Are (alternative) record labels still important today?

greengrocer

In a time that more and more people subscribe the services like Spotify and Apple Music and music choice is more and more becoming influenced by algoritms I wonder if record labels are still important. And with labels I not only mean the big ones but more the smaller alternative type of labels.
Just curious about what people on this forum think, so opions and experience are welcome.

realdawei

Not unless they add specific value. In my experience with the streaming services the new value add is getting artists on to popular playlists

[Deleted User]

I say they are useful in terms of showcasing certain talent. Not so important in terms of supporting an artist monetarily.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

mannix

@Dawdles said:
Main benefits in my experience of Label vs DIY are physical Distribution and attracting the right Booking agents and Press. It ‘can’ all be done without being on a label but Distro, Agents and Press will always mostly gravitate toward label artists. Their available time for checking out bands and music is finite and I guess labels act as a kind of ‘quality filter’ of what to prioritise paying attention to first. (Edit - not saying that non label music can’t be amazing! And vice verse, plenty of lame music that’s on labels!)

If you don’t wanna release physical copies, tour or get good press then it’s tougher to call - In terms of just digital sales/streams benefits for the average signed band on an average sized label. Though stuff like Spotify algos etc are probably more likely to suggest/recommend artists on the same/similar labels etc than someone totally obscure doing it DIY. And fans of a label that trust them as tastemakers will generally check out all that labels’ new releases and often buy what they hear.

It’s really hard to have any kind of black and white opinion on it, there’s no way to accurately compare how well a specific non-label band would have done if on a label, or vice versa. but overall I’d say yeah, a trusted/cool label is still well worth working with.

Nice response and good valid points @Dawdles The only thing I ask myself nowadays is if we talk about critics: are people, other than critics and musicians, still reading those music magazines. I know for example that NME went full digital earlier this year because nobody bought it anymore.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

mannix

@Dawdles said:

@mannix said:

@Dawdles said:
Main benefits in my experience of Label vs DIY are physical Distribution and attracting the right Booking agents and Press. It ‘can’ all be done without being on a label but Distro, Agents and Press will always mostly gravitate toward label artists. Their available time for checking out bands and music is finite and I guess labels act as a kind of ‘quality filter’ of what to prioritise paying attention to first. (Edit - not saying that non label music can’t be amazing! And vice verse, plenty of lame music that’s on labels!)

If you don’t wanna release physical copies, tour or get good press then it’s tougher to call - In terms of just digital sales/streams benefits for the average signed band on an average sized label. Though stuff like Spotify algos etc are probably more likely to suggest/recommend artists on the same/similar labels etc than someone totally obscure doing it DIY. And fans of a label that trust them as tastemakers will generally check out all that labels’ new releases and often buy what they hear.

It’s really hard to have any kind of black and white opinion on it, there’s no way to accurately compare how well a specific non-label band would have done if on a label, or vice versa. but overall I’d say yeah, a trusted/cool label is still well worth working with.

Nice response and good valid points @Dawdles The only thing I ask myself nowadays is if we talk about critics: are people, other than critics and musicians, still reading those music magazines. I know for example that NME went full digital earlier this year because nobody bought it anymore.

Yeah I also rarely buy/read physical magazines now. A shame really

By ‘press’ I was referring to the whole bubble. Print mags but also stuff like Pitchfork, Brooklyn Vegan and those kinda sites. They’ll run non-label stuff if it finds their ear and they think it’s buzzworthy/new, but generally their content focuses on Label artists. It’s a shame, but I imagine their submissions desk is totally buried so they have to filter it somehow... Decent labels generally will already have relationships with people at these outlets and your record will at least get heard/considered..

Looks a lot like the regular press these days due to cuts critics do less and less research for themselves.

Will

As a consumer, I still appreciate indie labels as a curator. I have labels I've come to like and will check out pretty much any new music they release. I wish Spotify made this as easy as Bandcamp does.

Drümünkey

@syrupcore said:
As a consumer, I still appreciate indie labels as a curator. I have labels I've come to like and will check out pretty much any new music they release. I wish Spotify made this as easy as Bandcamp does.

You can search Spotify by label using "label:[LABEL]"

Will

@Drümünkey said:

@syrupcore said:
As a consumer, I still appreciate indie labels as a curator. I have labels I've come to like and will check out pretty much any new music they release. I wish Spotify made this as easy as Bandcamp does.

You can search Spotify by label using "label:[LABEL]"

Wrlds2ndBstGeoshredr

@syrupcore said:
As a consumer, I still appreciate indie labels as a curator. I have labels I've come to like and will check out pretty much any new music they release. I wish Spotify made this as easy as Bandcamp does.

Check out Seil Records on bandcamp. Great label for ambient. This latest one is genius:

https://seilrecords.bandcamp.com/album/ambient-piano-works

DCJ

The labels that are agile enough to navigate the new music business are still useful and important for artists. Labels are an incredible tool. But many of the old ones are dying because they’re too big to change. I don’t think we’ll ever see a time in the near future where there isn’t a label or some equivalent group representing artists.

u0421793

As an individual artist I find it a bit strange that even in these years I still need to fill in a label name when releasing work. Similarly when publishing an ebook.

If I release a painting, I don’t need a gallery name to release it under. If I take professional photographs, it can be just me – not an agency. It’s more acceptable with visual art to release work as an individual rather than only through a marketing organization. I’m not saying things need to change, but I find it a bit strange, that’s all. The effect of the age of the record label leaves a strong legacy in its wake.

[Deleted User]

@u0421793 said:
As an individual artist I find it a bit strange that even in these years I still need to fill in a label name when releasing work. Similarly when publishing an ebook.

If I release a painting, I don’t need a gallery name to release it under. If I take professional photographs, it can be just me – not an agency. It’s more acceptable with visual art to release work as an individual rather than only through a marketing organization. I’m not saying things need to change, but I find it a bit strange, that’s all. The effect of the age of the record label leaves a strong legacy in its wake.

I guess it’s seen as some kind of endorsement, that you’re a bona fide artiste, rather than some old guy like me making noises on an iPad. That a separate entity thinks you’re good enough to invest their time and money in promoting you.

There is a bit of that in the art world - I’ve been asked which galleries ‘represent’ me when trying (and failing) to get exhibitions.

I’ve always fancied running a little record label actually. If it didn’t incur additional charges then I’d set one up and promote it via Bandcamp.

greengrocer

@MonzoPro said:

@u0421793 said:
As an individual artist I find it a bit strange that even in these years I still need to fill in a label name when releasing work. Similarly when publishing an ebook.

If I release a painting, I don’t need a gallery name to release it under. If I take professional photographs, it can be just me – not an agency. It’s more acceptable with visual art to release work as an individual rather than only through a marketing organization. I’m not saying things need to change, but I find it a bit strange, that’s all. The effect of the age of the record label leaves a strong legacy in its wake.

I guess it’s seen as some kind of endorsement, that you’re a bona fide artiste, rather than some old guy like me making noises on an iPad. That a separate entity thinks you’re good enough to invest their time and money in promoting you.

There is a bit of that in the art world - I’ve been asked which galleries ‘represent’ me when trying (and failing) to get exhibitions.

I’ve always fancied running a little record label actually. If it didn’t incur additional charges then I’d set one up and promote it via Bandcamp.

Spot on. A gallery or label means something for a lot of people. It can open doors. People want to be part of something and it is a reference point for consumers and critics. Though I think in the early internet times as well as in the early radio times this wasn't needed. As always you see that "the establishment" or something that looks alike takes over as the man in the middle.

u0421793

One of the big effects of the internet is disintermediation. Unless that was just a blip.

[Deleted User]

@u0421793 said:
One of the big effects of the internet is disintermediation. Unless that was just a blip.

I think it was a thing, for a while. Then middle-men and corporations twigged the potential for making even more money and barged their way in.

mannix

@MonzoPro said:

@u0421793 said:
One of the big effects of the internet is disintermediation. Unless that was just a blip.

I think it was a thing, for a while. Then middle-men and corporations twigged the potential for making even more money and barged their way in.

Agree with Monzo here. What is also important to know is that music and arts is something more complex than for example software. Music, arts as well as fashion are taste driven. And you can manipulate taste in most cases by throwing a lot of marketing money at it. With software if something is shit and not working well you can't hide it with lots of marketing. And of course if a piece is good the word gets around. That's why devs as @j_liljedahl or @brambos can get their apps reviewed and sold, etc.

ToMess

Spotify etc are more like freebies to fans and a way to not get them to illegally download, as they make next to no money. Or well once you start getting ok money from them, you get millions elsewhere.

You can get your music to those services dirt cheap via distrokid for example, no need for label for that. However a proper label will help you with stuff that actually make you money, like gigging, you get to know and possibly work with people who already have exposure, so you get to leech on their fame.

Bad deal with shithole label might ruin your career and/or cost you millions IF you manage to make it

Most of hip hop scene in finland is ran by few major indie labels. There are few signed to sony, universal etc, but that stuff is hippidy pop made for little girls, not hip hop.

JeffChasteen

@MonzoPro said:

@u0421793 said:
One of the big effects of the internet is disintermediation. Unless that was just a blip.

I think it was a thing, for a while. Then middle-men and corporations twigged the potential for making even more money and barged their way in.

They always do.