Are downloads really killing the music industry?

The music industry does like to insist that filesharing - aka illegal downloading - is killing the industry: that every one of the millions of music files downloaded each day counts as a "lost" sale, which if only it could somehow have been prevented would put stunning amounts of money into impoverished artists' hands. And, of course, music industry bosses' wallets. But we won't mention that.

Take the story that appeared in this paper last week:

At least 7 million people in Britain use illegal downloads, costing the economy billions of pounds and thousands of jobs, according to a report.

Shared content on one network was worth about £12bn a year according to the research commissioned by the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property.

David Lammy, minister for intellectual property, said: "Illegal downloading robs our economy of millions of pounds every year and seriously damages business and innovation throughout the UK. "It is something that needs tackling, and we are serious about doing so."


Well, up to a point, minister. Ben Goldacre took apart the rather dodgy calculations behind the claims on Saturday.

But it left me wondering. Why does the music industry persist in saying that every download is a lost sale? If you even think about it, it can't be true. People - even downloaders - only have a finite amount of money. In times gone by, sure, they would have been buying vinyl albums. But if you stopped them downloading, would they troop out to the shops and buy those songs?

I don't think so. I suspect they're doing something different. I think they're spending the money on something else.

What else, I mused, might they be buying? Hmm... young.. like the entertainment industry... ah, how about computer games and DVDs? Thus began a hunt for the figures for UK sales of games and of DVDs and of music to see if there was any consistent relationship between them. And since this was about filesharing, it seemed sensible to analyse it since 1999 - when Napster started and blew up the CD business model.

(It's surprising how hard it was to find these statistics. You'd think someone like ELSPA, the European Leisure Software Publishers' Association, would have them. Nope: instead initially I had to track them via press releases. The BPI, representing British record labels, said that it didn't have numbers going back before 2004, which seemed a bit 1984-ish to me; it turns out the BPI doesn't like to release those figures because it changed the methodology for recording sales in 2004, effectively reducing the number. At least DVD data are easily obtained from the British Video Association and the UK Film Council. Thank you.)

The first clue of where all those downloaders are really spending their money came in searching for games statistics: year after year ELSPA had hailed "a record year". In fact if you look at the graph above, you'll see that games spend has risen dramatically - from £1.18bn in 1999 to £4.03bn in 2008.

Meanwhile music spending (allowing for that * of adjustment in 2004 onwards) has gone from £1.94bn to £1.31bn.

DVD sales and rentals, meanwhile, have nearly doubled, from a total of £1.286bn in 1999 to £2.56bn in 2008.

If we assume that there's roughly the same amount of discretionary spending available (which, even allowing for the credit bubble, should be roughly true; most of the credit went into houses), then it's clear who the culprit is: the games industry. By 2009, the amount spent in games and music is almost exactly the same as 1999 (though note that the music industry changed its methods from 2004).

Yes, downloaders aren't spending money on the music industry, and in that way they are hurting it. But I'd argue that the true volume of "lost" sales is nowhere near the claims made. Assume that music couldn't be copied (as many games can't). I don't think that the volume of music sales would equate to all those downloads. At best, it would be £600m larger.

But the reality is that nowadays, one can choose between a game costing £40 that will last weeks, or a £10 CD with two great tracks and eight dud ones. I think a lot of people are choosing the game - and downloading the two tracks. That's real discretion in spending. It's hurting the music industry, sure. But let's not cloud the argument with false claims about downloads.

(guardian)

Read The Entire Story Here..

Who Pays for the Recording Costs?

There are no real rules about who should pay for recording costs. If you’re an unsigned band who goes into the studio to record an album with your own money and you get signed to a record label who releases that album, then those costs stay with the band.

The label does not have to pay you back the money you spent on recording the album, although that expense you have taken on can be considered when you’re negotiating an advance with the record label. If you get signed to a label on the strength of demo and the label wants you to record an album for them to release, often the label will pay for at least a portion of this recording. However, a smaller indie label that simply doesn’t have money to spend on recording costs might say, “well, you record an album, and we’ll release it,” leaving those costs up to the band.

If the label pays for the recording of an album, they have a right to withhold earnings from the band until they recoup all of the costs they have put into the album. Also, if the label pays for the recording, they generally have more of a say in how the album sounds. The extent to which the label exercises this right varies from label to label.

If you sign a multi album deal with a record label, make sure the contract clearly states who is responsible for the recording cost of each album (and if you sign a multi album deal, ideally the label will take on the bulk of the recording costs).

Read The Entire Story Here..

Musical Training Boosts Brain Growth

Research has revealed significant differences in the gray matter distribution between professional musicians trained at an early age and non-musicians, as presented today at the American Academy of Neurology's 53rd Annual Meeting in Philadelphia, PA. The musicians in the study had more relative gray matter volume in left and right primary sensorimotor regions, the left more than the right intraparietal sulcus region, the left basal ganglia region and the left posterior perisylvian region, with pronounced differences also seen in the cerebellum bilaterally.

"We were interested to know whether intense environmental demands such as musical training at an early age influenced actual brain growth and development," comments study leader Gottfried Schlaug, MD, PhD. Results of this cross-sectional study may indicate use-dependent brain growth or structural plasticity of gray matter volume in response to such demands during a critical period of brain maturation. "An alternative explanation may be that these musicians were born with these differences, which may draw them toward their musical gifts." Fifteen male professional musicians and 15 age and gender matched non-musicians were included in the study conducted by neurologist Schlaug and Gaser Christian, PhD, of Germany, at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston. Using a magnetic resonance imaging sequence, they compared high resolution anatomical datasets of the professional musicians' and non-musicians' brains on a voxel-by-voxel basis using SPM99 software.

"Musicians typically commence training at an early age, making them ideal subjects for this type of investigation," notes Schlaug. These presumed cerebral adaptations may not only lead to modifications of functional sensory and motor maps, but may also lead to structural adaptations within the sensorimotor system.

"However," Schlaug concludes, "additional study is necessary to confirm causal relationships between intense motor training for a long period of time and structural changes in motor and non-motor related brain regions." Schlaug is continuing this study to identify areas of the brain that are different, and to determine if training and experience create the differences.

Kate Melville

Read The Entire Story Here..

Green Day: 21st century Breakdown review

Long ago every other album was a rock opera with the tracks and artwork linked by some unifying theme or storyline. Such an approach has been pretty much ridiculed as pretentious since the late seventies but the format saw an unlikely revival in 2004 by Green Day whose American Idiot articulated the anxiety of a nation on the verge of war and saw the band reborn as protest rockers. The album sold 12 million copies worldwide. A tough trick to follow then but follow it they have — with a three part rock opera telling the story of two characters Christian and Gloria and the battle of idealism versus destruction. Many of the tracks here (Christian's Inferno, Peacemaker, The Static Age) are reworkings of the pop-punk sound of Dookie but without the goofy lyrics. Elsewhere they stretch themsleves into less familiar territory with cabaret (Viva La Gloria) piano balladry (Last Night On Earth), the pomp of Queen (title track) and Beatles style pop symphonies (Restless Heart Syndrome) — it’s on these less immediate tracks that Green Day really triumph and live up to the hype. Lyrically, it's a step up too and also notable is Billie Joe Armstrong’s impressive vocals which easily cope with the bands epic scope. Unlike most current albums 21st Century Breakdown works better when listened to as a whole but the downside to that (as with many films and books) is that it’s slightly too long. Most listeners though won’t be able to get enough of it. More to try: The Who: Quadrophenia Foxboro Hot Tubs: Stop Drop And Roll!!! The Clash: Sandinista Stiff Little Fingers: Inflammable Material

Read The Entire Story Here..

Dirt - Alice in Chains

Dirt is Alice in Chains' major artistic statement and the closest they ever came to recording a flat-out masterpiece. It's a primal, sickening howl from the depths of Layne Staley's heroin addiction, and one of the most harrowing concept albums ever recorded. Not every song on Dirt is explicitly about heroin, but Jerry Cantrell's solo-written contributions (nearly half the album) effectively maintain the thematic coherence -- nearly every song is imbued with the morbidity, self-disgust, and/or resignation of a self-aware yet powerless addict. Cantrell's technically limited but inventive guitar work is by turns explosive, textured, and queasily disorienting, keeping the listener off balance with atonal riffs and off-kilter time signatures. Staley's stark confessional lyrics are similarly effective, and consistently miserable. Sometimes he's just numb and apathetic, totally desensitized to the outside world; sometimes his self-justifications betray a shockingly casual amorality; his moments of self-recognition are permeated by despair and suicidal self-loathing. Even given its subject matter, Dirt is monstrously bleak, closely resembling the cracked, haunted landscape of its cover art. The album holds out little hope for its protagonists (aside from the much-needed survival story of "Rooster," a tribute to Cantrell's Vietnam-vet father), but in the end, it's redeemed by the honesty of its self-revelation and the sharp focus of its music. [Some versions of Dirt feature "Down in a Hole" as the next-to-last track rather than the fourth.] Steve Huey

Read The Entire Story Here..

Musical Training Might Be Good For The Heart

Musical training might be good for the heart, suggests a small study, which shows that it is musical tempo, rather than style, that is the greatest stress buster. The findings, published ahead of print in Heart, are based on various aspects of breathing and circulation, in 24 young men and women, taken before and while they listened to short excerpts of music.

Half of those taking part were trained musicians, who had been playing instruments for at least seven years. The remainder had had no musical training. Each participant listened to short tracks of different types of music in random order, for 2 minutes, followed by the same selection of tracks for 4 minutes each. A 2 minute pause was randomly inserted into each of these sequences.
Participants listened to raga (Indian classical music), Beethoven's ninth symphony (slow classical), rap (the Red Hot Chilli Peppers), Vivaldi (fast classical), techno, and Anton Webern (slow "dodecaphonic music").

Faster music, and more complex rhythms, speeded up breathing and circulation, irrespective of style, with fast classical and techno music having the same impact. But the faster the music, the greater was the degree of physiological arousal. Similarly, slower or more meditative music had the opposite effect, with raga music creating the largest fall in heart rate.

But during the pauses, all the indicators of physiological arousal fell below those registered before the participants started to listen to any of the tracks.

This effect occurred, irrespective of the musical style or preferences of the listener, but was stronger among the musicians, who are trained to synchronise their breathing with musical phrases.

Passive listening to music initially induces varying levels of arousal, proportional to the tempo, say the authors, while calm is induced by slower rhythms or pauses.

They suggest that this could therefore be helpful in heart disease and stroke. Other research has shown that music can cut stress, improve athletic performance, improve movement in neurologically impaired patients, and even boost milk production in cattle.

Read The Entire Story Here..

Music Reduces Stress In Heart Disease Patients

Listening to music may benefit patients who suffer severe stress and anxiety associated with having and undergoing treatment for coronary heart disease. A Cochrane Systematic Review found that listening to music could decrease blood pressure, heart rate, and levels of anxiety in heart patients. Living with heart disease is extremely stressful. The uncertainties and anxieties surrounding diagnosis and the various medical procedures involved in treatment can significantly worsen the condition. For example, stress can increase blood pressure, leading to increased risk of complications. Music listening may help to alleviate stress and therefore reduce this risk.

"Our findings suggest music listening may be beneficial for heart disease patients," says Joke Bradt, who works at the Arts and Quality of Life Research Center at Temple University in Philadelphia. "But the trials we looked at were generally small and varied in terms of styles of music used and length of music sessions. More research on the specifics of music listening is certainly warranted."

The researchers reviewed data from 23 studies, which together included 1,461 patients. Two studies focused on patients treated by trained music therapists, but most did not, using instead interventions where patients listened to pre-recorded music on CDs offered by healthcare professionals.

Listening to music provided some relief for coronary heart disease patients suffering from anxiety, by reducing heart rate and blood pressure. There was also some indication that music listening improved mood, although no improvement was seen for patients suffering from depression due to the disease.

"We all know that music can impact on our emotions, our physiological responses, as well as our outlook on life, and this early research shows that it is well worth finding out more about how it could help heart disease patients. In particular, it would be interesting to learn more about the potential benefits of music offered by trained music therapists, which may be differ substantially from those associated with pre-recorded music," says Bradt.

dailyscience

Read The Entire Story Here..

Music Thought to Enhance Intelligence, Mental Health and Immune System

A recent volume of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences takes a closer look at how music evolved and how we respond to it. Contributors to the volume believe that animals such as birds, dolphins and whales make sounds analogous to music out of a desire to imitate each other. This ability to learn and imitate sounds is a trait necessary to acquire language and scientists feel that many of the sounds animals make may be precursors to human music. Another study in the volume looks at whether music training can make individuals smarter. Scientists found more grey matter in the auditory cortex of the right hemisphere in musicians compared to nonmusicians. They feel these differences are probably not genetic, but instead due to use and practice.
Listening to classical music, particularly Mozart, has recently been thought to enhance performance on cognitive tests. Contributors to this volume take a closer look at this assertion and their findings indicate that listening to any music that is personally enjoyable has positive effects on cognition. In addition, the use of music to enhance memory is explored and research suggests that musical recitation enhances the coding of information by activating neural networks in a more united and thus more optimal fashion.

Other studies in this volume look at music's positive effects on health and immunity, how music is processed in the brain, the interplay between language and music, and the relationship between our emotions and music.

The Neurosciences and Music II is volume 1060 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

Read The Entire Story Here..

Musicality

How can we explain musicality ? Musicality is a complex human action as a result of many factors. The first pre-requisite is the feeling for rhythm and the ability to reproduce the preset rhythm. An exact ear or the understandings of acoustical sensations is absolutely necessary as the next pre-requisite as well again the ability to reproduce acoustical sensations in precise pitch. But this are pre-requisites only.

The other important requirements: an instantaneous understanding of written rhythm and written music including all different expression and dynamical marks. But not enough: instantaneous understanding of the given mood is also necessary, plus the ability to integrate one's own playing into the organism of the music and/or of the ensemble.

Again, this is not enough: one has to understand where to place the beat or more emphasis, one has to understand one's own importance or unimportance as part of the musical action. One has to know also which notes are more important than others, where to reduce the dynamics even for up to two steps or where to rise the dynamic level even for up to two or sometimes three steps.

And again, this is not enough, as one has to understand the musical forms & miniforms ("gruppetti") instantaneously.

Some of this abilities can be acquired by hard work or simple experience: rhythmical training, ear training, recognizing forms knowing the works very well. Exact memory for music is a good tool also, but requires some analytic memory. Feeling for forms & the interaction between forms can be developed by great experience in the arts, in all arts, which can be acquired by visiting museums, reading encyclopaedias, specially about the classical arts from Egyptian arts to Greece & Rome. So one gets a feeling about esthetic.

But most of it, musicality is depending on intelligence as it is part of the intelligence. Provocative ? Me ? Yes ! You should know, that shaking the body more or less within the rhythm or starting grinning while listening music or starting humming less out of tune than others, that's not musicality. Musicality is more. Playing a piece in tune, playing the right notes at the right place, is not enough. Musicality is more. Like intelligence it is a gift of nature, plus much work.

If you listen to certain chords, and it starts running down your back icecold, and your flesh begins to creep, that's where musicality starts. If you listen to music, and you feel like flying in outer space, that's where musicality starts. If you listen to music, and you become angry or sad, that's where musicality starts. And if you are able, to bring others into the moods said above by your playing, well, then you are a musical musician.

Think about.
Prof.Hans Pizka

Read The Entire Story Here..

How Record Companies Make Money

Record companies make money by selling recordings. It is a high-risk business. According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), approximately 90% of the records that are released by major recording labels fail to make a profit. Independent labels have to be more careful in their choices and in their allocation of expenses because they do not have the resources to cover many failures. However, they can make and promote records for far lower costs than major labels and be profitable with far fewer sales. The budgets for making and selling recordings are tied to what labels estimate they will sell. Knowing how many recordings might be sold makes it possible to budget recording costs. Most profitable labels have histories of selling and promoting that enable them to estimate gross income.
Recording Costs

Recording costs are borne by artists, not record companies. Record companies commonly make loans to artists (all-in advances) for these costs and recoup them from royalties.

With the exception of jazz and classical artists, new major label artists can spend between $100,000 and $500,000 to make a record, but recording budgets of one million dollars and more are not uncommon. Many independent artists will spend less than $15,000.

Manufacturing Costs

Manufacturing includes replicating recorded material and packaging. The costs depend on the number to be manufactured. Manufacturing costs are generally borne by recording labels, although labels try to deduct packaging costs from the base price on which they pay royalties.

Major labels pay approximately $.50 to $.55 per CD. Independent labels that order more than 100,000 CDs a year pay approximately $.65 per CD. Labels that buy less than 10,000 CDs a year pay approximately $1.20 per CD. These costs include the printing of 4-page package inserts and tray cards.

Royalty Costs

Record labels pay two royalties: The first is a record royalty to the performing artist(s); the second is a mechanical royalty to composers and publishers.

Some companies pay record royalties on a percentage (8% to 16%) of the suggested list retail price (SLRP) less a packaging cost, generally 15% to 25% of the SLRP. Others base royalties on the wholesale price to distributors. For a CD with an SLRP of $16.98, a common packaging deduction of 25% is $4.25 and the amount paid to the artist will be calculated as a percentage of $12.73. Thus, at a 10% royalty, artists will receive $1.27; at a 14% royalty rate, $1.78.

Record labels pay composers and publishers mechanical royalties. They try to cap mechanical royalty budgets at ten songs payable at 75% of the statutory rate ($.80 per song in 2002), which equals $.60 per song under the controlled composition clauses of recording contracts.

Promotional Costs

Major labels budget approximately 20% of annual gross income for promotion and selectively allocate the funds according to sales projections for each artist. Independent labels generally budget 10% of projected gross sales of all recordings annually and selectively allocate that budget.

Promotional costs include designing and printing promotional and packaging materials for recordings; press kits and Web sites; and advertising, radio promotion, videos, public relations and mailing costs. Some or all the costs for packaging, video production and radio promotion may be recouped from artists’ royalties, depending on contractual agreements.

Distribution Costs

The record companies decide on the suggested list retail price (SLRP) of each format. The SLRP helps stores to determine the discount price they charge customers and helps performers determine the price to charge to fans at gigs and by mail order.

The price at which distributors buy from recording companies (distributor wholesale price) is also set by the record companies. This is commonly 50% to 55% off the SLRP. If the volume is high enough, the discount can go to 60%.

The price at which stores buy from record distributors (store wholesale price) is determined by the distributors. This is commonly 55% to 65% of the SLRP. Stores return unsold product at 100% of their cost.

The price at which record stores buy from record companies that own their own distribution warehouses is approximately 75% of the SLRP.

Potential Profits

How do these costs relate to a million selling album?

At common discounts, record companies receive approximately $10.00 per CD ($16.95 SLRP). Thus, projected record company gross income is ten million dollars.

Out of this the record company will spend approximately $625.000 in manufacturing costs; approximately $1,000,000 in promotion (another $1,000,000 will be charged against artist royalties); $1,780,00 in royalties to the artists (at 14% of the SLRP of $16.95, less packaging); and $600,000 in publishing royalties (at 75% of statutory). After subtracting $4,005,000 from its ten million gross income, the record company has a gross profit of $5,995,000. It will recoup its million- dollar advance to the artist and its promotional costs. (Diane Rapaport)

Read The Entire Story Here..

How to Start a Band

Starting a band may sound pretty straightforward, but it can actually be one of the most frustrating parts for many people. If you don't go about setting up your band right, you'll be caught in an endless cycle of trying to replace this player or that, trying to get the new people ready to play the songs, and so on and so forth - not to mention the fact that a dysfunctional band can out-drama any group of middle school girls. Save yourself the hassle and get your best band going right from the start.

Know Who You Need:

Before you can start finding band members, you've got to figure out exactly what your band needs. Say you and friend are playing together, and you play guitar and she plays drums. Well, you're set on a drummer, and whether you need a second guitarist will depend on your songs. Sounds obvious, right? But, it's easy to end up trying to fit in an unexpected keyboard player or extra guitarist just because you like that person. Remember that your goal is to get a band that can play shows together. Figure out the roles you need filled and match the people to the roles instead of the other way around.


Find the Musicians:

Now that you know what kind of musicians you need, you can start looking for them.


Figure Out The Ground Rules:

When you're just getting started in your band, there's no need to get too overly complicated and start fighting about your future royalties (if you are - consider it a huge red flag). If you're serious about your band, however, there are a few basics you should consider - it will help keep everyone on the same page:
* What is the practice schedule?
* Where will you practice?
* If there are any expenses (practice space, etc), how will you pay for them?
As your band grows, the things you need to figure out together will increase.


Who's the Boss:

Most bands have a natural leader, usually the songwriter and/or the person who formed the band. Exactly how much you want to exercise this whole "boss" thing is up to you - for instance, is it your songs, your way or the highway, or can others have some input? More importantly, when you start booking shows and promoting your band, it's good to have one person who is the main contact for the band. This can be the person who runs the show musically or someone else good at taking care of details.


Start Playing!:

Obviously, of course, the most important part of starting a band is just getting together and playing some music. Even with the best laid plans, this is the only way to make sure your band really clicks together. This is also a good time to figure out who is taking things seriously and is committed to the band, and who is not. If you have ambitions to make a living through your music, and your other band members view the band as a hobby, now is when that difference will rear it's head. If you and your band aren't a music love match, no problem - just return to step one!

Read The Entire Story Here..

Cake - Motorcade Of Generosity

Cake, eh? If ever the world was in need of their lyrically astute, musically simple college rock, it's now. The fact that they have a new album due later this year has nothing to do with this re-issuing of this, their 1994 debut LP. It's just a coincidence. Motorcade Of Generosity, however, is far more than just a 15-year-old sales gimmick. It was the album that paved the way for McCrea and co's long-lasting, culturally-embedded career, and the forerunner of the band's varied, occasional hits (The Distance, Short Skirt/Long Jacket).

But it was also released in times when American college radio airplay held far greater significance in terms of mainstream success and the fortunes of such outfits. Usurped by an internet full of witty deadpanning, what further pleasures can be derived from a re-print of Cake's witty deadpanning of 15 years past?

If you're not familiar with the group, imagine, if you will, the two musicians who pop up now and then in There's Something About Mary, or the tune Jim Carrey whistles as he dunks a small child's head underwater in Me, Myself & Irene: here is a pop legacy built on charm, sarcasm, simplicity, and a lyrical confidence apparent in crystal-clear enunciation.

Motorcade shimmies into earshot with Comanche, an aurally sparse sprinkling of advice to Native Americans that seizes attention with John McCrea's trademark reigned-in draw, which is itself succeeded by Ruby Sees All, the loud-quiet stamp of riffery that presents itself - to varying extents - throughout the Cake discography.

With Jolene, the band drives Motorcade through its strongest passage. McCrea rallies passionately against the tedium suffocating the titular character, his lyrical tour de force augmented with the album's greatest riff and most fully realised cacophony. It's a snapshot of Cake in their early prime.

Haze Of Love carries the baton adeptly, serving as a further plateau of astute observation, whilst You Part The Waters exhibits the band in a jam session, all delicate guitar funk, extended solo allowances and a rather glorious vocal harmony crescendo.

Also on display is the sharp wit and playfulness of Jesus Wrote A Blank Cheque, as well as the band's debut single, Rock 'n' Roll Lifestyle, in which poseurs on both sides of the microphone are called to account for their phoney behaviour: "How much did you spend on your black leather jacket?" asks McCrea. "Is it you or your parents in this income tax bracket?"

Amid the final trio of tracks, Mr Mastodon Farm provides Motorcade with its figurative exclamation mark. As a simply layered, gradually unfurling, plainly poetic piece, it holds in equal measure the constituent ingredients of Cake's enduringly charming legacy.

And so, in spite of the time passed since its inception (or perhaps because of it), Motorcade Of Generosity transcends trends - of its era but not defined by it - and is as utterly listenable today as it was when Forrest Gump topped the box office. Not bad going for a bit of confection.

Read The Entire Story Here..

How to Start a Record Label: Introduction and Basics

Do you want to start a record label? Many a label has been started by someone saying, "ok, I've got a record label!". In some ways, it really IS that easy. Some of the best labels have made it up as they've gone along. However, if you really want to give yourself the best chance of success, not to mention protecting your investment, going through a proper set-up process is important. This guide will walk you through getting your label up and running.

Before we jump in, though, let's make sure you've thought this whole label thing through. Running an indie record label is fun, but it takes a lot of commitment and a ton of money. It's critical you go into this with your eyes open. Here are a few things to consider:


If you are starting a record label with the sole purpose of releasing your own music, be aware that being both label owner and only artist on the roster brings some limitations. Even with the best intentions, your label runs the risk of coming across as a vanity project. That means that some distributors may be hesitant to work with you and some funding sources may hold off on investing in you. If you are planning to do promotion in-house, remember that it can be a little uncomfortable for everyone for you to be calling up journalists asking them when they think of your album. This isn't to say that you shouldn't start a label to release your own music. It just means you need to be aware that it brings along a few complications other labels don't face.

You will almost certainly have to work on your label every day, even if you have a full time job. Do you have the time to invest in making the label work?

However much you are budgeting for your label - it will cost more. Can you start a label and cover your bills?

Read The Entire Story Here..