Featured Artist: Here Is There

Tulsa natives Here Is There are in a league of their own, and it’s not just because they’re the only band I’ve ever heard of from Tulsa. These guys are in their early twenties but they’ve been playing together since middle school, and have been finding an increasingly more sophisticated sound over the last couple years.

I fell in love with their demo in 2007 and some of their Myspace-exclusive tracks because of the sheer level of dynamics in their sound. The four (now five) piece band brims with mathy instrumental proficiency and a soulful demeanor they marry to traditional progressive rock. The result, however, has more the panty-dropping potential of The Strokes than Yes.
Now they’ve taken on a whole new beast, bringing on board rapper Victor Alonzo to share the bill with mighty lead vocalist Zach Edmondson. Hopefully the coming year will bring us some new material — I’m interested to see where they’re going with this, considering they’ve removed all their former work from their Myspace. Check out some of their older stuff.

Piracy vs. Purchasing: What’s Next?

Music piracy is not so much of a two-sided argument anymore as a many-layered conversation. I think ten years ago it was pretty easy to have a cut-and-dry opinion about the matter, but now that artists have adapted to and even embraced the internet as a forum for music distribution, the debate has been muted.

Distribution methods are dynamically changing, and it seems recording artists are always a step or two behind. Only in recent years have labels embraced online sales transactions, but major distribution outlets like iTunes and Amazon still sell digital music for prices comparable to buying a compact disc at a major discount store like Wal-Mart or Target.

Of course the world of internet piracy is more sophisticated than ever. Major torrent trackers like The Pirate Bay and Mininova (RIP), now the prime target of RIAA‘s legal efforts, have developed ways of circumventing international copyright laws to provide users with terabytes upon terabytes of digital music free of charge, and merely a click away. Although they frequently fall victim to crippling litigation anyway, smaller and private trackers provide access to even bigger libraries provided the user is savvy enough to access them.

Not to mention the exponentially increasing popularity of YouTube, whose original stated purpose before becoming subject to the internet establishment was to host every music video ever created. While artists like Prince have taken offense to the concept, and major labels like Warner Music Group have taken huge efforts to moderate its content, the site remains the world’s largest cache of music videos and single songs, albeit at substantially compressed bitrates.

Myspace (remember, it was that social networking site that USED to be ubiquitous) is now the most popular form of music promotion, allowing artists to upload entire discographies worth of streaming audio as well as a ready-made community with which to network and share their art. The problem of course is that Myspace itself only provides a source of exposure, not income.

Now that major recording artists like Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead have all but shunned the concept of major label distribution and its archaic business model, people are starting to reconsider whether this is such a black and white issue. The inherent problem is — are these the right people to be listening to?

I think its nothing short of admirable that Trent Reznor and Thom Yorke have been so vocal about their dismay for major labels, but they are at somewhat of a luxurious position, being that they are hugely successful and at liberty to explore more experimental methods of distribution that may or may not be successful. While nothing’s changed for smaller, independent artists, who still struggle just as much now for exposure as they did when they couldn’t land a record deal before, I’m wondering what effect the rise of internet piracy has had on the middle ground, or even the upper echelon. It seems that even alternative radio is catering more and more to the mainstream, becoming more of the Middle 40 to contrast less and less with the Top 40.

Typically the only artists you hear clinging to the archaic business model that major labels provide and practice are the ones who have negotiated extraordinary contracts, such as Metallica and Pearl Jam as Camas mentioned. More often than not, the recording artists of themselves see a very small percentage of the royalties from their record sales, and a more popular motion now is to sell directly to the consumer for discounted rates. The inherent problem is that there is no centralized marketplace for such transactions, and introducing one would once again subject the artists to a commission a hence a large portion of their royalties. I forsee this becoming the next major beast.

There are other artistic considerations to take into account that mainstream consumers consider trivial. The continued cult popularity of vinyl records demonstrates that a lot of people still have consideration for the artists entire output — listening to the entire album in context with lyrics and full-sized album art in-hand. The realm of digital music will continue to marginalize this subculture into the fringe, but they’ll still be there.

Another consideration is sound quality. Last time I checked, most of what iTunes sold was in proprietary MPEG-3 format, at bitrates as low as 192 kbps. No self-respecting artist would release audio at such a fraction of full quality. Even the aforementioned NIN and Radiohead have taken this into account — when they famously released their albums free of charge, they were in compressed audio formats, whereas lossless formats were available for charge. For now the distinction is only pertinent to audiophiles, but as the mainstream music consumer becomes more tech savvy, I imagine audio quality will become a more pertinent consideration.

The big question is — what’s the solution? Well if I had one, I’d be rich, but I have my fantasies. I think the direct-from-artist model has some serious merit. I’d like to continue seeing music at low bitrates provided free of charge. This allows people to try full albums, to get a feel for them before making the investment of a purchase. It also hopefully circumvents the potential for singles to take centerstage and obscure exposure to the merits of the rest of the artist’s work, or the album as a whole if it’s intended to be experienced as such.

I think the real future has to be in a centralized outlet/promotional forum — something combining the merits of Myspace and iTunes but without the relatively extravagant cost to both the consumer and the recording artist. Services like Bandcamp are huge leap forwards, allowing people to stream audio from the browser and purchase it in a variety of compressed and non-compressed formats, the price of which are left to the artists’ discretion. If this concept was super-imposed on a social networking site like Myspace (or hopefully Facebook), I think it’d have huge potential for success.

It’s been a rough ten years for the recording industry. Now that the war between two giant beasts is almost ending in victory for the internet, perhaps the final death knell of the major label is imminent. In the meantime, the best way to show support for your favorite artists is to see them live. Artists retain a much higher percentage of the ticket price than revenue from their record sales, and its one service the Internet can never provide.