bemis gets to then keep making genuine art, there are no losers.

In a recent piece for FL, editor-in-chief Darren Levin wrote, “Your collection of digital music isn’t worth the $100 Dick Smith hard drive it’s imprinted on” – and that’s spot on. More permanent though are handpainted vinyl jackets you’ve spent hours working to afford, or the memories formed through meeting a band or receiving a personalised book every month.

Acts have finally worked out a way to make money from music again, and it’s in the best possible way – through cutting out the middleman, taking some creative freedom back and at the same time rewarding their fanbase through more direct and outlandish offerings that were previously impossible, or just not thought of.

Bands and artists connecting with fans in a tangible and meaningful way is the real solution to piracy. “You get what you pay for”, Green sings on track two ‘Sharp Practice’, and that’s never been more true than it is now.

Social

  • aidanhogg
  • tissue
  • charlesmorley
  • Perfect Skies
  • mondo22
  • liquidtopaz3
  • jezz88
  • thereisnokevin
  • Krusty_the_Karl
  • rarebits
  • andy_chalmers_102
  • johndean145
  • katiecunningham
  • neuroticwill
  • thunderbot
  • sarahanne

Comments

www.fasterlouder.com.au arrow left
46174
Richard Slimmins

Richard Slimmins said on the 27th Sep, 2012

reeeally well-written article. but...

are these packages really a good development? these super deluxe packages are just as bizarre as vip festival passes...they're exclusive and take the focus away from the music and place it on second hand volvo's, hand-painted ukuleles and limo rides. i don't see how that's something worth celebrating. the solution to piracy is great bands creating music so important that people feel the need to purchase it. we shouldn't be celebrating shrewd marketing, we should be celebrating high art that reaches beyond the urge to steal.

people keep getting distracted by how shit it is that piracy exists without wondering why piracy exists. because the passion just isn't there for a lot of people anymore. this article suggests that the passion for an artist means spending $750 on an lp/cd/tote bag combo. it pretty much says 'i was passionate about this artist for a very long time, but i couldn't afford the cds, so i pirated them, now i have a good job and a savings account and a tax refund, so i spent $750 on it and thus my hands are clean.' some people won't ever have that disposable income, these options are for very few people. everyone else will continue to pirate/stream and that shouldn't be demonised, that's the reality of how we engage with music now.

good article by a really good writer though, and this isn't meant as a personal attack. i just think that the sentiment isn't right, and i'm really surprised so many people celebrate clever marketing over clever tunes!

davidswan

davidswan said on the 27th Sep, 2012

reeeally well-written article. but...

are these packages really a good development? these super deluxe packages are just as bizarre as vip festival passes...they're exclusive and take the focus away from the music and place it on second hand volvo's, hand-painted ukuleles and limo rides. i don't see how that's something worth celebrating. the solution to piracy is great bands creating music so important that people feel the need to purchase it. we shouldn't be celebrating shrewd marketing, we should be celebrating high art that reaches beyond the urge to steal.

people keep getting distracted by how shit it is that piracy exists without wondering why piracy exists. because the passion just isn't there for a lot of people anymore. this article suggests that the passion for an artist means spending $750 on an lp/cd/tote bag combo. it pretty much says 'i was passionate about this artist for a very long time, but i couldn't afford the cds, so i pirated them, now i have a good job and a savings account and a tax refund, so i spent $750 on it and thus my hands are clean.' some people won't ever have that disposable income, these options are for very few people. everyone else will continue to pirate/stream and that shouldn't be demonised, that's the reality of how we engage with music now.

good article by a really good writer though, and this isn't meant as a personal attack. i just think that the sentiment isn't right, and i'm really surprised so many people celebrate clever marketing over clever tunes!

Really appreciate the feedback and the time you've taken to engage with the article. And the avatar/username, of course. I'm not super rich, by any means, so it wasn't a matter of just having heaps of extra disposable income. It was more a change of mindset for me, to go from thinking 'this music is here for free online, I'd be an idiot not to take advantage of that', to 'hey these dudes need my money if I want to keep enjoying myself and enjoying their art.' And it's a change of mindset for bands as well to say 'let's give fans something they can actually remember us by/give them cool experiences', rather than just putting out a CD every two years. It's a legitimate value add.

In terms of your point that the solution is 'great bands creating important music', that's right, and that's really why I paid $750 for the album. In terms of literal value did I get $750 worth, from a wooden box, LP, hand drawings, video call etc? Probably not. Did I get $750 worth from singing along, rocking out in my car, dancing around like an idiot? Absolutely.

I'm not demonising pirates/streamers, I'm just saying from my perspective music is the thing I enjoy most, so therefore I'm going to direct my funds appropriately. To me there's nothing more hypocritical than saying "I'm a massive music fan", then torrenting whatever album Triple J just played because you think you might potentially like it. That used to be me. I think the reality of how we engage with music now ideally shouldn't be passively streaming/pirating... it should be through having a more personal relationship with a band, and that includes bands offering up more creative ways of enjoying the music, and fans taking them up on that.

Richard Slimmins

Richard Slimmins said on the 27th Sep, 2012

yeah, sorry about that - i didn't mean to say anything about your wealth, etc (even though i actually did, that's really rude!)...that was more a comment on the idea of paying exorbiant amounts of cash for a product when you don't have to, rather than a personal assessment of your income bracket.

for me, i've been a long-time music pirate, guilt-free. it's available, we live in a free market, if i have the option to pay or not, i'll go for convenience. i think that's how almost everyone thinks these days, and it's not a bad thing to do, it's common sense. streaming has now legitimised it. we can accept the fact that bands aren't gonna make a whole lotta cash from the bulk music listener now. you're right that these options are smart from the band's point of view. if someone is willing to pay money for something (even as ridiculous as i find paying anything more than $30 for a new record is) then it's just smart business. (should note that i buy about 30 new records a year on vinyl, and they're local, and they're by the most exciting artists in this country...people i think are worthy of my money!)

what i don't agree with, is that deluxe options are a good thing for most music listeners. it's just another thing most can't afford. for most people, effectively nothing has changed. good for the artist, bad for the fan. i think if a fan wants to engage with music by going to shows, pinching music, and having that $750 worth of value rocking out in the car for zero dollars, that that's completely fine. it's like saying someone shouldn't have fun whilst fucking unless they shelled out for high fibre count sheets and ceiling mirrors.

a personal relationship with a band doesn't mean fingering the vinyl. a personal relationship can be from something as simple as being moved by a lyric. money should never come into account when we're talking about appreciating and loving music or art, the music comes first and the music should be for everyone.

gumbuoy

gumbuoy said on the 27th Sep, 2012

Oh man, your first comment was okay, but this one you went way off.



We don't live in a free market, when it comes to music. If artists/labels were putting their music out for free, and then asking people to pay for it, then yes. But what actually happens is, the artists/label decides they want X for it, and the first few people who do pay for it, or acquire it by non-paying methods (ie review/advance copies) then decide they're happy to forego the wishes of the artist/label, and from there, everyone decides they want it for free.



Yes, streaming has now legitimised it, in that artists/labels are being paid (admittedly not a premium) and they are CHOOSING to put their music into these services.



So the albums you download and then decide not to buy, you delete them right away, after one or two listens, right? After all, they're not exciting, and not worthy of your money, so you don't keep their music, right?



How is it bad for the fan to have deluxe level items at higher price points? If they were the ONLY purchase options available, sure, but as long as the album, on its own, with no fancy bells and whistles, is available, who cares if there are other options out of your price range? You buy the level of interaction you can afford.



Once again, does that mean every time you download an album, you 100% guarantee you have gone/will go to their show? If not, a band has provided you with $750 of rocking out, and you've given them nothing in return.



100% unadulterated bullshit. If you don't pay musicians anything, they're not going to make music, or certainly not in any way that you can engage with. Someone provides a valuable experience to you, either live, or in the car, or wherever, they should be compensated for the effort they went to, and their use of creative expression and imagination.

sarcasm_mister

sarcasm_mister said on the 27th Sep, 2012

The music industry may still be strong but music shops are definitely a dying breed, every Sanity/HMV I ever used to visit (or work at) seems to be long gone, JB seems a bit immune coz of its diversity. Would be interested to see how the specialty vinyl record stores (Polyester, etc) are doing now compared with before.


the premise on which Sanity/HMV have operated on for so many years. that is, we'll give you good customer service if you pay double what you would anywhere else. is very outdated and will inevitably result in their demise. as much as i love and respect small independent vinyl store i don't think their disappearance will result in anything but a sentimental loss. but as vinyl becomes more and more popular i think they'll stick around for a while longer.


I love Spotify in terms of what it offers consumers but if bands are getting paid one third of a cent per track played, and if that listener chooses to exclusively listen to music via Spotify rather than buying the record(s), I don't see that as a positive outcome for bands/music.

as music streaming becomes more prevalent the market will naturally become more competitive. record labels will be more inclined to give the rights to their music to websites who will give them more money per play. it'll work out just fine in the long term. in the same way other technologies have.

it's a cruel world out there. artists and bands need to stop acting like they have some special right to decide how much money they make.

shazie

shazie said on the 27th Sep, 2012

If i download or spotify a new album and I like it, then am more likely to go buy it on vinyl and pay to see them live (which is good money in Australia at the moment to be quite honest). If I don't like it but maybe like one song? No I don't delete it. But hey, they weren't good enough to motivate me to buy anything after i downloaded and listened. At least they got the opportunity for me to listen to their album and be a possible paying customer. I don't see it as far removed from hearing a song on the radio and not liking it and not becoming a paying customer.

I am giving them an opportunity to inspire me and earn from it, better than not at all.

And yer, on a side note. more musos live off minimal income now than those that make enough to live comfortably. And I am sure most of them would be happy if a mate told me to listen to them and i downloaded their music and loved it and became a paying fan.

I think I have a similar attitude with this. While I don't see it as "dance for me monkeys and entertain me!" (and I'm sure you didn't either, I'm just using an exaggeration), downloading music has lead me to spend the majority of my money on concerts. I couldn't afford to go to as many concerts as I do if I bought every album I thought about listening to (i still buy albums though).

Does it mean that I'm free from guilt and am a good Samaritan? Nah, I still do feel guilty about downloading. On the other hand, I know that if I never downloaded Sleepmakeswaves "...and so we destroyed everything" just in passing, then the chances of me going to multiple concerts, telling other friends to go see them, and buying merch/music from such an amazing band would've been much lower. I can live with that trade-off.


It does raise the issue of bands who don't tour in Australia though, or aren't around anymore or don't actively tour.


Also, great article. Needs more shoutouts to Nothing Rhymes With David and the bonuses he has for his upcoming album though.

mondo22

mondo22 said on the 28th Sep, 2012

If i download or spotify a new album and I like it, then am more likely to go buy it on vinyl and pay to see them live (which is good money in Australia at the moment to be quite honest). If I don't like it but maybe like one song? No I don't delete it. But hey, they weren't good enough to motivate me to buy anything after i downloaded and listened. At least they got the opportunity for me to listen to their album and be a possible paying customer. I don't see it as far removed from hearing a song on the radio and not liking it and not becoming a paying customer.

I am giving them an opportunity to inspire me and earn from it, better than not at all.

And yer, on a side note. more musos live off minimal income now than those that make enough to live comfortably. And I am sure most of them would be happy if a mate told me to listen to them and i downloaded their music and loved it and became a paying fan.

I mostly do the same. If I like something enough, I just go on amazon.com and add it to the shopping basket, wait til I get a wad of cash and then checkout eventually. Sure, local record stores might miss out on my business, but I don't feel I owe anything to them anyway, just the artist.

I can also concur with being happy for people to appreciate my music without getting much of an income. Only a very small percentage of musicians in the world can actually make a proper living out of their craft where they don't need any other income streams. I think part of the issue is that too many artists approach music with only career prospects in mind. It should be something that you love doing as a means to express yourself. My feeling is that if it so happens that people really love what you do and are happy to pay you for it, then that's a great bonus, but the core reason for being a musician should be for the love of playing music.

gumbuoy

gumbuoy said on the 3rd Oct, 2012

I don't think I've ever met a band fan who said, or implied, that they were a bigger fan because they had X piece of extra merch that someone else didn't have.

I bought the special edition of the new SFK album, which comes with a totebag I probably won't use, a sketchbook I'll probably look at once and then forget about, and a signed cd inset, which I'll also probably just forget about when the CD goes into storage. I did it because, as my favourite band, I wanted to buy the maximum level possible. (I stopped short of the vinyl, as our vinyl player isn't set up, but I ended up getting a preview copy on cd, so now I wish I'd gone the vinyl.) When the band tour in a couple of weeks, I'll certainly pick up a shirt if they have one in my size, or just buy it through the website.

Having said that, I'm in a pretty comfortable position with a decent level of disposable income. I would never begrudge anyone deciding they were just going to buy the album, from the cheapest place possible, as that was the level of purchase they felt they were able to afford. And I would never say their interaction or level of meaning assigned to their experience of the album was less than mine.

I would also never begrudge a band for making these higher level purchases available. The main thrust of the whole music-copyright-infringement-downloading thing seems to be that now that a band's music can be digitised and distributed for free, bands need to find other ways of making money - providing items and experiences that can't just be digitised and distributed. Well, this is exactly the sort of stuff people should be getting behind.

davidswan

davidswan said on the 3rd Oct, 2012

I don't think I've ever met a band fan who said, or implied, that they were a bigger fan because they had X piece of extra merch that someone else didn't have.

I bought the special edition of the new SFK album, which comes with a totebag I probably won't use, a sketchbook I'll probably look at once and then forget about, and a signed cd inset, which I'll also probably just forget about when the CD goes into storage. I did it because, as my favourite band, I wanted to buy the maximum level possible. (I stopped short of the vinyl, as our vinyl player isn't set up, but I ended up getting a preview copy on cd, so now I wish I'd gone the vinyl.) When the band tour in a couple of weeks, I'll certainly pick up a shirt if they have one in my size, or just buy it through the website.

Having said that, I'm in a pretty comfortable position with a decent level of disposable income. I would never begrudge anyone deciding they were just going to buy the album, from the cheapest place possible, as that was the level of purchase they felt they were able to afford. And I would never say their interaction or level of meaning assigned to their experience of the album was less than mine.

I would also never begrudge a band for making these higher level purchases available. The main thrust of the whole music-copyright-infringement-downloading thing seems to be that now that a band's music can be digitised and distributed for free, bands need to find other ways of making money - providing items and experiences that can't just be digitised and distributed. Well, this is exactly the sort of stuff people should be getting behind.

This is exactly how I feel. I'm not going to get $750 worth of value out of the stuff I've bought, I mean most of the stuff the package came with is simply to read/look over, so people looking at my decision on face value could argue I've been 'ripped off'. But it's like donating in a way, it's showing appreciation for the enjoyment you get from the music. If I was broke though and couldn't afford the package I wouldn't look at myself as less of a fan.
And some of these new options that people are coming up with like paying a band to write a song for you, or being able to do a whisky tour with a band, that's the sorta stuff that'd stay with you forever while being a massive financial boost for the band at the same time. Can't see how anyone could argue against that.