I can see that working for some kinds of music but not others.

The kind of stuff you do I can see it being alright for.

I've got nothing against small releases, the whole DIY thing is you can do whatever you want. Especially if you aren't worried about selling stuff, you can just put out stuff at your own pace.

I wouldn't want to get all my music that way though.

the most promising business models in music revolve around this philosophy

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njuo1puB1lg&playnext_from=TL&videos=5hJWZayRPKg[/url]

I thought you despised making money out of music?

I wouldn't rely on trying to do what Reznor did if you're starting from scratch. He already had millions of fans when he started trying to experiment with those things.

most interesting elements of that 15 minute case study:

1) even though ghosts I-IV was technically free (as it was licensed under creative commons - meaning once one person bought it, they could share it for free) it grossed 1.6 million on amazon alone

2) the deluxe edition limited ghosts I-IV package, which sold for 300$, sold out 2500 copies in under 30 hours, thats a gross of 750,000 dollars in one day for an album that was free

3) the slip was released for free in mp3 and lossless format while simultaneously tourdate listings were posted - meaning you could get the music and immediately buy tickets to shows

4) he would routinely leak his own music while on record labels, involving fans in a lengthy "scavenger hunt" type of deal at his shows, where he was known for doing things like leaving USB drives in the bathrooms at concert venues containing unreleased music

5) he also encouraged fans to video his shows and then he uploaded all the 25789235782935 gigs of raw footage to the site and then asked fans to create something with it

his business model is essentially connect with fans + reason to buy = $

and its ****ing lucrative as ****

[QUOTE=gaslight;18016540]I thought you despised making money out of music?

I wouldn't rely on trying to do what Reznor did if you're starting from scratch. He already had millions of fans when he started trying to experiment with those things.[/QUOTE]

no, i hate ownership of music, corporate interests, and punishing people who file share

making money using business models that embrace file sharing and creative commons is completely appropriate

[QUOTE=Raayl;18016442]as far as im concerned - my life is my album. when i'm dead, that's it - the album is done. until then, i release song after song under the pretense of my morbid little life.[/QUOTE]

:lol:

Come on, man.

[img]http://trickledown.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/emo-kid.jpg[/img]

We both know you're better than that!

By the way, I'm really interested in hearing this new stuff you're working on. I admire your dedication and passion for making music! :thumb:

[QUOTE=Joelbassman;18016414]Idk, I kind of a fan of the 'album'. I know most people don't give a fuc, but I think the process of bringing 10-15 songs together that highlights that era of your music is cooler than releasing it in like glorified ep's.

j/s[/QUOTE]

I back this. There's nothing like grabbing an album, listening with headphones, and admiring the album's artwork and flipping through the booklet as you listen to the album. It's an experience that's, unfortunately, becoming obsolete, with downloading individual songs to iPods where people, it seems, almost rarely listen to a whole album.

[QUOTE=gaslight;18016509]I prefer full length albums if a band is capable of pulling it off but not everyone is up for it.

There's a difference between making 11 songs and making an album.[/QUOTE]

I also support this, which buttresses my second point: people don't really listen to full albums anymore, so young musicians now a days (16-30 years old, lets say) aren't MAKING full albums. I'm all for progress and the idea that music will go where ever its best for music as a whole to go, but I don't think the album format is quite done yet. There is still lots of potential.

His business model is great and clearly works for him, but it's not going to work for very many other people.

The thing is he already had fans and money, which enabled him to try out that business model.

I predict 99% of musicians who try to copy his approach would be lucky to see 1% of his success.

[QUOTE=gaslight;18016553]His business model is great and clearly works for him, but it's not going to work for very many other people.

The thing is he already had fans and money, which enabled him to try out that business model.

I predict 99% of musicians who try to copy his approach would be lucky to see 1% of his success.[/QUOTE]

Even less than 1%, to be honest. =/

Yeah pretty much.

We'll never know how he would have done without ever being on a major label to begin with.

Being on a major label may suck, in terms of lack of control over your music, being forced to meet deadlines, etc., but let's face it: the mass exposure being on a major label offers is by far the most useful, and will continue after bands leave that label.

What if Nirvana walked away from Geffen Records and went back to Sub Pop?

[QUOTE=whitesquares;18016550]

[img]http://trickledown.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/emo-kid.jpg[/img]

[/QUOTE]

is that your facial reaction pic to reading that a musician's life is their album

Yes, exactly.

brb I need more eyeliner

Weak retort, sir. =/

[QUOTE=Raayl;18016588]is that your facial reaction pic to reading that a musician's life is their album[/QUOTE]

:lol:

The funniest part is when you forget all of the other jokes and just look at that guy and you think, is that seriously what someone thinks is a cool way to look? Like maybe it was staged for something but if it's real, then that's the best joke of all.

[QUOTE=gaslight;18016553]His business model is great and clearly works for him, but it's not going to work for very many other people.

The thing is he already had fans and money, which enabled him to try out that business model.

I predict 99% of musicians who try to copy his approach would be lucky to see 1% of his success.[/QUOTE]

and you know this how

provide some kind of case study on how this business model will fail for 99% of other musicians or at least provide me with more than "idk man i dont [I]feel[/I] like it will work"

then you might be more convincing

reznor's model isn't perfect, but what makes it really great is that he never stops experimenting and inventing new methodologies for connecting with fans

and CwF is the basic premise of any successful business model in the digital age if you dont do that and you dont do it well then you're dead in the water its just that simple

[QUOTE=gaslight;18016595]:lol:

The funniest part is when you forget all of the other jokes and just look at that guy and you think, is that seriously what someone thinks is a cool way to look? Like maybe it was staged for something but if it's real, then that's the best joke of all.[/QUOTE]

lol hes certainly very [I]colorful[/I]

[QUOTE=Raayl;18016596]and you know this how

provide some kind of case study on how this business model will fail for 99% of other musicians or at least provide me with more than "idk man i dont [I]feel[/I] like it will work"

then you might be more convincing

reznor's model isn't perfect, but what makes it really great is that he never stops experimenting and inventing new methodologies for connecting with fans

and CwF is the basic premise of any successful business model in the digital age if you dont do that and you dont do it well then you're dead in the water its just that simple[/QUOTE]

There's no way I could ever be bothered doing a case study on it man, you know that.

All I'm trying to say is, Reznor was hugely famous already and that's why it worked for him, he already had enough fans.

If you're trying to build fans from scratch, even using his exact business model won't help you.

It's an inarguable fact that the vast majority of people who try to have financial success through their music will not get it. Hell, not even financial success, even getting a large fanbase.

[QUOTE=Raayl;18016596]and you know this how

provide some kind of case study on how this business model will fail for 99% of other musicians or at least provide me with more than "idk man i dont [I]feel[/I] like it will work"

then you might be more convincing

reznor's model isn't perfect, but what makes it really great is that he never stops experimenting and inventing new methodologies for connecting with fans

and CwF is the basic premise of any successful business model in the digital age if you dont do that and you dont do it well then you're dead in the water its just that simple[/QUOTE]

I see where you're coming from, but I'm with gaslight on this one.

I 100% wish you only luck and success, though...

well thank you whitesquares

btw our new song is done

its very "different" i guess

So, Octave4Plus strings is refusing to sell me any more strings.

At $96 per 8-string set, I don't think it's a wise decision on their behalf.

I'm both angry and disappointed.

In other news, has anybody tried Circle K Strings? I bought a 4-string balanced tension set for a buddy's bass and they really impress me. The tension uniformity is definitely noticeable under your fingers. I like them. :)

Why are they refusing to sell you any more?

And nah, haven't heard of Circle K.

[quote=gaslight;18019531]Why are they refusing to sell you any more?

And nah, haven't heard of Circle K.[/quote]


It's a long story. What is comes down to is that I wasn't getting the sustain I wanted from my low F#, so I posted a question about it on Talkbass, and in my question I posed all of the potential options - strings, pickups, bass construction, bridge, etc.

The owner reads talkbass. He defended himself, and I politely responded that I wasn't making accusations and that I only brought up the strings in passing.

They saw it as bad publicity for their strings and because I never said anything nice about their company (even though I had placed an order for another set with slightly different gauges), I was refunded the money, and the supervisor sent me this long email about it. I can send it to you if you're interested, and you can read the thread too.

I really had faith in the company, and have discussed their phenomenal customer service numerous times. I just figured that my initial string choice (non-tapered, .174 gauge) just wasn't right for my bass. Now they've given me no choice but to use a different company.

That sounds enormously small of them to act that way.

[quote=gaslight;18019560]That sounds enormously small of them to act that way.[/quote]

I think so.

Oh well. I'm really digging those Circle K's anyway. The balanced-tension set that I bought was .112 - .084 - .061 - .043. It's weird to play on at first - feels like a very light set of strings with a very heavy E, but the tension is actually just consistent. On a normal set, the E is considerably under-tensioned from the rest of the strings, so we eventually teach our fingers to compensate.

I'll definitely be considering a set for each of my basses.

I'm never going to buy anything from Octave4Plus.

Does the consistent tension affect sound noticeably or just the feel, what's the price on a set like that compared to a "normal" set?

Also, you're a bit of a gear head, I'm thinking of getting an Aguilar ToneHammer instead of a Radial JDI for a gig bag stashable DI. Think it would do as near enough of a good job as a DI to the Radial, even without the benefit of the added tone shaping?

[quote=gaslight;18019629]I'm never going to buy anything from Octave4Plus.

Does the consistent tension affect sound noticeably or just the feel, what's the price on a set like that compared to a "normal" set?[/quote]

This was on a bass I've never used before with a new "normal" set, so I can't comment on the exact tonal differences. From a physics standpoint, I think there would be a more consistent, linear trend between the strings, as the tone goes from "warm/fat" on the lower strings and "thin, nasaly" on the upper strings.

A 4-string set is $25 + s/h. They are comparably priced. I can't comment on the life of the strings either, but if you wipe them down and clean them periodically, they should last a while.

Here's the website if you're curious.
http://circlekstrings.com/store/index.html

They sound interesting enough. If a distributor here picks them up, I wouldn't rule out having a geez at some.

PS, there's a DI question up there for you too if you want to weigh in.

What are you going to be using the DI for? If it's live, then any of those similar DIs will do the job fine. Sansamp, EBS microbass, Tonehammer etc. To be honest, they're probably fine for studio too. I think too much is made of having the most hi-fi DI possible, just as long as it doesn't suck.

FWIW I used to have a Tonehammer and then sold it on. It was okay, but I mainly went with it for the AGS, which turned out to be unusable.

What made it unusable?

I figure it'll be my just portable DI for stuff where my head won't be there. I use the DI out on my head for gigs if needed, and I'll use it at home too for a while. After it I want to save up for for a really nice tube DI which would be my studio baby, but is too big for gig bag stashing.

The other DI options I'm considering are the Radial JDI as mentioned (advantage of being passive), or maybe the Phil Jones Bass Buddy but that's powered.

I'm not that fussed about how good the AGS is because I have the overdrive channel on the AG500 head anyway which is probably just a better version of it.

Truth be told, a DI is a DI is a DI. All the technology does is bring your signal up to line level and possibly ground a bit to filter out some hum. The key is really in the tone-shaping and the size of the unit.

The Radial is nice because it's passive, so you'll never be in a situation where you're left high and dry due to dead batteries or obnoxious power cables, and still has the ground lift function to eliminate some hum. However, all of the tone will be coming from your bass. This may or may not be preferable.

The ToneHammer's preamp is based off of the OBP-3 with sweepable mids, and that's a preamp I highly recommend and avidly use. The arguments for and against are exactly opposite that of the Radial.

I guess what it comes down to is - what do you need it for, and will you need tone-shaping in that situation?