My first tune (with Dweezil Zappa by the way) is out

[tderuelle]

We got amazing sounds out of the fractal!

It is for sale on my site for now. Will be in iTunes too, it's just that they take 30%, pay you in 75 days and don't really help indie artists like myself...

Anyway, if any of you are interested to hear about it, check out my site!

http://www.dztd.ca

 

[POB]

Will be in iTunes too, it's just that they take 30%, pay you in 75 days and don't really help indie artists like myself...

Is that for real? For a what is effectively just to download a software file, if so that's a disgrace! I'll be taking steps to avoid iTunes.

Track sounds great, good luck with it.

 

[tderuelle]

Will be in iTunes too, it's just that they take 30%, pay you in 75 days and don't really help indie artists like myself...

Is that for real? For a what is effectively just to download a software file, if so that's a disgrace! I'll be taking steps to avoid iTunes.

Track sounds great, good luck with it.

They charge you through tune core, depending on the number of stores you select (stores, they are actually just catalogs) then you have to wait 4 to 6 weeks to list. But I don't really care about that, really.

What bugs me with this iTunes thing is the fact that they don't do anything for you. I would give them more than 30% if they were actually promoting or doing something, and most importantly protect my rights.

But they don't. They are selling iPods on the back of artists, that is what they are really doing. They devaluated music with their model, big time...

On the upside, they also made it possible to reach a wider audience... I do have mixed feelings about all this. There is no free lunch my finance prof says....

 

[jay]

You can pay extra for them to advertise(tunecore) and they have several different packages with different airplay on internet radio.
I'm assuming that once your song is on the internet on a legitimate website you would be able to argue it in court that you had the song first..In the writing world there is a thing called the poor mans copyright, where you fedex your manuscript back to yourself and don't open the package. If there is ever a copyright issue this holds up in court, I'd say your music on itunes is the same.
There is another site getting started called nimbit, i think it's .com. I used it to post some tunes on my facebook page a month or two ago, and I saw they also can put music on itunes but I never looked at how much it costs. (I had some stuff come up and am going to look into it when I can).
People are still trying to figure out what to do with music on the internet..I mean there are models in use now, but it's still open to someone with a better idea.If you can advertise the music for sale on your own website well it seems like the best option going now.
Jay

 

[Raca]

And how much do you think you get off the retail price of a real CD?
I think it's far from 70%...

 

[iaresee]

Don't do anything for you? You call giving you a potential audience of millions of iPod carrying customers nothing? You call allowing you access to the most successful online music retail system ever created nothing?

They get keep 30% because you can make a living from sales through their portal alone. Because they built, maintain, improve and grow that system and model with fervour. Their cut is far less than brick and mortar.

If you think you can do better distributing without them, why did you list there? Think you can build and maintain as succesful a distribution engine as Apple and keep a 70% profit margin doing it? Doubtful.

Don't bite the hand that helps you.

 

[POB]

And how much do you think you get off the retail price of a real CD?
I think it's far from 70%...

With CD there is a real physical cost in manufacture and distribution but the artiste has generally always had a raw deal, hosting files is a different ball game. Thank god the traditional model of selling music is evolving.

 

[iaresee]

And how much do you think you get off the retail price of a real CD?
I think it's far from 70%...

With CD there is a real physical cost in manufacture and distribution but the artiste has generally always had a raw deal, hosting files is a different ball game. Thank god the traditional model of selling music is evolving.

You think running the iTunes store is free? If you look at Apple's financials you'll see that, while they turn a profit on the store, the margins are not huge.

What you see may only be a file, but it was delivered to you seemlessly, at amazing speed, using technology that was not developed and deployed without great cost.

If you think you can go it without iTunes' customer base check out http://amiestreet.com/ - they charge you real distribution costs. You don't start making money until you've covered the costs of hosting and distributing your material. But once you're paid up, you keep just about all of it after that. And the cost per track isn't that high. You also start off with your tracks being free, price goes up as your popularity increases. It's sobering to list there.

I've done better by iTunes over the years than from all the indie distrbution services combined. They all require you to do your own marketing. If you want promotion find a label or pay ala carte for it out of pocket. And when started listing in iTunes they took 50%. It was still the best place to sell if you're independant.

 

[POB]

And how much do you think you get off the retail price of a real CD?
I think it's far from 70%...

With CD there is a real physical cost in manufacture and distribution but the artiste has generally always had a raw deal, hosting files is a different ball game. Thank god the traditional model of selling music is evolving.

You think running the iTunes store is free? If you look at Apple's financials you'll see that, while they turn a profit on the store, the margins are not huge.

What you see may only be a file, but it was delivered to you seemlessly, at amazing speed, using technology that was not developed and deployed without great cost.

If you think you can go it without iTunes' customer base check out http://amiestreet.com/ - they charge you teal distribution costs. You don't start making money until you've covered the costs of hosting and distributing your material. But once you're paid up, you keep just about all of it after that. And the cost per track isn't that high. You also start off with your tracks bring free, price goes up as your popularity increases. It's sobering to list there.

I've done better by iTunes over the years than from all the indie distrbution services combined. They all require you to do your own marketing. If you want promotion find a label or pay ala carte for it out of pocket. And when started listing in iTunes they took 50%. It was still the best place to sell if you're independant.

I don't want to hijack tderuelle's post with a discussion on iTunes. I appreciate there is a cost involved in running the iTunes store and the technology behind it but Apple also sell iPods and iPhones and I'm sure they could even run the store at a loss at and do OK for themselves. I'm glad it works for you though.

 

[iaresee]

I don't want to hijack tderuelle's post with a discussion on iTunes.

Who's hijacking? The OP started this discussion with his very first post to the thread.

I appreciate there is a cost involved in running the iTunes store and the technology behind it but Apple also sell iPods and iPhones and I'm sure they could even run the store at a loss at and do OK for themselves. I'm glad it works for you though.

Wait: you think Apple should cut their profits, run the store at a loss, because it'd be a nice gesture? Umm....yea...well...maybe in Communist Russia that'd work.

 

[tderuelle]

I don't want to hijack tderuelle's post with a discussion on iTunes.

Who's hijacking? The OP started this discussion with his very first post to the thread.

I appreciate there is a cost involved in running the iTunes store and the technology behind it but Apple also sell iPods and iPhones and I'm sure they could even run the store at a loss at and do OK for themselves. I'm glad it works for you though.

Wait: you think Apple should cut their profits, run the store at a loss, because it'd be a nice gesture? Umm....yea...well...maybe in Communist Russia that'd work.

Hey I started a real passionate debate here! wow. that's good, hijack all you want.

 

[tderuelle]

I don't want to hijack tderuelle's post with a discussion on iTunes.

Who's hijacking? The OP started this discussion with his very first post to the thread.

I appreciate there is a cost involved in running the iTunes store and the technology behind it but Apple also sell iPods and iPhones and I'm sure they could even run the store at a loss at and do OK for themselves. I'm glad it works for you though.

Wait: you think Apple should cut their profits, run the store at a loss, because it'd be a nice gesture? Umm....yea...well...maybe in Communist Russia that'd work.

Hey I started a real passionate debate here! wow. that's good, hijack all you want.

I am far from saying that I can compete with iTunes with my inky-winky (yet reliable and paypal secured) site but I can offer an alternative to consumers who share some of my small business values. For those who prefer the convenience of their iTunes software and the anonymity of big business, I'll be there. I buy regularly from iTunes and find it very practical. It works great.

I think the debate is not about iTunes not delivering on their promise, or not offering a good service, their business is amazing and quite visionary. The debate is the same one that originated many many years ago, that is, how much should an Artist get for his work and what makes it worth to give a cut.

If iTunes delivers and sells me many tunes, I will definitely bite the bullet and praise it! in fact I would love to do that and that bullet would taste nice!

I can only propose alternatives and follow what the end user (the consumer) will tell me to do... No free lunch again!

keep on hijacking it's very interesting!

 

[PacoCasanovasOld]

ok let's do another hijacking....

Since this is a forum related direct to share your work you did with the Axe direct with other axe user, wouldn't it be a nice thing to give away one of your songs or at least a direct link of your preview to the axe community here? Otherwise it turns into a nice selfmade PR-action......

Just as an idea, since you love the hijacking.... :geek: :lol:

btw. nice job! Done well.....

best regards
Paco

 

[POB]

I think the debate is not about iTunes not delivering on their promise, or not offering a good service, their business is amazing and quite visionary. The debate is the same one that originated many many years ago, that is, how much should an Artist get for his work and what makes it worth to give a cut.

Agreed, this is an age old argument. I'm not Apple bashing nor suggesting it should not make a profit. Although I can't quite understand why its seemless, amazingly fast delivery system takes 75 days to pay its artistes, I only get 30 days from my suppliers

iTunes rant over, lets get back to the music

 

[tderuelle]

ok let's do another hijacking....

Since this is a forum related direct to share your work you did with the Axe direct with other axe user, wouldn't it be a nice thing to give away one of your songs or at least a direct link of your preview to the axe community here? Otherwise it turns into a nice selfmade PR-action......

Just as an idea, since you love the hijacking.... :geek: :lol:

btw. nice job! Done well.....

best regards
Paco

I ain't afraid of calling a cat a cat: it is a selfmade PR_action! I admit! I don't have many means except my keyboard and voice at this point! I don't have a PR machine behind (or up-front?) me.

Tschuus!

 

[Kriig]

Don't do anything for you? You call giving you a potential audience of millions of iPod carrying customers nothing? You call allowing you access to the most successful online music retail system ever created nothing?

They get keep 30% because you can make a living from sales through their portal alone. Because they built, maintain, improve and grow that system and model with fervour. Their cut is far less than brick and mortar.

If you think you can do better distributing without them, why did you list there? Think you can build and maintain as succesful a distribution engine as Apple and keep a 70% profit margin doing it? Doubtful.

Don't bite the hand that helps you.

It´s not help. It´s called business. They don´t give a .... about the artist as long as they make money. Just like every record company, radio, manager etc... But an artist CHOOSE to put their music where they want. And they/we CHOOSE to sign contracts. Just read the manual with the small letters.

 

[tderuelle]

Don't do anything for you? You call giving you a potential audience of millions of iPod carrying customers nothing? You call allowing you access to the most successful online music retail system ever created nothing?

They get keep 30% because you can make a living from sales through their portal alone. Because they built, maintain, improve and grow that system and model with fervour. Their cut is far less than brick and mortar.

If you think you can do better distributing without them, why did you list there? Think you can build and maintain as succesful a distribution engine as Apple and keep a 70% profit margin doing it? Doubtful.

Don't bite the hand that helps you.

It´s not help. It´s called business. They don´t give a .... about the artist as long as they make money. Just like every record company, radio, manager etc... But an artist CHOOSE to put their music where they want. And they/we CHOOSE to sign contracts. Just read the manual with the small letters.

Nice!

 

[iaresee]

I think the debate is not about iTunes not delivering on their promise, or not offering a good service, their business is amazing and quite visionary. The debate is the same one that originated many many years ago, that is, how much should an Artist get for his work and what makes it worth to give a cut.

This isn't the same debate. You're getting plenty for your work. And like I said: if you don't like the cut, you're free to not use the service. Really the terms are amazingly generous. Apple has put into place a marketplace with millions of buyers available 24/7. And they're now willing to take in just about anyone's tracks into that marketplace (when I started listing there you had to be on a label to get into iTunes and that's been relaxed again and again over the years). And they want 40-60% less than what any traditional distribution outlet wants in order for to access people through there rather amazingly well run portal.

What terms would be fair to you? 100%? How on earth would that pay to development, deploy and maintain the absolutely massive infrastructure the iTunes store is? What company would develop something as amazingly easy to use as the iTunes store to not make any money off selling things through it? That'd be like Walmart not marking up goods on the shelf.

Like I said: go check out Aime Street's prices. That'll give you a very good idea of what it costs in terms of disk, bandwidth and server capacity (never mind software development and tech support) costs to host a file in a store for purchase.

Apple doesn't make you pay those costs up front. In fact, they start paying you on your very first sale. They could just as easily say you're not getting paid until they're fully recouped (which is exactly how a record label would do it by the way).

If iTunes delivers and sells me many tunes, I will definitely bite the bullet and praise it! in fact I would love to do that and that bullet would taste nice!

You seem to have what iTunes is confused with a record label, because a label it is most definitely not. It is a content portal. They provide the easiest path of least resistance for millions of people to buy music, but they don't do the marketing for you because that's not what they're providing. It's up for you to push your goods. They offer ad space for a price, but ultimately if you want to move units you're going to have pound the pavement, so to speak, outside of the walls of the iTunes store. If you wanted Apple/iTunes to do the marketing for you, you'd be looking at a big label style cut of the profits and that 70/30 split would be reversed.

Since you talk like you're in school make a project out of it: propose an alternate to iTunes. A service with as easy an interface for buying and playing back that music as Apple has currently developed. And how it would function, make a profit, build up and scale out, and what kind of cut from sales you'd need as you grew the service.

Can you envision a way to do it without taking a penny from the content providers? Would you want to?

Edit: I notice you're selling the track yourself for $1.35 -- why are gouging your fans if they buy straight from you? Shouldn't you have it priced at least a few % less than the iTunes store, since you don't have to pay the Apple tax if I buy it straight from you?

 

[iaresee]

It´s not help. It´s called business. They don´t give a .... about the artist as long as they make money. Just like every record company, radio, manager etc... But an artist CHOOSE to put their music where they want. And they/we CHOOSE to sign contracts. Just read the manual with the small letters.

Yes and no. It is business. No doubt about that. But they do need content to make the portal work. Without content, it wouldn't be popular. The terms, as I've mentioned before, have gotten better and better over the years. Used to be you had to be on a label to get listed, then you only 50% on sales. Now you don't need a label and you make 70%. Apple's not quite evil, but yes, they need and want to make money -- kind of the raison d'etre of a company. But as you can see, as time marches on and the infrastructure stabilizes, as R&D is recouped, as the portal dominates more and more, Apple is happy with less and less of a cut per track. What label is going to give you the deal where they take less of a cut from you if another artist on the label sells more? None, that's who.

 

[tderuelle]

I think the debate is not about iTunes not delivering on their promise, or not offering a good service, their business is amazing and quite visionary. The debate is the same one that originated many many years ago, that is, how much should an Artist get for his work and what makes it worth to give a cut.

This isn't the same debate. You're getting plenty for your work. And like I said: if you don't like the cut, you're free to not use the service. Really the terms are amazingly generous. Apple has put into place a marketplace with millions of buyers available 24/7. And they're now willing to take in just about anyone's tracks into that marketplace (when I started listing there you had to be on a label to get into iTunes and that's been relaxed again and again over the years). And they want 40-60% less than what any traditional distribution outlet wants in order for to access people through there rather amazingly well run portal.

What terms would be fair to you? 100%? How on earth would that pay to development, deploy and maintain the absolutely massive infrastructure the iTunes store is? What company would develop something as amazingly easy to use as the iTunes store to not make any money off selling things through it? That'd be like Walmart not marking up goods on the shelf.

Like I said: go check out Aime Street's prices. That'll give you a very good idea of what it costs in terms of disk, bandwidth and server capacity (never mind software development and tech support) costs to host a file in a store for purchase.

Apple doesn't make you pay those costs up front. In fact, they start paying you on your very first sale. They could just as easily say you're not getting paid until they're fully recouped (which is exactly how a record label would do it by the way).

If iTunes delivers and sells me many tunes, I will definitely bite the bullet and praise it! in fact I would love to do that and that bullet would taste nice!

You seem to have what iTunes is confused with a record label, because a label it is most definitely not. It is a content portal. They provide the easiest path of least resistance for millions of people to buy music, but they don't do the marketing for you because that's not what they're providing. It's up for you to push your goods. They offer ad space for a price, but ultimately if you want to move units you're going to have pound the pavement, so to speak, outside of the walls of the iTunes store. If you wanted Apple/iTunes to do the marketing for you, you'd be looking at a big label style cut of the profits and that 70/30 split would be reversed.

Since you talk like you're in school make a project out of it: propose an alternate to iTunes. A service with as easy an interface for buying and playing back that music as Apple has currently developed. And how it would function, make a profit, build up and scale out, and what kind of cut from sales you'd need as you grew the service.

Can you envision a way to do it without taking a penny from the content providers? Would you want to?

Edit: I notice you're selling the track yourself for $1.35 -- why are gouging your fans if they buy straight from you? Shouldn't you have it priced at least a few % less than the iTunes store, since you don't have to pay the Apple tax if I buy it straight from you?

Very interesting!

Thanks,