Tag: Digital Music

iTunes Radio: Have They Hit It Out of The Park?

radio_1xCustomizable, user integrated, radio stations have become the norm on music playing services, from Pandora to Spotify to fm.Radio; so it was just a matter of time before Apple’s iTunes developed and released a radio application of its own. And in classic Apple style, the iTunes Radio (accessible directly through iTunes, after downloading the new software) hits it out of the park.

Similar to its competitors, iTunes Radio, allows the user to create personal radio stations based on a specific artist, song, or genre. But where iTunes Radio differs from other learn-on-the-fly radio stations is the option to listen to 250, DJ created and genre organized stations. Featured stations range from The Beatles Radio, to the Voice, to “Miley Cyrus Bangerz,” Diplo tracks, and of course iTunes Top 100. In this way iTunes Radio reminded me of Sirius Satellite and other satellite car stations, offering unique, specific music.

But in exploring iTunes Radio, I picked several categories to study in comparing it with its competitors; the categories being: price, and music recommendations. In terms of price you can listen to iTunes Radio for free if you’re okay with listening to advertisements. However if you own an iTunes Match account, $25 a year, which allows you to store all your music in the iCloud and access it on any device, you can listen to iTunes Radio ad-free. Such a deal. Pay for music accessibility and the absence of ads is offered through Spotify as well; Spotify offers free use, with ads, uninterrupted music on a laptop or desktop for $4.99 a month, or uninterrupted music anywhere on all devices for $9.99 a month.

Pandora also offers a free service with advertisements, or an upgrade with similar deals to iTunes Radio and Spotify for either $36 a year, or $3.99 a month. Another great feature of iTunes Radio that can’t really be matched by its competitors is the ability to purchase a song you have recently discovered, again through iTunes Radio, and have it available in your music library. And you own this song, its not just saved in a queue!

Now on to what I think is obviously the most important aspect of iTunes Radio: the music. In this field, at least at the moment, I don’t quite see iTunes Radio competing with Pandora, in that Pandora offers more than 500 genre-based stations, and more than a million songs from more than 100,000 artists. (iTunes claims they have the most, but haven’t put a number on the “most”). It may be this extensive music catalog that Pandora has acquired that makes its music recommendations not only more accurate but more fun.

I can’t tell you how many new songs and artists I have discovered listening to Pandora radio, and in the few hours that I experimented with iTunes Radio I didn’t come across one “new” artist that I hadn’t heard of. This may just be a result of Pandora being in business longer and perfecting the art of recommending music, but to me they clearly had the advantage in this area. In addition, Pandora’s option to learn more about the playing artist and song lyrics is just a nice touch, aiding in your ability to “discover” new musicians.

That being said, iTunes Radio claims the more you use it, the better the recommendations. (Would you expect them to say anything different?). But for now it reminds me of iTunes “Genius recommendations on steroids.” But they have room to grow and most likely will.

Until next time,

Kelli Richards, CEO of The All Access Group, LLC

The Scoop on Zach Zalon, Former President of Virgin Digital

I recently talked with Zach Zalon, the co-founder of Wilshire Axon and former President of Virgin Digital, the digital platform for Virgin’s Entertainment Group. We discussed his inspiration for launching Virgin Digital and the philosophies that have structure his career.

Zalon attributed most of his career to the fundamental philosophy that was created when he worked as manager at the Troubador club, a live music nightclub. He spoke of the clubs ability to showcase up-and-coming artists that didn’t have a big following by bookending a major label act with these new artists. “Our philosophy was to democratize, in some respects, access to fans by using the bigger bands that were going to draw all those people to our club as the gateway to that bands fan base.” The philosophy that was created from this was the underlying desire to support independent artists that didn’t have the proper following or support.

He took that philosophy with him when he left the Troubador. At that time, the Internet was in its early states, and Zalon teamed up with his connections in the music world to use the Internet as another vehicle for expanding an artist’s access to new audiences, which inspired him to branch out and create his own consulting firm, The Factory Network.

Transitioning into his career with Virgin, Zalon explains that Virgin had been a client of The Factory Network (TFN), and they had worked with the company to do a variety of things. TFN wrote a business plan for what they thought would be a fairly innovative service called Radio Free Virgin, a global, online radio service that connected very deeply with the mega stores around the world to drive a fairly significant audience. When Richard Branson funded it, Zalon and his team decided to close down TFN and take on the project for Virgin full time.

After many years with Virgin, Zalon and his team spun out of the company and created two separate companies, Wilshire Axon and Hello Music. Zalon and his team used the blueprinting methods they had created during their time at Virgin and established a digital product design firm. Hello Music started from the teams desire to help artists. The idea behind it is to pre-negotiate opportunities that, up until now, only major acts have gotten access to and providing that access to artists anywhere in America in a standardized experience.

When asked what he most wanted to be remembered for Zalon said that he didn’t feel like he had been around long enough for a legacy, but rather explained that the three things he and his team were focused on were helping large companies create amazing digital experiences for their customers, helping independent artists get support, and an overarching focus on the city of Los Angles.

To hear the full interview visit my BRT Interview With Zack Zalon.

There, you can find new interviews with some of the top innovators of our time.

My BlogTalkRadio episodes are regularly scheduled live every Monday at 8:00 pm EST.

 

Until next time,

Kelli Richards, CEO of All Access Group

https://allaccessgroup.com

 

Twitter Music

Twitter MusicAs all of us know, there are countless online music apps and platforms circulating the web, from Spotify, to Pandora, to Soundcloud, to Last.fm – all offering “unique” variations on the music listening experience. Let’s have a quick overview and then I’ll make a few valuable points.

  1. Spotify works with Facebook to allow friends to share music in real time, as they listen.
  2. Pandora lets users pick a genre, or artist, or song and create a playlist accordingly.
  3. Soundcloud targets the artists themselves, allowing recording and sharing, which in turn, appeals to listeners looking for the next great musician or fans seeking sneak peeks of new songs.
  4. Last.fm basically provides an encyclopedia-like amount of information about artists with biographies to similar musicians and popular tracks.

So it comes as no surprise, and it was only a matter of time before Twitter released its own online music player, cleverly named, “Twitter #Music.”

So what does #Music have to offer, and is it even worth using when compared to all the other listener options?

Lets check out the app.

Twitter organizes its music selection into four categories: Popular, which they describe as “new music trending on Twitter;” Emerging, “hidden talent found in the Tweets;” Suggested, “artists you might like;” and #NowPlaying, “tweeted by people you follow.” 

The Popular music section is basically Twitter’s version of the iTunes top 100, or the Billboard top 100, except it illustrates the top 40 songs played on Twitter.  Is less actually more? The ‘Emerging’ category promises to expose new, up and coming, talented musical groups –probably Indie-Rock bands; ‘Suggested’ is exactly what it sounds like –Twitter analyzes your tweets and follows and provides you with music accordingly (not bad for music discovery purposes); and ‘#Nowplaying’ is pretty self-explanatory.

While the idea of Twitter joining the music sharing industry is a pretty obvious decision, and the categories they break the music down into seems legitimate, and are integrated into Twitter pretty logically, it still is difficult to imagine #music making any real impact in the music sharing space, despite its already massive audience.  The sad news is that Twitter has failed to offer any “new” advantages to using its application.

Popular music can be found anywhere. There are far more credible sources for “emerging” talent on sites like Pitchfork.com, or even through Spotify – and “Suggested” tracks has already been mastered by Pandora. However, possibly the biggest flaw in #music is the fact that I could really care less about what people I’m following are listening to. Facebook and Spotify work so well together because they only share information among friends, or at least acquaintances. Twitter is different in that it is a totally different type of social networking. Yes I follow my friends, but I also follow people for news, for sports analysis, for tech advances, or because they may just tweet hilarious, absurd and interesting thoughts.

But that does not mean that I am interested in what Anderson Cooper, Snookie, LeBron James, or what @crapmydadsays is listening to?  Not really.

Until next time,

Kelli Richards, CEO of The All Access Group, LLC

 

From Rotary Phones to ??? – The Every Changing Market of Communications

Snapping “selfies” (self-taken pictures) on the beach while drinking margarita’s and uploading them to social sites might be a good way to share the moment with friends, but the potential for bosses and professional colleagues to see the less-than-scandalous, but inappropriate-for-your-brand pictures is always lurking close behind. Snapchat, a currently trending app, has found a way for you to avoid awkward looks at the office, but still let your friends in on how your weekend getaway was spent.

Snapchat is for picture and video messaging only. For instance, it’s an easy and fun way to let your friends know what they missed out on when they turned down your concert tickets with a simple video message. You can control how many seconds the message is viewed (the limit is 10 seconds), and who sees it. Users can also add captions to their pictures and videos. Send a video of your baby’s first steps to your whole family in an instant, just remember to save the video (or picture) before you send it, because once it is sent, it is gone forever. Snapchat permanently deletes all of the pictures and videos that you send and receive after you’ve viewed them.

With the digital age exploding, communication is an ever-evolving market right now. It seems like a lifetime from rotary phones to smartphones, and the changes are coming at a faster and faster pace.

Some other apps changing the instant communication landscape are WhatsApp and Voxer. With these apps you can send a text message, voice clip, or video snippet with just a touch of a finger on your smartphone. The best part? They’re practically free.

WhatsApp costs $0.99 to download, but sending and receiving text messages and videos is free. After a simple download, users can enter their phone number, which the app software adopts as a username. WhatsApp syncs the contacts stored on the device and adds people –who also have the app. Once the app is set up, you can send unlimited texts, pictures, and videos. Another perk of this app is that you can use it internationally. Have a friend in England? Don’t worry, you can still send them pictures of your cat (Milo, in my case) or steamy mug of morning java. The app also makes chatting with a group easy; just add a subject line and people to the group to start messaging.

Similar to WhatsApp, Voxer also allows its users to text and send pictures, in addition to sending voices messages. Voxer yanks on your inner child’s desire to play because it is, in essence, a glorified walkie-talkie. The focal facet of this app is its push-to-talk feature. Want to remind your husband to pick up the kids from school? Send a verbal message in seconds.

There will always be a demand for a faster and better means of communicating. Who knows, one day soon we might even remember to go old school and communicate face to face. The invaluable power of a REAL connection, in real-time. Mind blowing, right?

What do you think will be next for communication technology?

Until next time,
Kelli Richards, CEO of the All Access Group, LLC

The Virtual Power of Eric Whitacre’s Choir: Involving the Masses in Music

WhitacreNot since the supergroup “USA for Africa” sang, “We Are the World,” in 1985 has a song collaboration inspired such a global response. But this time, instead of celebrities contributing their part, from inside a studio in California, the contributors are average people, working in front of their computers, in the comfort of their own homes.

Just as Lionel Richie and Michael Jackson did before him, Eric Whitacre – minus the logistics – has created a musical sensation.

Jumping in the way back machine for a moment, Eric Whitacre’s interest in music began when a friend convinced him to join his college choir, primarily because of the pretty girls. It was the “Kyrie” from Mozart’s Requiem, however, that sparked his passion. In a recent TED Talk, Whitacre spoke of this experience saying it changed his life. He then felt as though he was part of something bigger than himself.

Whitacre went on to write pieces, which were published, got  Masters degree at the Juilliard School, and became a renowned composer and conductor. But it would not be Mozart or even an inspiring professor that would be Whitacre’s muse for his most recent project, it was a fan video submitted on YouTube.

The fan sang the soprano line of “Sleep,” a song Whitacre had composed, and it gave him an idea. If he could get 50 people to sing a part of one of his songs and post the video to YouTube, he could string the videos together to create a virtual choir. He decided to upload a conductor track of his song, “Lux Aurumque,” and waited for would-be artists to take an interest.

The project, when completed, received 1 million hits in its first month. You can view the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7o7BrlbaDs

With such a big response, Whitacre decided to do a second collaboration, this time using his song, “Sleep,” which inspired the project from the beginning. At the end of the submission process, 2051 videos from 58 countries were uploaded to YouTube. By working virtually, with technology at the fingertips of millions of people from all corners of the Earth, what used to take years to achieve, is now possible in months, weeks, and sometimes hours.

(View the, “Sleep” collaboration video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WhWDCw3Mng)

Similar to Eric Whitacre, I understand the power of global connectivity, networking …community. It is at the core of my All Access Radio show each week (which is approaching its one millionth download this month). In one form or another, it has always been in collaboration that human beings create our best works.  Even those who work in isolation will depend upon networks and colleagues to launch their projects once they’re completed.

So this blog comes with a question: What is YOUR legacy project?  Where are your communities?  Are you building a choir of support around you?  

Until next time,

Kelli Richards, CEO of the All Access Group, LLC

Google Glass: A Curse or a Blessing?

downloadYes, Alice, we’ve definitely fallen into the looking glass. Google’s most recent project, Google Glass, will delve far into the realm of science fiction, bringing Tony Stark, Iron Man-esque technology to the masses. The Google Glass project delivers a wearable computer system in the form of glasses, offering hands free messaging, photography, and video recording.  Straight out of 007, this offers the ability to share everything you see, live, in real time: directions, reminders, the web – all seen through the lens, right in front of your face.

The glasses have a display in the top right corner of the frame, making endless information available at all times, and will reportedly connect with either your Android or iPhone implementing WiFi, 3g, and 4g coverage. These revolutionary specs won’t just be a piece of spectacular hardware; Google is negotiating with Warby Parker, a company which specializes in the sales of trendy glasses, in an attempt to bring infinite data while still looking fashionable.

The best part of Google’s Project Glass is that Google is currently allowing civilians, not developers, the opportunity to influence product development. Google declared, “We’re looking for bold, creative individuals who want to join us and be a part of shaping the future of Glass.” Applications are being accepted through the use of Google+ and Twitter, through the hashtag #ifihadglass.

While this idea of unlimited data being available even more easily than at your fingertips is revolutionary, it raises more than a few questions regarding privacy. The ability to record everything right in front of you, in real time, is a daunting thought, covering everything from being photographed at a cafe, to making videos in airports. Beyond the questionable “Glass etiquette” that will certainly develop over time, the prospect that Google and the government will be able to access users’ data is shattering.

If the Glass Project brings information right in front of your face, allowing you to communicate, to access the internet, contacts, etc., and share what you are seeing live, what will stop others from accessing your private information? Although a few decades late, Orwell’s 1984 has definitely caught up with us.

The issues that may arise from the mass production of Google Glass are met with equally impressive, revolutionary concepts around social networking and sharing. Glass would be the apex of social sharing, allowing people to be in constant contact, literally letting individuals step into other’s shoes, to view the world from a different point of view. You could be standing in New York’s Time Square and share and trade that experience with someone around the world, exploring the streets of Venice or Sydney, Australia. Such universal sharing would truly redefine the human experience.

At its best, this would also effect topics as broad as human rights and poverty – but the cost remains to be seen. Only time will tell if the Google Glass Project will be the vessel connecting mankind, Pandora’s box, or something in the middle.

Kelli Richards,
CEO of the All Access Group, LLC

One Thing RIGHT in the Music World: CD Baby

CD Baby is an online distributor of independent music. But they’re not just any online distributor they’re actually the largest online distributor of independent music in the world. Since their start-up in 1998 and mega distribution giant success, CD Baby has paid out over $200 million to artists. That’s not bad considering everyone else in the music industry is claiming that no one is buying music (and everyone is stealing it). One of the most interesting aspects of CD Baby is the fact that the artist, not the label or the retailer, sets the price of their albums and discounts. Perhaps that’s why there are over 300,000 artists on CD Baby today.

CD Baby’s greatness continues to shine through and impact every part of music and the music industry. By supporting artists, doing ethical business in the music industry, and helping new musicians emerge. With all that is wrong in the music industry today, it’s nice to see a company of great people doing great things.

Kelli Richards, President and CEO
The All Access Group, LLC

 

This week In the Hot Seat with Larry LeBlanc: Kelli Richards, CEO and president, The All Access Group.

Kelli Richards has more experience in dealing with the convergence of music, entertainment, and technology than almost anyone you can name.

She’s had over two decades of experience championing these worlds, in fact.

Today, as president and CEO of The All Access Group based in Cupertino, California in the heart of Silicon Valley and host of All Access Radio, Richards strives to create alliances between large content and technology companies, major artists, and consumer brands.

Richards guides her clients through the maze of leading-edge technologies and connections in order to get their products to more people. According to this savvy, fast-talking entrepreneur, her focus is on “strategic rainmaking, and creating opportunities between innovative technologies for digital distribution, and branded entertainment content.”

For established music artists and celebrities, Richards engages direct-to-fan distribution channels to try to create new revenue streams that leverage their brand and extend their reach to more fans and broader markets.

Richards is widely-celebrated within both technology and music worlds for having launched digital music at Apple Inc. As director of music and entertainment markets from 1987 to 1997, she spearheaded all of the company’s digital music initiatives. She was a key part of a very small team which launched Apple’s earliest music initiatives that led eventually to the company launch of the media player computer program iTunes in 2001 after her departure.

In the mid-90s, Richards co-developed PatroNet, the first Internet-based artist subscription service with her Waking Dreams’ partner, producer/musician Todd Rundgren.

A former A&R executive at EMI Records, Richards has co-authored several books, including “Taking the Crowd to the Cloud – Social Media for the Music Industry” as well as the book/DVD, “The Art of Digital Music,” a compilation of interviews with 56 artists, producers, programmers, record label executives and music industry figures, including Glen Ballard, Chuck D, Thomas Dolby, Herbie Hancock, Jimmy Jam, Alan Parsons, Phil Ramone, Todd Rundgren and Don Was.

What do you do at The All Access Group?

Before this I had run music at Apple for a decade before iTunes. That’s what got me engaged more actively on the tech side (of the music industry). When I left Apple (in late 1997) I basically took my job to the outside. I took the job that I was doing at Apple, which was being the person in charge of all of the music initiatives and the tech convergence, and I started working with disruptive technologies and working with tech companies and major artists, my two favorite groups of people. Bringing them together to create new opportunities.

If I am working with a major artist, I am leveraging all of my tech and brand relationships to help them with a digital strategy. If I am working with a start up tech company, I am bringing them relationships with big artists, and brand or tech companies; whoever they need (from) my network to accelerate their success. I am basically a rainmaker, but a very strategic one.

What artists have you worked with?

I have worked with about 300 artists over the past 14 years. I don’t like to namedrop with the artists that I work with or I have worked with. I do work with artists sometimes in a coaching capacity; and, sometimes in a strategy capacity. But more what I do is bring them into my work with tech companies. So I am reaching out to that network of artists that I am in touch with and cherry-picking which ones would resonate and make sense for new technology distribution models to bring them revenue.

What digital strategy would you suggest for an upcoming band with a great record and a regional buzz?

Unfortunately, I don’t work with indie artists. I only work with established artists that have a brand, and a following. I probably wouldn’t be able to help them. That’s a short conversation.

Why do you only work with major artists? In order to work on a larger canvas?

Yes. Because I deal on a bigger canvas. I want to be able to make things happen. I can do better for artists and expand their audiences because of their brand and their following than I can for a rising or an unknown artist. There are people who specialize in working with indie artists, I just don’t happen to be one of them.

It’s not that I don’t support indie artists; I think that’s the lifeblood of the business going forward. You have to have new artists, but I just don’t find that I can do as much for them as I can with the bigger artists.

You have also worked with numerous big companies.

Sony, Cisco, Motorola, Apple. Big companies all the way down to start-ups that you have never heard of. Some of which blew away in the wind in the 2009/2010 era, and some of which are still standing–and new ones all of time. That’s the power of being (based) in Silicon Valley, and I am very entrepreneurial.

There’s still a disconnect between the music and tech worlds, is there not?

Frankly, that’s why I have had a career over the past 14 years. That’s what I do. I help be a human bridge between those worlds, and I bring opportunity to both sides based on an understanding of how each works and the relationships that have been built.

Meanwhile, technology is changing so rapidly.

That’s why I have been leaning more in that direction for quite a long time now. We drive what is coming next, and we create new models and new revenue streams for artists, and that’s exciting to me. That fulfills the vision that I had from a very young age.

Are people in the technology sector becoming more music savvy?

Not really but, again, there’s opportunity for me and others who do get (understand) that space. What’s happening is more and more people are getting let go from labels and from the digital side as well. Those people are becoming peers and are consulting to the tech world. You see more of that happening all of the time. But, for the longest time, I was The Lone Ranger. There was me and, maybe, Ted Cohen and a couple of other colleagues. We were the only ones beating the drum (about music) on the digital side out there in the wilderness because nobody knew what we were talking about–trying to bring convergence between these two spaces.

I wouldn’t say that the labels were in denial about technology but…

I would. I would say that. And why wouldn’t that be? There was a (business) model that worked for over five decades where they were empowered and they had all of the profits. Why wouldn’t they want to keep that?

Gracenote’s Ty Roberts recently told me that the people running the record business now are his peers and that they know the technology world better.

I would have to agree with that. But do we have to wait for that first generation to retire before we see a seat change? Probably.

So many managers have beefed up their companies with technology experts while labels still seem to be lagging behind. At some labels, it just seems like there are a couple of tech whiz kids in the basement with no real power.

No kidding. We were just at one of the big labels, and it’s true. There were these 12 people huddled around this small conference table in the corner. But I am optimistic that the bright managers and the bright label executives are pushing tech, digital and social media as tools that are going to make a big difference in their approach to artists.

A decade ago, managers would ask their label what the marketing plan was for a project. Today, the savvy managers devise an overall marketing and digital strategy, and ask, “Where do you think you can fit in?”

Absolutely. That would be the right question. That’s what they do. Managers should be saying, “This is what our game plan is. This is what we are thinking. What are you aware of that we might be overlooking? What do you know about what we aren’t doing? That we should be harnessing. Either a technology or a company that has a platform we should be rolling into given what our goals are. Or what can you see that we are not even thinking about that makes sense to expand our audience to make more money for our artists?”

How many managers are truly qualified to deal with the changing world of technology? They really need outside help in most cases.

Let me tell you, I work as an extension to the artist team. They still have a manager. They have a booking agent. They have publicists. When I work with a big artist on strategy, I focus on their digital strategy, and what relationships they should align with. I work in tandem with the manager. I’m not trying to take the manager’s job, but to buffer what social media strategies they would use. Should they be engaging Topspin (Topspin Media)? Should they be doing online streaming concerts to promote a big tour? (Overseeing) all of these strategy components involving technology, digital and social media is almost its own role as you say.

A manager already has a lot on their plate.

Often, they will have a digital person on the team, if it’s a big enough management company.

You meet with majors’ managers. Are they not a lot savvier now about these technology issues as well?

You better believe it. Artist managers, in general, the best ones have become much more tech savvy. I just had a meeting with Jordan Berliant (partner) at The Collective. Jordan is extremely bright. He’s also one of these guys who’s been tech savvy from his early days. This guy is completely versed. You sit down with him, and you go through what you are working on with a couple of different startups and the guy is right there. Yes, he has a head of digital that works inside The Collective, but Jordan himself is extremely savvy about the power of these tools, and what they can do for his artists knowing which ones to engage. That is an example of a management firm really taking to heart the importance of digital. It’s not going away. It’s becoming a bigger part of the pie.

The smartest one of all was certainly Terry McBride for many years. I put Terry right at the top of the list with the Nettwerk Group. Terry had his vision of collapsed copyright and how to harness strategies to engage through all of these different digital and social tools in a very authentic way for his artists.

Still, the internet world has increasingly become much more complex.

Yes, yes. There are 180 social media platforms. How would you know which ones to even leverage for your artist if you weren’t in the middle of that world? You have to be in it. You have to be in the digital social world yourself to be able to guide an artist. It is a rare person who understands the artist; how they think and work and also understand the technology. But there are several people out there who do that. Myself included, but also Ty Roberts (chief technology officer, Gracenote) is another one and Ian Rogers (CEO, Topspin Media) is another one. There are so many of us out there trying to make sense of this for the artist. We are very artist-oriented.

Distribution has been made easier by the internet, but the one thing the labels still do better than anyone is providing a marketing sizzle.

Marketing, yes. You hit the word Larry. That’s what they do best. Marketing. That is what they do. That is what they are becoming — marketing firms.

Labels can still bring to the table their marketing expertise, which can be significant.

Yeah, I’m with you, Larry. I’m with you. There is still a role (for labels). I don’t want to be a label basher. (For) all of the different start-ups I work with, and with the models that I get excited about, I still have to go back to the labels, and bring them on board on some of these things. The meeting I took at the major recently, I could have gone artist by artist myself because I have relationships with the managers; but it would take me forever. I wanted some scale and speed. That is why I went to the label. But most people don’t have those artists and manager relationships, and they have to work with the label.

For a mid-level artist working globally, there are endless options, including releasing music through indies or through a major in some territories.

Oh yeah, there are so many options. That’s why an artist needs a manager to quarterback the strategy. That’s why they need a manager because the manager is more powerful than ever now. More so than when there was the full retinue at the label and everything else. The manager quarterbacks the strategy.

Today with the internet an artist can do a release themselves worldwide.

Of course. Or do a phase (of a release).

An artist can also still work with a major in certain territories.

As long as they have a reversion clause (in their contract), and get their masters back. That’s the important point. Keep your masters. Do one-offs.

With the internet being so global, how do you harness it directly to make an impact?

That’s the power of these social media tools is to let your fans be part of the process. It’s not linear anymore. It’s interactive. Let fans help promote you and watch what happens. For example, I’m working with Fankix where a band can do a concert online, and reach all corners of the globe with one concert in real time and have a time zone centric live Q&A after the show with the band and the fan base. They can do this all online. And they can have their fans engage with each other. The reason this is so powerful is that the fans get to meet each other globally. When did that ever happen?

Some artists use fan-funded tools like Kickstarter, Slice the Piece, and Pledge Music to pay for their albums, while others may leverage TopSpin to create unique bundles of goods that allow them to go direct-to-fan.

All of that. All virtual tip jars enabling bands to be underwritten by their fans much like what Todd (Rundgren) and I came up with PatroNet 17 years ago. Ian (Ian Rogers at Topspin Media) has just launched Sharealytics which is all about the data aspect of the power that we have with social media tools. Understanding where your fans are. What are they doing? Where do they live? What have they bought from you? What are they saying about you? Who are your biggest fans? This is powerful stuff.

The industry is moving from collecting data to finding out more what the data really means.

Yes. Wouldn’t you like to know where the majority of your fans work so you could route your touring appropriately? Which (fans), in particular, so you could do a shout out at concerts and encourage more people to become evangelists and street teams for you? Wouldn’t you like to know that? I think that an artist would like to know who bought how many T-shirts, and CDs from all parts of the world. How much money did they make?

Mobile phones becoming the indispensable voice/social networking-and-music companion has brought about the need for a deeper body of consumer and fan knowledge.

Absolutely. Smart phones, tablets, and apps.

Today, we carry around a traveling entertainment centre.

You’ve got it. The power of those platforms is that people aren’t tethered to their laptops or any other device in one place. They are carrying the artist with them everywhere they go. They are sharing the artist’s music with their friends, and with other fans on the fly. That’s the power of those tools. Now the artists are thinking, “Do I need an app?” Sting just spent close to $1 million on an app.

[Sting 25, released in Nov. 2011, celebrates the last 25 years of Sting’s career, as both a musician and a humanitarian and activist. Costs of the nearly $1 million app were apparently primarily covered by its two primary sponsors: American Express and Chevrolet.]

Not every artist needs an app, and an artist probably doesn’t need to spend $1 million on it. This is another example of artists shouldn’t do something for the sake of doing it because they are a lemming. They figure out with their team, what does it make sense for them to do, and in what context will they do it. “What would I do here that I could only do through this medium? How is this going to help me?”

Marketing has become a 365 day thing for artists.

That’s right. That’s a very important point. What a manager has to be thinking about is not just their marketing cycle around the band’s CD drop, and their tour. They have to be thinking about year-round engagement with the fans. What are they going to be doing for the artist and the fans year-round? You do have spikes around those CDs and touring and you can then really engage those fans in a much more authentic way as your street teams.

On the indie side, you want to look at collaborating (with others) and building a much bigger platform in a shared way so you can get more awareness.

I find Facebook helpful in building business relationships.

I find it even more impactful in my world as a tool to engage opportunities between big artists and brands based on their fans–on both sides–having social graph profiles. Fankix does just that. It pulls all that together. Because you have access to those fans’ social graph profiles, you know a lot about them, and too few people are harnessing that to their advantage. And I don’t mean poaching in a negative way. I mean leveraging them (the social graph profiles) in a positive way.

How do you do that? By going through fan profiles on the artist’s and sponsor’s Facebook pages?

Correct. You basically know who the fans are for that artist because they are connected to the artist. The artist promotes to them and encourages, in this case it’s Fankix that I am working on. If there’s an online concert happening, it’s in the band’s best interest to promote it to their fans. The fans come to the online concert, and they bring their friends with their Facebook social graph profiles.

Meanwhile, the brands that are involved bring their fans. Someone like Heineken has about half-a-million fans on Facebook. They bring their fans to the concert. Now the band that is participating gets the benefit of the half million Heineken fans. This is how you grow the system. This is how you monetize a broader audience for an artist and a deeper audience engagement for a brand. That’s where Facebook becomes an actual tool. Not just something to have a profile on.

With some exceptions, the major labels aren’t yet delivering on all of the different things available. Why wouldn’t labels liaise closer with automobile manufacturers 5, 10 or even 15 years ago?

Now you are singing my song. The problem with that particular example is that the artist railed against the concept of selling or whoring out their fans. They didn’t want to sell their fans to the car companies. Many still do rail out against that. They don’t want to impose on their fans. That was the stance for many years. But, Larry, that’s what changing. It’s changing if it’s done right because the brands can be integrated into the social experience in a way that is not intrusive or offensive to the fan and brings the revenue to the artist. Some of the brands have started their own record labels now.

Where does your interest in the technology side of music come from?

I was one of those weird people that I knew what I was going to do for a living at the age of eight. I don’t know if it’s because I grew up in Silicon Valley. I’m a Cupertino native just like Steve Jobs. We grew up there; and it (technology) was kind of in the soil. Tech has always been a part of my world. I could see at a very young age where things were headed with the music and tech convergence. I could see what we were doing in technology in Silicon Valley and how that was going to have an impact on artists. I always knew that I wanted to work in the music industry ever since I saw (producer) George Martin when I was eight years old behind the Beatles on TV. I told my folks, “I don’t know what that man is doing but that’s what I want to do.” And I trained to be a record producer.

[Cupertino is one of the numerous cities claiming to be the heart of Silicon Valley, as many semi-conductor, and computer companies were founded there, and in the surrounding areas. The worldwide headquarters for Apple Inc. is located there. Among the companies also headquartered in Cupertino are: Trend Micro, Cloud.com, Lab126, Packeteer, Chordiant, and Seagate Technology. Over 60 high-tech companies have offices there, including IBM, Olivetti, and Oracle Corporation.]

Instead, you got an MBA at San Jose State University.

Yeah, I was the wrong gender (to be a producer then). But I got lucky, and I got hired by Neil Portnow (VP of A&R, EMI America Records) to be a junior A&R executive at EMI. That’s what led me in that direction. It was at the time that EMI America and Manhattan merged. It was late ‘80s. Joe Smith was running Capitol at the time. Jim Mazza was in charge (as president) of EMI America. Neil was in charge of A&R. It was in that era. It was a very turbulent era for the company. EMI had a funny roster at the time with Sheena Easton, John Waite, Thomas Dolby, and David Bowie.

I was at EMI for a good two years, and I worked with a number of artists, but I got tapped to go up to Apple to start their music focus. A colleague of mine was at Apple and he told me, “There’s rumbling around here that they want to start music as focus.”

You were at Apple Inc. for a decade. You lasted a long time.

Yes, I did.

What were you hired to do?

I was in the earliest group launching music. There was an interface that turned the Mac into a musical instrument that enabled musicians to have a home recording studio with Mac and ProTools. My claim to fame at Apple, unfortunately, was not iTunes. It was making sure that every musician and every filmmaker were passionate about using the Macintosh in their work, on the road, and in the studio.

That’s my claim to fame.

How much was music held in…

I was the lone voice. To be fair, I had other colleagues to work with in and out of that 10 year period. People like Dave Pakman, who later ran eMusic (and now is a partner at Venrock in New York). Kevin Saul had been the lawyer for me there. (As associate general counsel at Apple, Inc.), he remains the lawyer for the iTunes music stuff to this day. Some people have stuck around. Some people have gone in and out (of the company). In many ways, I never really left. I am still only a mile from the (Apple) campus. It’s my hometown.

You obviously worked with Apple’s co-founder Steve Jobs.

Steve and I had many conversations. In fact, I kept the pilot light lit for him (when he left). I knew that he would come back to run the company in its darkest days. Everybody around me was saying, “You are absolutely crazy. This man is running two other companies. He’s never coming back.” Meanwhile, there I was like Don Quixote fighting windmills; trying to make sure that people (at Apple) would understand that music was the killer app for the company. There I was running around the hallways saying, “Music is the killer app.” Nobody wanted to hear it.

So I was keeping the pilot light going, and Steve was able to come back and enable the vision I and some of my colleagues had to make music key and to change the industry. I would have loved to have been part of if I had had the power when I was there. But I was not empowered because the CEO, the people at the top (before Jobs returned) didn’t see music as driving everything.

[In a May 24th 1985 board meeting, Apple’s board of directors sided with CEO John Sculley in a dispute with co-founder Steve Jobs, and removed Jobs from his managerial duties as head of the Macintosh division. Jobs resigned from Apple five months later, and founded NeXT Inc. the same year. In 1986, Jobs bought The Graphics Group (later renamed Pixar) from Lucasfilm’s computer graphics division for the price of $10 million. In 1996, Apple bought NeXT for $429 million, bringing Jobs back to the company he co-founded. Jobs became CEO again in 1997.]

It was really tough to know that is where it (music and technology) was headed. It was like when Todd (Rundgren) and I knew where artist 360 was headed and we had to wait a decade for our vision to come to life. It happened to me several times in my career.

Between 1978 and 2006 there were a number of legal disputes between Apple Computer and Apple Corps owned by The Beatles.

Yes, the problem was we got ourselves into a few lawsuits with Apple Records. I had to then hold the line with a three page edict (of limitations) when we lost the first two go-arounds so we couldn’t cross the line as to what Apple could do in music. When Steve came back, of course, and won the third lawsuit (in 2006), everything changed.

What sort of limitations had there been?

I can’t divulge, even to today, what the terms were, but I had to toe the line with three pages of things that we could not cross the line. That was under Neil Aspinall’s rule. Neil (manager of Apple Corps) and I became colleagues as well before his death (in 2008). He was a great guy. But it was just the way it was. It was business. It wasn’t personal.

What did you learn working with Todd Rundgren for four years?

Well, Todd and I were two people that shared the same vision. We absolutely could see where things were headed. We were both music tech geeks. Put Ty (Roberts) in there too. Because that’s when I first hooked up with Ty. We all shared the same vision to where things were headed. Todd and I were very complementary. I was very business-oriented, and very tech-oriented. This is an artist. Todd is very artistic in his approach to everything he does. I think that it was a good partnership. I think that we were very complementary and God, to work with a genius. To have been able to work with Steve Jobs, and Todd Rundgren, these are two of the smartest people that anybody could be able to work with. They are brilliant. They are geniuses.

I remember you organizing Music Biz 2005, a futuristic conference in 1999.

That was my conference. I produced that.

One of the first technology and music conferences?

Well no. I am a pioneer in digital music from day one. But that was in the mid-90s and there were other conferences. There were Plug.In by Jupiter and Web Noise. There were many of these conferences; maybe about a half-dozen, and there were many people that were there in those days that are still very active now.

[Music Biz 2005 (MB-5) took place Oct. 15-17, 1999 at the Ex’pression Center for New Media in Emeryville, California. The event was organized by a group of Bay Area industry veterans: producer David Schwartz; co-producer Kelli Richards; operations manager Keith Hatschek; executive producers Leslie Ann Jones, Steve Savage, Gary Platt, and Peter Laanen; and associate producers Andrew Keen and Craig Deonik.]

Still Music Biz 2005 was the first conference to offer industry leaders the opportunity to dive into the latest recording, music creation, and internet technologies. Most conferences then were technology driven.

Actually, they were run by research companies for the most part or by journalists. You’re right. We designed that conference very deliberately. We pulled together people out of the artist world, and the technology world. And I think that we were one of the earliest to do that.

The conference was timely being in 1999; in the midst of Napster and a recording industry not knowing how to react to the internet, and music downloading. It was an era of uncertainty.

Yes it was, however, a lot of us in the room had a very clear road map–a blueprint–where things were headed. We could see it as clear as day. And it took a decade for a lot of people to even get close to what we were talking about. It all came true. Everything that we said.

For example, Todd and I came up with the company Waking Dreams, and a venture that turned into the earliest form of an artist 360 (deal). The venture was called PatroNet. The goal was to have established artists break free, and go direct to their fans based on the fact that they were the brand, and they had a powerful following in their fan base. And their fans would underwrite them. They wouldn’t need a label anymore, and they would have multiple revenue streams. This, of course, has all come about; but, at the time, it was heresy. This was in 1995. First of all nobody understood what the hell we were talking about and even if they did understand it they were terrified. What if we were right? We were right but we were way too early.

An almost plantation mentality existed back then between artists and their labels.

Oh, you used that word very deliberately. That’s what happened with Prince. Don’t you recall when he changed his name into the symbol? That is why he did that. His whole stance was, “This is a plantation mentality. I am a black artist. I’m being screwed just like my predecessors were. I’m going to re-record my masters and stick it to the man,” and that is exactly what he did.

Artists were absolutely tied to the labels.

It was a linear, one-way system. It was the only way you could have a career, period. That was it. One way linear; one-dimensional. An artist either signed to a label or they didn’t. They gave the label all of their rights or they would just forget about having a career. Of course, that is what we were so up in arms about, Todd and I, in the mid-90s, along with many others.

The power of the labels was then that they controlled distribution.

They did and when the internet came about many of us could see that that was the crack in the ice that was going to change everything.

Why did you believe that? The internet was such a narrow pipe in its earliest form.

Yeah, yeah but we could see where it was headed. We could see that broadband was going to come. We could see that everybody was going to be using this. We didn’t really foresee social media at the time; but we did foresee direct to fan and we were evangelizing–even at that 1999 conference–the importance of artists starting to engage directly with their fans with whatever tools that were available in technology and that more would come and that is exactly what has made all of the difference. Now we talk about social engagement.

Newcomer bands need to sign with a label to become successful internationally while a major act isn’t as dependent.

It’s funny, that coming from a label background, I’m not a big label fan. But even for the big artists, there’s still a need for them (labels) in a controlled way. For one-off distribution to big-box retailers; and for their marketing and promotional muscle. Period. You never want to give them your masters. You never want to give them your domain names. You never want to give them your publishing. You want to keep all of your rights and offer them a seat at the table on your terms. That’s the way it works now. If you are a big artist, you’ve got that kind of leverage. Or forget it. If you are big enough, you don’t need to use a label at all.

You are also a talent producer for award shows, and you organize celebrity fundraisers.

I cross-pollinate. Being that I am based in Cupertino in Silicon Valley, one of the things that I do is that I bring artists and celebrities opportunity to perform in front of tech companies; to be part of marketing campaigns; play at conferences; play at CES (the world’s largest consumer technology tradeshow), what have you. So there’s that brokering part of my work as well. I recently brought Jerry Seinfeld to perform at Cisco to perform at an employee anniversary event at the request of John Chambers, the company’s CEO. That’s another piece of what I do. I work all across the spectrum.

I am also a certified life coach, if you can believe it, and I work with celebrities and artists as well as innovators and entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley to bring them the next phase of growth in their lives. What is it they would like to do that they are not doing? Have they been on the road too long? Do they want more balance (in their lives)? We work through those kind of softer issues as well to bring them more fulfillment and more enrichment in the life.

My career has always been about working with artists, and enabling them new opportunities to reach and engage with their fans. It has always been my core passion for my whole career; for my whole life.

Larry LeBlanc is widely recognized as one of the leading music industry journalists in the world. Before joining CelebrityAccess in 2008 as senior editor, he was the Canadian bureau chief of Billboard from 1991-2007 and Canadian editor of Record World from 1970-89. He was also a co-founder of the late Canadian music trade, The Record. He has been quoted on music industry issues in hundreds of publications including Time, Forbes, and the London Times. He is co-author of the book “Music From Far And Wide.”

Digital Music East, Justin Timberlake, MySpace TV, and Where it’s All Headed

Human beings love music. It’s universally appreciated across all cultures and economic stations, all political and philosophical groups, and all ages. In fact, it threads itself, an incredibly strong communication tool, through generations. The impact of music is something that has never changed – it is as constant and timeless as humanity itself. It is as broad as the bridge from the Beatles to Irving Berlin and from Timberlake to Tchaikovsky.

But that’s about the ONLY thing in the music industry that is constant, everything else has been thrown up in chaos, redefining itself almost daily – often faster than even the most tech-savvy consumer can access – and certainly faster than artists and labels can learn. It’s not just the distribution and technology either; it’s the ever-shifting rights and monetization. Throw in the shape-shifting virtual and social spaces, and we’re looking at a virtual whirlwind of talent, tech and timing.

This is a time when mentors and leaders become uber vital to an artist’s process, and events like Digital Music Forum East (and West) become a beacon that attracts both the futurists and the icons of the industry.  This year’s Digital Music East happens in only a few weeks in New York and focuses on the five most vital parts of the industry today: Music-Tech, Rights, Distribution, Monetization and The Future.

Each series includes a number of 15-minute presentations by the top leaders and innovators in the music industry and panel discussions on hot topics, including:

Music and the Social Web
Music, Money & Innovation
New Technologies & the Artist
Rights & Licensing: If I Wanted to Reform Music Copyright Law, I Would…
What’s Next In Digital Distribution Models?
Monetizing the Music Experience: It’s Not Just About Selling Music Anymore
Predictions & Provocations about the Future of Technology & the Music

I will personally be speaking on “Taking the Crowd to the Cloud,” and basic info and tips on social media for indies and legends, the subject of my recent Amazon #1 bestseller on 2/23 at 11am. I was amazed to see how many artists did not know the variety of social spaces available to them, like podcast creators and streaming radio opps, such as BlogTalkRadio, and writing my eBook was a chance to provide a starting point for those new to the social space and Direct-to-Fan distribution.

Because in all fairness, even for the seasoned veteran in social media, this is a space that can raise even the portals to the highest of highs and then dump them when the next great triple E ride comes along, like the death of MySpace and the rise of Facebook.  And don’t think it can’t happen again.  Or UNhappen.  MySpace’s new benefactor, Justin Timberlake himself, is poised and ready to become the darling of real-time web TV – according to him at least.  “The future of MySpace is about what you’re going to do. About who you’re going to become,” he said in a brief presentation. “MySpace TV is the first foray into that future.”

MySpace TV will still encompass the site’s library of 42 million songs and 100,000 music videos, and it will enable instant communication and huge search-ability around them between friends.

Who knows where MySpace TV will go from there?  “As the plot of your favorite drama unfolds the joke of your favorite SNL character plays or even the last-second shot of your favorite team swishes the net, we’re giving you the opportunity to connect your friends to your moments as they’re actually occurring. This is the evolution of one of our greatest inventions, the television,” said Timberlake.  For the millions of artists who had invested their time and music and audiences on MySpace, I hope he’s right.

Kelli Richards
CEO
The All Access Group, LLC

 

Search Resources

Topic Areas & Guests

Categories

Join our mailing list

For insights on industry trends, and for details on special projects/events. We respect your time and your privacy.


By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact