Dog eat dog world…

Throughout this course, we’ve discussed several pieces that fall inside the varied sub-genres of indie music. However, we never really addressed the criticisms found widely across the mainstream industry, including the exploitative nature of commercial music and the inaccessibility of success within the field. In this module, we’re going to look at why mainstream pop isn’t always so great and how some indie acts survive in this same brutal market.

A generic outline of music production

Before we tackle the criticisms of the music industry, it will be helpful to get an idea of how it operates. Within commercial music, I like to present the workflow across at least two main sides of the production pipeline; creation and distribution. The steps of creation include the composition, recording, and production of all elements of a song. These tasks are handled somewhat chronologically as I’ve stated them here but can also be swapped around as fit. For example, significant progress can be made on the production of a hip-hop track before an artist comes back to provide a verse on it. In some cases, the same person is handling all components of the creation process and thus can freely move between steps as necessary for their flow.

After or at the same time as the creation of a song/album comes the distribution of said music. This includes - obviously - the distribution of the music onto music/media platforms, but can also include copyright & publishing rights, marketing, and social media engagement. In the most traditional sense, record labels handle the distribution side of this process, with the conceit being that artists can focus on creating the music while the label is specifically designed to sell it. An analogous medium could be found in filmmaking or writing. The filmmaker/artists/staff creates a movie and a film studio helps produce it, such as Disney, Sony, or Paramount. Authors write the book, and publishing companies edit, format, and put the book on shelves. In a perfectly balanced and ideal world, this division of responsibility makes sense, but as we’ll soon see one side of this coin is often outweighs the other.

You may note here that there I’ve incidentally created a distinction between “producing” a film and the music “production” process. Historically, music and film producers shared the same roles in their respective fields, focusing solely on the distribution side of the coin. While this kind of organization still exists today, usually with better job descriptors such as “executive producer,” we view music producers of today as more closely associated with the creative side of the process. Music producers will work for or in collaboration with the author of the song, and may even be a reason a songwriter chooses to work with a certain label. And again, sometimes the songwriter and producer are one and the same. While this is most prevalent in the indie scene, industry artists such as Kanye and Lady Gaga are known to work on all stages of their creative workflow and with other producers.

Industry practices & the death of art

I want to start this section with a bit of a disclaimer in that I have no experience working for or with record labels. All of the criticisms and questions I am about to pose to you come from my work in corporate music production, anecdotes from those who do work in the industry, and the collective perception of the industry. I know that many professionals in this field find great meaning in their work and that everyone needs to get paid at the end of the day. Consider the following musings as a critique of the worst parts of the big industries we have to work in, rather than personal criticisms of certain artists or professions. That being said, let’s dive into the absolute art and money suck that the industry seems to be - which I think can be done concisely in three parts.

The first major criticism that can be levied here, at least from an artist’s perspective, is found in the inaccessibility and ability to penetrate the major commercial markets. Even the most casual listeners and followers of the music industry understand that it’s an incredibly competitive field, or in the terms of Keynesian economics - a saturated market. There are too many well-qualified artists looking to sell their wares and not enough people to consume said wares. This in of itself is a tenuous explanation as it completely ignores the middle-men of the music economy; labels. So, it may be more appropriate to say that there are more qualified artists than there are people willing to support and sell their art to the consumers, in most cases because the middle-men deem the art as unable to make them money. This is the first chink in the proverbial armor of record labels and their overextended control of the music economy as this money motive is inherently antagonistic towards free artistic expression and meritocratic music-making.

Speaking of meritocracy, a second criticism to consider is how commonplace nepotism can be. There is a running joke in music circles specific to indie artists or those who claim to be that posits: “If an artist’s Wiki page has their parents hyperlinked to another page, then they aren’t indie.” While this is a bit spiteful and nasty, it’s not exactly unwarranted. In its most socially acceptable form, though grossly inequitable, the issue presents itself in familial affluence - parents who are able to provide otherwise inaccessible experiences, education, and training to their children. A more pure form of nepotism would be found in artists entering the industry through connections to established individuals already in the field, either through family, friends, or both.

Perhaps the most controversial but tenuous form of this nepotism is found in the term “industry plants,” or those who are actually affiliated with major record labels but are presented as indie and home-grown at first. This criticism has been used extensively against many kinds of artists as of late in a less than gracious way - though perhaps most particularly to discredit women in the pop scene. These claims can often be unfounded or hyperbolic but do tend to hit those whose affluence or connections has contributed to some part of their success. I’m making a point to not bring forth examples here, as the issue is not at all with individual artists who may realize some form of “unearned” benefit, but rather the over monopolized and corporatized industry as a whole that benefits from them. After all, it’s not as if these artists would be garnering fan followings if they weren’t good at what they do on some level. I think the issue with this is best exemplified as a question; if consumers don’t decide who and what enters the mainstream for mass consumption, then who does?

Finally, the last critique I’ll make here is found in the broad commercialization of music and the subsequent lack of artistic control it can foster. This point is basically a consequence of the previous two critiques levied. At the minimum, we know that record labels have a great deal of control over the creative process - cutting what doesn’t fit and carefully crafting the material that they want to publish. At the extreme end, artists are outright censored, either at the behest of a label or political force. In all cases, artists are prohibited from sharing their work in one way or another with the world, a disastrous consequence for the development of music both technically and socially. Now, this all may seem hyperbolic or a non-issue from our perspective since there is always more new music to consume, but every year there are a handful of artists who inevitably go public about their relationships with record labels. Just last year, The Guardian did a write-up on just three English artists that you can read here. A lack of control and the feeling of being “held hostage” are just a couple of words used here. While I’m not sure there is much we can do to solve or alleviate this issue as consumers, being aware of it and critical of the powers that be is the first step.

Indie practices & the death of the artists

We’ve discussed this before, but there is a distinction or compromise we have to make when talking about “indie” as a genre and industry. On one hand, many of the artists which I am about to bring up were at one point independent but are now with a record label. In some cases, these record labels are the industry giants I was mentioning earlier. In other cases, they are “indie labels,” an oxymoronic descriptor of smaller labels that generally offer more freedom to their artists while affording fewer resources as well. Another issue altogether is the distillation of the genre’s styles and tropes. Indie music provides an incredibly broad and diverse range of genres and styles that we’ve heard before, and it also adds a certain, undefinable indie sound to them. This is best analyzed in the diversity and experimental nature of many of these artists, and quite close to the experimental hip-hop and electronica from earlier in this course. With all of that said, let’s look at a couple of components of the world of indie music and listen to some of its music.

Let’s start this section by looking at probably the best source of income, experience, and growth for indie bands; gigging. Playing live music and collecting venue fees, while a lot of work, provides some semblance of a steady income. Though, that is assuming you get the gig, which is a job in and of itself! We know that artists tour nationally and internationally all the time, but indie artists can keep up in local or regional circuits by curating smaller tours and regular performances around specific city venues. No, the pay isn’t much, but consistent performances in these kinds of environments can certainly be a living.

The act of playing live shows is usually best suited to indie bands rather than single producers or songwriters. Even with that qualifier, indie subgenres are quite diverse and include everything from rock to electronica. Recent historical examples include indie favorites including The Strokes, Modest Mouse, and Wolf Alice. However, some recent examples of indie bands coming into the spotlight include the recently signed English rock band, Wet Leg, and American rock band, Crumb.

Independent producers make up the other side of this spectrum. Take Tame Impala, for instance, headed by Kevin Parker. Aside from live performances, Kevin plays and mixes all of the tracks for his pieces on his own - almost as a self-contained project for himself. There’s also Lil Nas X, who before his glow-up produced all of his tracks in his home or rented studio space. Old Town Road was just one of those songs that happened to blow up with the help of social media. Obviously, this kind of work offers the greatest amount of freedom for the artist, and in both cases can lead to significant careers as a touring band and mainstream singer/songwriter respectively.

Let’s wrap up our listening while considering that weird term I used earlier, “Indie Labels.” An overly simple way to state the position of these folks would be someplace in between independent producers and commercially signed artists. In most cases, this balance of freedom to create and resources to regularly produce and distribute music is a win-win. Beach Bunny recently released their first album Mom + Pop music group, just one of such labels. Meanwhile, Japanese Breakfast's latest album was distributed by Dead Ocean, a collection of publishers for music, film, and live performers.

As we move on from here, I think it’s important to acknowledge that there are in fact criticisms to be found in the forces surrounding indie production as well that are going to be detrimental to the artist/art in the long run. For example, many distribution platforms such as SoundCloud pay-wall most of their premium features that would be useful for entrepreneurial musicians. With platforms like Spotify, a publisher/distributor that is recognized by the company is required to provide content to the platform. Fortunately, there are companies such as DistroKid that serve as a massive clearinghouse for independent musicians - but of course, these services will cost you a fee! And don’t get me started on the pittance royalty payments delivered to artists by Spotify. The point here is that being an indie artist is far more than a sound, style, or genre. Rather, it is a way of life that comes with its own associated costs that make it difficult for artists to survive, thrive, and make their art. As I said before, there is little we can do as individual consumers to solve this issue, but being aware of them positions us as advocates for independent music and artists’ rights.