Rolling Stone story: Genero.TV and fan-sourced music videos

Here’s my second story for Rolling Stone, from the December 2009 issue. It’s 600 words on an Australian website called Genero.TV, which allows fans to create music videos for bands for a chance to become their official video, and win $4000. The article was illustrated by Simon Noynay.

Story below - click for full-sized version.

The Future of the Music Video

Fans making official film clips for their favourite bands - is it sharing the love or just a way for artists to get something for nothing? By Andrew McMillen

There was a time when a major artist could easily drop a few million on a music video; from Michael Jackson’s amazing $7 million “Scream” to more restrained efforts like the Gunners’ $1.5 million “November Rain”. These days, of course, it’s very different, and a modern classic like OK Go’s aerobic masterpiece “Here It Goes Again” is proof that even if you don’t have a budget, a good idea can go a long way.

But what if you’ve got no cash and no big idea? Well, there is a solution. Melbourne-based website Genero.tv lets bands post new songs online and then have fans create videos for them. Submissions are judged by the bands and fans alike and the winning entrant becomes an officially approved, internationally distributed music video. The winning clip from each round also receives a $4,000 cash prize.

Genero.tv launched its first round of songs in September this year with the support of 17 artists, including British electronic act Unkle and New York reggae group Easy Star All-Stars and an Australian contingent of Genero.tv artists includes The Temper Trap, hip-hoppers Hermitude, and up-and-coming Sydney-based indie rock band Bridezilla.

“As a musician, it’s refreshing to engage with new people on a creative level,” she Bridezilla guitarist Pia May Courtley, who is an enthusiastic supporter of the role-reversal (and collaboration) between bands and fans. “There’s lots of people out there with great ideas making viral videos anyway. If anything, these people aren’t governed by ‘what sells’, so their ideas end up being more genuine.”

For young artists, the Genero approach makes perfect sense, tapping into a movement that is old hat to every kid on the planet. As Elgusto of Blue Mountains hip-hop duo Hermitude reasons, “Our fans have been uploading YouTube videos set to our music for years, so we’re well aware of the untapped talent of filmmakers out there. Entering the Genero.TV contest could be their way of getting their foot in the door.”

But it’s not just a curiosity about what the public can come up with that is driving artist involvement - frustration played a big part in The Temper Trap’s decision to join Genero.tv, reveals guitarist Lorenzo Sillitto.

“We’d done a few costly music videos that we weren’t really happy with,” he admits, but stresses that getting good results, not saving money, was the major motivation. “Our involvement with the site isn’t to say that we wouldn’t pay the creator of the video we choose,” Sillitto clarifies. “We were fed up, and we saw Genero as a good way to get our fans involved in something tangible that the band is doing. It allows them to feel a part of the process.”

Genero.tv director Michael Entwisle underscores Lorenzo’s statement. “From our perspective, deepening the fan-artist engagement is a main benefit for our featured artists. More engaged fans are going to be the ones who will pay more money for concert tickets, merchandise, and music. What we’re doing shouldn’t be seen as a disruptive model for the music video industry. We’re hoping it just becomes a complementary platform that suits some artists, songs and labels.”

In a similar move this July, Sneaky Sound System announced the winner of their own online video contest for the song ‘It’s Not My Problem’. While it didn’t offer the same creative clean slate that Genero.tv does - entrants were supplied with green-screen footage of singer Connie Mitchell - producer/songwriter Angus McDonald states that the band would run a similar fan-sourced video contest “in a heartbeat”. “Music videos are such a lottery, even with experienced directors and producers at the helm,” says McDonald.

As for whether the lottery is made even riskier by entrusting creative control to their fanbase, Bridezilla’s Courtley admits there’s always a chance it could turn out to be a disaster. “But,” she says, “like a first date or foreign food, you never know until you try.”

Here’s my original pitch, sent September 1 2009.

Crowdsourcing Fan Creativity
In August 2009, a service called Genero.TV launched a business model that allows fans to create music videos for artists. This is how it works: artists contribute the songs and upload them for the fans; the fans create the videos and upload them to Genero.tv; then the world watches, votes and spreads the word.

They’ve just released their first round of 16 artists and songs, which each feature different prizes. The overall prize for this round is US$4000, which will be awarded to the director of one of the 16 final videos. As I understand it, videos submissions are judged by the bands and Genero.tv, and all of the winning videos will become the artists’ official video for that song.

Of the 16 artists, such as UNKLE, Easy Star All-Stars and Casiokids, 6 are Australian:

• The Temper Trap
• Bliss N Eso
• Birds Of Tokyo
• True Live
• Hermitude
• Mirror House Antics

Cool idea. Let’s take a closer look.

• Who’s behind Genero.TV? I can’t find any info on their personnel or the country where they’re based.
• Who funds the site?
• What kind of licensing is required for this kind of business model?
• Who’s funding this business model?
• Why did these Australian acts decide to jump on board?
• What are the acts’ expectations of the quality of submissions?
• What’s the value of the music video in 2009? (I’ll speak to some Australian acts who’ve had viral video ’success’, to determine the outcomes)
• Is this just a way for lazy bands to turn creative control over to their fans for cheap, or is it a genius idea to shorten the distance between artists and their fans?

Coincidentally, Sneaky Sound System last week announced the winner of a $10,000 fan-sourced music video competition that they ran through their website. They’d provide a good supplementary viewpoint to this article.

As with my first Rolling Stone story on streaming music subscription services, the interviews I conducted far exceeded the article’s word limit. Check back for outtakes from these articles here soon.

Filed under Published Writing | Tags: article, australia, bridezilla, connie-mitchell, creativity, crowd-sourcing, fan-sourced, freelance-writing, genero-tv, music-videos, pia-may-courtley, pitch, rolling stone, sneaky-sound-system, Writing | Comments (5)

How I Pitched ‘For The Record’

In June 2009, The Music Network published my first commissioned article. It was the first in a five-part series called ‘For The Record’, a retrospective feature on the album format and whether it’s still relevant. Start with part one here.

I recall spending a couple of hours on a May morning putting all of my thoughts and feelings on ‘the album’ down onto paper, and then transcribing it into a document and emailing it to the assistant editor. At the time, these articles (and the resultant commissions) were just about all I had going, so I threw myself at the opportunity completely.

It’s funny and a bit embarrassing for me to look back over this pitch, as it’s quite childish, incoherent and - as I’ve since learned - the exact opposite of what most editors look for in story pitches: brevity and clarity.

Below is how I initially pitched the article to the magazine for their ‘Digital View’ section (which later became ‘Digital & Media’ after their redesign).

The Music Network - Death Of The Album pitch (this is a placeholder title, btw)

This is a feature discussing the reduced importance that consumers place on the concept of the album, and how the music industry should largely adopt a new ‘organising principle’ in order to match consumer demand. I will be careful to qualify this by stating that release schedules should be re-examined on a per-artist basis, though, because the album still has some place; it’s just been marginalised.

The articles will use a consistent, measured tone that injects humour and attitude, but forgoes condescension. I’ll strive for objectivity here, though this is a topic that I could easily rant about subjectively. ;)

I envisage five parts, though it could go one less or more. This will become apparent once I start writing.

Precis:

I: A history of the album

• Why does the album exist? Who imposed the 74-minute limitation?
• Summarise the development of the format; Sony, Phillips, competing technologies, how it took a decade for the CD to supersede the LP
• Album historically serves as the preferred way to contain profits and maintain both consumer interest and a release schedule. Containment and maintenance.
• From LP to CD to digital; the medium has changed but the ‘organising principle‘ (the album - a term attributed to Gang Of Four’s Dave Allen) remains the same
• The industry revolves around the album: release schedules, record deals, album reviews, pricing structure
• Why is this a problem? Hint at changing consumer habits, and part II

II: What’s changed?

• Objection: “I still listen to albums!” So do I. Because it’s still the most prevalent manner of distributing music.
• It is important to understand this point: albums are still sold, whether digital or physical, but the widened choice afforded to consumers has resulted in a decreased attention span.
• To illustrate: here’s a regular album. It’s front-loaded with some great songs, the ones that you heard before you bought it. Then you get to the second half of the album and, more than likely, it’s not as good. Think about all those times you’ve tried really hard to enjoy later tracks on album just so that you claim to honestly love it all. It’s hard work; I’d argue it’s an unnecessarily big ask on the listener.
• It’s a complaint as old as the album itself: “A few of these tracks are awesome, but the rest are a waste of time.” Hi, MGMT.
• Define consumer; who is buying music in which format? Different trends for different demographics
• Discuss ‘killer versus filler’: Bob Lefsetz quotes here
• No band deserves all of your attention, and it’s selfish of them to expect that from you. No band claims to be the best band in the world, except The Hives. So why do they tack noticeably sub-par songs onto the end of otherwise riveting albums? Because record labels are tied to the concept. Lead into part III.

III: What hasn’t changed?

• The main point to reinforce here is the change in consumer (listener) habit. Technology and portability has severed our attachment to the album format. Provide anecdotal evidence of what the album (LP) used to represent; a social object that could only be played in the home, or at a dance hall.
• Every notion you hold about albums - the great, the poor - are built upon a format created to streamline label profit
• If our attention has splintered beyond the confines of the standard 12 tracks/45 minutes, why do new albums keep appearing on store shelves, both virtual and physical?
• Quote iTunes facts here - single vs album sales
• Point out the correlation between these facts; that is, a division between consumer habit and industry habit.
• Visual analogy: picture listeners and labels as running on two parallel lines. While the latter ignores the changing habits of the former, the two shall never meet. Piracy and discontent will deepen the divide.
• Major label profits have dived as a result of piracy, sure, but consider an alternative: that consumers are sick of spending $20 on a disc with only a couple of good songs. It’s easier to download the lot and listen to what you want, or to just pick and choose individual tracks.

IV: What needs to change in order to better serve consumer interest?

• Marketing structures and strategies (thanks Jade!). Label-signed artists who are locked into multi-album deals have it tough.
• These multi-album deals perpetuate the ‘few strong songs, mostly average songs’ trend to which we’ve become accustomed. To which we’ve responded with ignorance, piracy or pick-and-choose song downloads.
• What we need is increased quality control on the label’s part. Work with artists to allow them to discover the medium with which they’re most comfortable releasing music, and then work with them to realise these goals.
• Gone are the days of slapping a ‘one-format-fits-all’ tag on all artists, with the end-goal of album after album. There may be artists who still want to do that, absolutely. But to portray the album as the only marker of recorded success? This is a fallacy has been disproven.
• It is vital that adequate pricing structures and business models are adopted for a variety of releases - single song, small collection of songs (EPs), live performances - to ensure that artists can live comfortably off their earnings. So that they may continue to make music.
• This is an aspect that is often forgotten among the frequent discussion surrounding ‘the music industry’. All too often, we forget that the industry is built on the creative talents of songwriters, musicians and performers whose music engages. Music is an inherently social creation that is only becoming more social, as fans connect online and artist revenue streams continue their shift from recording-based to performance-based.
• Discuss alternative business models; hint at part V

V: The future of a reduced reliance on the album as the organising principle

• I imagine a steady stream of single tracks, with occasional EP and album releases. I think Bloc Party have done this recently?
• Give examples of artists who have tried alternative release models + quotes
• Give examples of artists who have successfully trialled new models. Avoid relying on big cases here (eg Radiohead, NIN); if this is to be believed, I’ll need to give more compelling examples than artist with millions-strong fanbases.
• Reinforce why a reduced reliance on the album is not a bad thing. Our listening habits have changed, but we still feel an attachment to the album concept. Cognitive dissonance might be worth including here.. or that could just dilute my argument. Will see.
• Reinforce the ‘digital’ aspect here, for this is The Digital View, damnit! Digital is the entire reason that the album has become a less pertinent format of music dissemination.
• But - what of record stores, if a reduced reliance on albums (’records’)? There’s a discussion for another column, one that’s not necessarily attached to this five-part album discussion.

After the articles were approved - and I totally rejoiced, as this was the first time I’d written anything other than CD or live reviews for money - I ran the above pitch past my friend, David Carter, who lectures at the Queensland Conservatorium. His expertise on matters concerning the music industry are documented on his blog, Where To Now?

David’s comments in (an appropriately academic) red.

I: A history of the album

• Why does the album exist? Who imposed the 74-minute limitation?
• Summarise the development of the format; Sony, Phillips, competing technologies, how it took a decade for the CD to supersede the LP
• Album historically serves as the preferred way to contain profits and maintain both consumer interest and a release schedule. Containment and maintenance. think you might be missing something here re production and distribution costs that need discussion up-front; what was the first album? why was the first album? these might be better ‘organising principles’ here - trace development of the album as a collection of singles to autonomous artwork - point out that the album-as-art had to do with innovative / creative use of the medium rather than an inherent element of the medium itself
• From LP to CD to digital; the medium has changed but the ‘organising principle’ (the album - a term attributed to Gang Of Four’s Dave Allen) remains the same
• The recorded music? industry revolves around the album: release schedules, record deals, album reviews, pricing structure ‘music’ industry has always included other revenue streams - side point but worth pointing out
• Why is this a problem? Hint at changing consumer habits, and part II

II: What’s changed?

• Objection: “I still listen to albums!” So do I. Because it’s still the most prevalent manner of distributing music perhaps a more important objection - ‘I still want to sell albums’?
• It is important to understand this point: albums are still sold, whether digital or physical, but the widened choice afforded to consumers has resulted in a decreased attention span not so sure about this - Your assertion that ‘widened choice’ has resulted in ’shorter attention spans’ is problematic - I don’t think you can prove a causal relationship here and not sure if it’s really attention span you’re talking about or a lower tolerance for filler? I think you’re getting at changing methods of the consumption / reception of music thanks to advances in computing and telecommunication technologies and while this has resulted in wider access to certain types of content the key thing here for music listeners has been the ability to easily re-order and separate out albums. It’s not the ‘internet’ that has ‘killed’ the album but rather the ability for consumers to ‘roll their own’ albums. - one point I think you’re missing in terms of what’s changed is ‘technology’; particularly the iPod. It seems to be there in III but not explicit here? Another point to make is that online the cost of manufacturing and distribution approaches zero for both content creator and consumer and this has fundamentally changed the marketplace.
• To illustrate: here’s a regular album. It’s front-loaded with some great songs, the ones that you heard before you bought it. Then you get to the second half of the album and, more than likely, it’s not as good. Think about all those times you’ve tried really hard to enjoy later tracks on album just so that you claim to honestly love it all. It’s hard work; I’d argue it’s an unnecessarily big ask on the listener.
• It’s a complaint as old as the album itself: “A few of these tracks are awesome, but the rest are a waste of time.” Hi, MGMT. this has always been the case with pop music and why labels used to sell singles; need to think about / discuss why digital is different.
• Define consumer; who is buying music in which format? Different trends for different demographics and also think about what / why they’re buying and what they end up doing with it. Maybe there’s an element of musical discovery in exploring ‘album tracks’ by Nick Drake or Dylan (for example) that grow your appreciation for their artistry; maybe you want the physical backup of a CD; if your iPod is your only music storage device what happens to those mp3’s you don’t want to listen to anymore?
• Discuss ‘killer versus filler’: Bob Lefsetz quotes here
• No band deserves all of your attention, and it’s selfish of them to expect that from you. No band claims to be the best band in the world, except The Hives. So why do they tack noticeably sub-par songs onto the end of otherwise riveting albums? Because record labels are tied to the concept. Lead into part III. or because they don’t think the tracks are sub-par; because they’ve bought into the notion that the format is art rather than product; because the drummer wrote the song and was complaining about not getting enough writing / royalty credits; etc. - there are a lot of reasons albums contain filler, some of which pertain to market expectations but not all. Don’t think you’ve made this point convincingly.

III: What hasn’t changed?

• The main point to reinforce here is the change in consumer (listener) habit. Technology and portability has severed our attachment to the album format. Provide anecdotal evidence of what the album (LP) used to represent; a social object that could only be played in the home, or at a dance hall. think you can provide physical evidence here in terms of sales from the iTunes music store - overwhelmingly consumers are buying singles;
• Every notion you hold about albums - the great, the poor - are built upon a format created to streamline label profit and a format that still must make monetary sense to the labels - even online; why? discuss.
• If our attention has splintered beyond the confines of the standard 12 tracks/45 minutes, why do new albums keep appearing on store shelves, both virtual and physical?
• Quote iTunes facts here - single vs album sales
• Point out the correlation between these facts; that is, a division between consumer habit and industry habit.
• Visual analogy: picture listeners and labels as running on two parallel lines. While the latter ignores the changing habits of the former, the two shall never meet. Piracy and discontent will deepen the divide. suggest you need to discuss / take into account that albums and bands still make money off physical discs - at present people are still buying CD’s, despite all the rhetoric; perhaps not so much that the labels are running parrallel to consumer sentiment but that they haven’t viewed digital downloads as a fundamentally different product?
• Major label profits have dived as a result of piracy not sure if you should concede this point - have they dived because of piracy or because of a format / consumption shift? , sure, but consider an alternative: that consumers are sick of spending $20 on a disc with only a couple of good songs. It’s easier to download the lot and listen to what you want, or to just pick and choose individual tracks this is an old argument that I don’t think you need to embroil yourself in - this isn’t about copyright and piracy it’s about how (if) recorded music can be marketed and monetised.

IV: What needs to change in order to better serve consumer interest?

• Marketing structures and strategies (thanks Jade!). Label-signed artists who are locked into multi-album deals have it tough.
• These multi-album deals perpetuate the ‘few strong songs, mostly average songs’ trend why? ideally everyone involved wants an album worth of strong songs - what stops this happening? wonder if there’s something here to do with advances in technology / no development money allowing a lesser level of songwriter / composer access to an audience? to which we’ve become accustomed. To which we’ve responded with ignorance, piracy or pick-and-choose song downloads.
• What we need is increased quality control on the label’s part. Work with artists to allow them to discover the medium with which they’re most comfortable releasing music, and then work with them to realise these goals.
• Gone are the days of slapping a ‘one-format-fits-all’ tag on all artists, with the end-goal of album after album. There may be artists who still want to do that, absolutely. But to portray the album as the only marker of recorded success? This is a fallacy has been disproven. not sure this is what labels are doing though - again, they want to make the most money they can from a release in the context of a very unpredictable market; if they thought they could do this with singles they would; why haven’t they?
• It is vital that adequate pricing structures and business models are adopted for a variety of releases - single song, small collection of songs (EPs), live performances - to ensure that artists can live comfortably off their earnings there’s a fallacy going around that artists used to live comfortably off their earnings from record sales - it’s not true - very few artists (particularly major label artists) made / make significant personal profit from album sales; the real money for artists is and has always been in royalties, touring and merchandising. There is such a small percentage of records that actually make anyone any money it’s ridiculous - why then have record companies and artists perpetuated such a seemingly flawed business model? So that they may continue to make music.
• This is an aspect that is often forgotten among the frequent discussion surrounding ‘the music industry’. All too often, we forget that the industry is built on the creative talents of songwriters, musicians and performers whose music engages. Music is an inherently social creation that is only becoming more social, as fans connect online and artist revenue streams continue their shift from recording-based to performance-based think you need to address the differences between music as product vs music as service in here somewhere
• Discuss alternative business models; hint at part V

V: The future of a reduced reliance on the album as the organising principle think you might want to review / throw out some of this and incorporate whatever’s left into part IV - particularly artist examples. Don’t think there’s enough new ideas here to warrant a fifth part.

• I imagine a steady stream of single tracks, with occasional EP and album releases. I think Bloc Party have done this recently?
• Give examples of artists who have tried alternative release models + quotes
• Give examples of artists who have successfully trialled new models. Avoid relying on big cases here (eg Radiohead, NIN); if this is to be believed, I’ll need to give more compelling examples than artist with millions-strong fanbases.
• Reinforce why a reduced reliance on the album is not a bad thing. Our listening habits have changed, but we still feel an attachment to the album concept. Cognitive dissonance might be worth including here.. nah - be honest; too many people out there already saying ‘this is the future’. not enough willing to say ‘I’m unsure / conflicted / fascinated’ or that could just dilute my argument. Will see.
• Reinforce the ‘digital’ aspect here, for this is The Digital View, damnit! Digital is the entire reason that the album has become a less pertinent format of music dissemination.
• But - what of record stores, if a reduced reliance on albums (’records’)? There’s a discussion for another column, one that’s not necessarily attached to this five-part album discussion.

Read the published articles here: part one, part two, part three, part four and part five.

Note how the latter half of the series totally deviated from the initial pitch, as - like David rightly pointed out - there weren’t enough new ideas to warrant needlessly dragging the feature out. So I decided to interview some musicians instead; always a reliable fallback for any stuck music journalist.

Filed under Writing | Tags: article, david-carter, digital, feature, for-the-record, how-to-pitch, Journalism, journalist, Media, Music, music-journalist, pitch, queensland, story, writer, Writing | Comment (0)

My First jmag Story

Here’s my first story for jmag, the monthly music magazine published by Australian youth radio station triple j. It’s 1450 words on alternate revenue streams for three Australian artists in three areas: TV commercial sync licensing, TV series sync licensing and iPhone app licensing.

I interviewed Michael Tomlinson of Yves Klein Blue, Nick O’Donnell of 26, Karnivool manager Heath Bradbury, Robert Spencer of Staring Man Studios, Jamie Brammah of Hook, Line & Sync, and Isabel Pappani of Undercover Tracks. Click the below image to read the full-sized article; its text is included underneath.

Sing, Sync, Score

Digital distribution allows artists’ music to be heard around the world on a wider range of mediums - and at a faster rate - than ever before. Musicians’ income is no longer delineated via just recorded music sales, gig attendance and merch desk turnover: in 2009, an artist can license their work to many commercial ventures. ANDREW MCMILLEN looks at three avenues.

26: TV series sync licensing

In April 2009, Brisbane indie rock band 26 had their song ‘A New Beginning’ placed in the season finale of the NBC TV show Life. The opportunity arose after the band licensed their music to Brisbane boutique sync agency Hook, Line & Sync, who specialise in pitching unsigned music to film and television executives across the world. What did the Life placement mean to 26?

Guitarist and vocalist Nick O’Donnell admits: “It had a massive effect. We went from doing regular indie band sales - where people stumble across you for whatever reason – into the thousands. The particular NBC music supervisor who placed our song makes a point of featuring indie bands and pumping the music up in the mix, rather than just featuring as a background soundtrack.”

O’Donnell believes that the opportunity - while undoubtedly assisted due to Hook, Line & Sync’s industry connections - was largely serendipitous. “It’s more a case of the music supervisor going after a specific sound, than a band saying, “We’re really great! We’d be perfect for your atmospheric, movie-like soundtrack!” It doesn’t work like that, at all. Music supervisors have a list of what they want: the tempo, lyrical themes, sound, and whether they want an indie act. For example, they might have already had ‘Clocks’ by Coldplay set in the mix, but since they can’t afford to license ‘Clocks’, they want someone who sounds similar.”

O’Donnell remains buoyant about 26’s first sync deal. “It’s certainly given us more of a hunger to present our stuff to more things like that,” he admits. “Sync deals are something you really want to continue happening. There hasn’t been anything negative from it.”

The big question, though: what did the opportunity mean to the band financially? “What we got was a fairly small licensing fee, which is the up-front money they pay you to make the placement. I’m told we got a pretty good average deal for an indie. We’ll get back-end payment as well, from royalties. Once those come in, we get royalties of it being played in 24 or so countries.”

Having been yet to see the royalty cheque, do 26 have any idea what the number on it might read? “We have no idea,” O’Donnell admits. “That’s one thing that’s up in the air.”

Yves Klein Blue: TV commercial sync licensing

A young couple playfully load their car from the third story window. The soundtrack? Yves Klein Blue’s equally playful indie rock tune, ‘Polka’. You may have witnessed the 30-second Mitsubishi Lancer Hatch ad a hundred times in the last 12 months. But how did it come about? Singer/guitarist Michael Tomlinson elaborates.

“The ad company contacted our manager, sent through the ad, and we asked how much they’d pay. And after a brief conversation about the amount, we agreed to have the song placed on the ad. It was the first time we’d agreed to an ad placement; the most important thing to us was that the ad wasn’t a bad match. It wasn’t offensive in its product or execution, so we said ‘yes’.”

“To us, having ‘Polka’ placed in the Mitsubishi ad simply gave us a wider market reach. It doesn’t really matter how people hear our songs. So if ‘Polka’ is forever to be associated with Mitsubishi Lancers, then so be it. A lot more people heard it as a result, so I have no problems with that.”

What did the sync deal mean for the band’s back pockets? “It was wonderful. It wasn’t totally lucrative, but at the same time it’s really helped us pay for our tours. We haven’t seen any of the money personally - we’re not swanning around in luxury cars - but it’s been a fantastic, positive experience.”

“It’s tough to tour Australia,” Tomlinson states. “Until you can charge a decent amount for your shows and know that you’ll sell out a large room, it’s quite difficult to make a profit on touring. Being in a band is like digging a huge hole, taking all the money you’ve ever earned, throwing it into the hole, and burning it. People ask me if I have a job, and I have to reply ‘kind of’, because being in a band, it doesn’t pay money; it just takes money all the time,” he half-jokes.

Despite their win with ‘Polka’, Tomlinson is unsure whether they’ll be able to re-bottle sync-lightning. “I have no idea about how one would go about putting their song ‘in harm’s way’, so to speak. I’m not sure how we were selected, or whether we’ll ever be selected again.”

Some closing advice: “Sync deals are definitely worth doing, but make sure a lawyer reads everything,” Tomlinson cautions. “Their fees are high, but it’s better to pay them and be safe, rather than sign something that you can’t get out of.”

Karnivool: iPhone app licensing

In July 2009, West Australian gaming studio Staring Man released an iPhone application named Pools Of Blood, which allows handheld gamers to defend their tower from hordes of incoming orcs. As the player rotates their perspective to vanquish foes, a hard rock song seems to drive the pace: Perth band Karnivool licensed their single ‘Set Fire To The Hive’ for the game. Staring Man CEO Robert Spencer describes how the studio came to work with one of Australian’s most revered hard rock acts.

“We were developed the game for a couple of months, but it seemed to be missing something. We started talking about background music; as rock fans, we agreed upon Karnivool.” Serendipity is a recurring theme among these three licensing opportunity examples. “We called their management and discovered that it was really convenient timing, because we were working on the game at the same time they were finishing up their second album, Sound Awake.”

Karnivool’s manager Heath Bradbury confirms: “It was a targeted approach from Staring Man, which is part of the reason why we went ahead with it. It wasn’t just a random request for a game soundtrack; it was a request to work directly with the band. And in terms of running a successful gaming company from the most isolated capital city in the world, we can empathise with some of the Perth-based trials and tribulations!”

Spencer continues: “Once we heard ‘Set Fire To The Hive’ we had to increase the gameplay pace! But our original vision was so close to that sound, so it worked out really well. Both ‘Hive’ and Pools Of Blood are departures from what both groups are known for.” In addition to the gameplay in Pools Of Blood, Staring Man built in a Karnivool portal that lists upcoming tour dates, band news and provides a link to buy their music on iTunes.

Manager Bradbury is positive about the experience: “I think we’ll have an ongoing relationship with Staring Man. As Karnivool releases roll out in different territories, we’ll start to see how effective Pools Of Blood has been as a marketing tool. At this early stage, it’s hard to get a tangible idea of the impact that opportunities such as this have on a band’s profile.”

“Financially, licensing is one of the few great areas of the music industry,” Bradbury laughs. “I think it’s going to be more important that managers have direct relationships with the people that run gaming companies and other licensing entities.”

Boxout: Shelling Out

You’ll note reluctance on the bands’ part to divulge exactly what these licensing deals meant for the bank accounts, and for good reason: how would you feel about being asked what your art is worth?

Jamie Brammah of Brisbane-based music licensing agency Hook, Like & Sync says: “For an Australian indie band’s song to be placed on US network television, the upfront fee can range from $1,000-$5,000. It really comes down to negotiation, and how badly they want the track.”

With regard to TV commercial sync deals, Isabel Pappani of California-based licensing agency Undercover Tracks says: “I’ve licensed Australian music to local commercials for $8,000, up to $100,000-plus for nationwide. A new push lately is ‘gratis licensing’, where companies don’t offer an upfront fee. Their justification is that the exposure results in adequate artist compensation. The licensing industry isn’t happy with this, but they argue that there’s always someone to take the deal.”

Here’s the original pitch I sent to jmag.

Alternative revenue streams for Australian artists, focussing on

• iPhone applications
• TV commercial licensing
• TV show sync deals
• Video game sync deals

Premise: digital distribution allows artists’ music to be heard around the world on a wider range of mediums - and at a faster rate - than ever before. Let’s highlight some success stories in these fields, and include some ‘quick tips’ gleaned from the artists interviewed at the end of the article, for bands looking to maximise their online exposure and potential to be chosen for these opportunities.

My intended source for the video game sync deal didn’t come through in time, but the story felt complete with three bands’ experiences in sync licensing.

I submitted the initial article on September 8. A rewrite request came through from triple j on October 1, and I sent through the final copy on October 8. The main change was the ’shelling out’ boxout, which provides some $ figures on what these deals mean for bands.

The story’s in the November 2009 issue of jmag [pictured right], which also features a couple of my live reviews (Metronomy and Paul Dempsey).

Thanks to Jenny Valentish, Everett True and Nick Crocker.

Filed under Published Writing | Tags: 26, a-new-beginning, Add new tag, app, article, Everett True, freelance, heath-bradbury, hook-line-&-sync, Interview, iphone, isabel-pappani, jamie-brammah, jenny-valentish, jmag, karnivool, Life, mitsubishi, nbc, nick-o'donnell, pitch, polka, pools-of-blood, robert-spencer, set-fire-to-the-hive, staring-man, story, triple j, undercover-tracks, Writing, yves-klein-blue | Comments (5)

My First Rolling Stone Story

In October 2009, my first story was printed in Rolling Stone Australia. It’s 600 words on a couple of music/tech issues; not exactly the most glamorous first RS article , but it’s a start no less. The story is below; click for full-sized PDF.

This was the fourth story I’d pitched to the magazine. Here’s my original pitch:

Bandit.FM: Under The Hood

Sony are launching their Bandit.FM music subscription and download service in October 2009. Let’s take a closer look at the strategy and technology behind the site. Are subscription services really the future of music consumption - as everyone seems to be yelling this year - or is at all hot air and marketing?

What will I discuss? (sample questions)

• Who’s backing the site? (eg. venture capital beyond Sony’s involvement?)
• How long has this been in the works?
• Why launch now?
• How long did it take to get all four major labels on board?
• Each artist seems to have a unique ‘content rich’ splash page containing imagery, a bio, and artist recommendations (eg. http://bandit.fm/sixstring/karnivool) Who supplies the content behind these pages? Were these compiled specifically for Bandit, or is the content supplied by external sources?
• How many staff are working on Bandit full-time?
• What are the advantages of a subscription-based streaming service as opposed to an advertising-based service?
• What opportunities will Bandit allow for Australian indie bands?

Clearly I was unable to answer all of those questions in the article, but the issues I raised warranted a commission.

Hey Andrew,
Am quite interested in the Bandit story, but only as a short thing, maybe around 600 words tops. You think you can get something meaningful in that space?

It would be good to get perspective on it that wasn’t just from Sony – the main thing is this can’t be a PR piece for them. A non-Sony artist who will be for sale there is good, maybe a comment from someone at one of the other majors. Nokia also do a subscription of sorts, so maybe that’s something to consider…

After submitting the story initially, I was asked to rewrite, as the tone was “a little too “essay”, not “news” enough for one of our short pieces”.

To give you an idea of the timelines associated with the story,  the article was finalised in late August, and it’s only appeared in print this month, for the November 2009 issue [pictured right].

It’s been a great experience, and I look forward to writing many more stories for Rolling Stone. Many thanks to Matt Coyte, Dan Lander, Stephen Green, Nick Crocker and Neil Strauss.

Filed under Published Writing, Writing | Tags: bandit-fm, comes-with-music, dan-lander, download, freelance-writing, gavin-parry, getmusic, karen-farrugia, matt-coyte, neil-strauss, nick-crocker, nokia, pitch, rolling stone, sony, spotify, stephen-green, story, streaming, tech, Writing | Comments (7)