Donald Passman is the author of my favorite book about the Music Business!

Earlier this week, Mashable published an admittedly brief social media analysis piece I wrote on Lady Gaga relating online conversation to her music’s consumption. The question I keep asking myself, and the question I continue to be asked, is why Lady Gaga?

One reason is that I’m fascinated how this ordinary looking, but otherwise talented female from New York, became the most popular star on the planet simply by being outrageous. Sure, she (possibly) writes her own music and has the talent to sing, but that’s not a differentiator.

What I concluded is that above all, Lady Gaga is really good at being famous. As a culture, we are attracted to fame, and there is something about her that is especially enlightening for many people. What is it?

My original article sliced apart fame from this cultural perspective. However, my regular writing style is not in line with Mashable’s content or audience. Having said that, below is the original, pre-Mashable¹ edit fame analysis on this creature called Gaga.

–

Fame’s appeal lies within its mystique: what it is and why it occurs remain relatively unanswered questions, besides the necessity of rapid, surrounding conversation. Ten years ago, even the most shocking entertainer’s rise to stardom was missing the accelerating momentum of social media, a crucial factor in today’s fame equation.

Lady Gaga has played a hand in manipulating fame to her advantage, recently emerging as arguably the most famous pop star on the planet. She wove her way through the charts by treating her desire to be famous as an art. She’s developed an image of shock artistry, wearing futuristic attire, sculpted hair styles and glittery makeup, completing a socially disruptive persona.

Few stars’ early footage has shocked the public as much as Gaga’s, then known as Stefani Germanotta, performing in plain clothes in a Lower East Side club in New York City, circa 2007. While her current shtick is that of a fame monster, more than a musician, her vocal skills are humbling. Local students attend these clubs with the intention of seeing unique, often independent talent, secretly hoping they are receiving a glimpse of the next big thing. Viewers of Gaga slamming on the keys, singing to the tune of the piano, certainly did.

Fame, at its core, is fueled by the artist’s demand for attention. Take one of Gaga’s earliest stunts: fed up with her ignorant audience as she played in a crowded, NYU bar, she decided to strip to her underwear. Hardly high brow, but a magnetic step in attracting attention toward her character, rather than the music. The next day, you can bet the almost naked, talented female pianist was a popular conversation among the influential New York music crowd.

We live in a culture where the fame-less public are attracted to the idea of fame. And, this fame-seeking desire is what makes Gaga appealing. It’s less her provocative, often outrageous performance, but more her implicit advocacy for individualism driven by everyday conversation.

Conventional wisdom in the music business has it that you should send promo copies of new releases to music publications and music radio. This, of course, makes perfect sense. People who are reading about music are likely to be interested in the music that you make, as long as it’s within the ballpark of the music that they came to the periodical or the broadcaster for.

The logical extension of this idea — that you should send promotions to the online equivalent of music broadcasters and publications — also makes perfect sense. Therefore, one of the most clearly sensible things to do would be to locate MP3 blogs to have much in common with the kind of music that you promote.

Here’s a good place to start looking:
MonkeyFilter’s MP3 blog listing

MP3 blogs are written by enthusiasts who have become opinion leaders in their field. They provide MP3 use of songs that they recommend to their readership. This differs from a music publications in the sense that every review is therefore necessarily a positive one. So by extension, if you send them your music and they choose to talk about it on a blog they are doing so as an opinion leader with their implicit approval.

Of course you have to content worth the idea that your music is now being given away for free to potential customers. However as we have discussed, and will no doubt discussed further at great length, this should not concern you. At any rate, MP3 blogs typically leave music up online for only a week or so, so that bandwidth costs do not become excessive.

Since it costs nothing, or next to nothing, to send promos via MP3, it does make sense to cast the net more widely than you might if you were posting physical CDs. With that in mind, I would like to propose a further lateral step beyond the logical MP3 blog approach.

People who write blogs with large readerships, but which are not about music, also probably quite like music.

That is to say, enthusiasts and opinion leaders in the area of politics, popular culture, technology — even accountancy — could still form part of your potential constituency, even if they are not readers of music publications. In fact, it’s probably fair to say that the vast majority of music buyers do not read music publications.

It’s probably also true that most of these opinion leaders are never sent promotional copies of music. The chances of an MP3 blogger choosing to promote your music on their blog is probably slimmer than the chances of a political blogger promoting your music on their blog… simply because being sent a promotional disc is nothing new to people in the music business — but quite a novelty outside of it.

So picking me a bunch of blogs that you have some affinity for (other than musical affinity) and locating the authors via e-mail might actually be a very good way to expose your music to a readership that isn’t looking in the places you might ordinarily expect.

You may find you want to do this more thematically. For instance, readers of blogs about wine, food, expensive cars, or right-wing politics may not be the ideal audience of your angry indie protest band.

However, there’s nothing to say that readers of blogs about hi-fi equipment, surf boarding, alsatian breeding, or indeed someone’s personal life, might not have clear areas of intersection with your kind of music.

So, strategy: spend some time on the Internet having a look at a range of different blogs. Track down the ones with significant readership that may have things in common with the kind of people you might expect to listen to your music.

Put a couple of MP3s on your website somewhere that the authors of these blogs can access them (but which aren’t immediately obvious to the general public). Send the blogger of choice a polite e-mail saying that you enjoy their writing, and that you would very much like for them to listen to your music. If they like it, you’d be very pleased for them to give it away as an exclusive gift to their readership.

For most recipients, this will most likely be a first. The sheer novelty of it will at least get you past the first hurdle. It will get listened to. However, I’d suggest you politely request that if they are going to go ahead and give it to their fellow alsation-fanciers, that they host the MP3’s on their own server. That way, they’re not just giving out a free link to your music to all and sundry but are instead valuing the promotional gifts to their own constituency and managing its distribution.

As a PR strategy, this strikes me as an incredibly effective ploy, and one I haven’t seen put in practice as yet. It gets your music in front of a whole new crowd of people that you might ordinarily never have had access to simply because they are not the people who read the music publications or listen to the radio stations you imagine they might.

In other words, it’ll get you talked about in the vast majority of scenes untouched by the rest of the music industry. Which strikes me as potentially of some value.

Record companies, large and small, invest around US$5 billion a year in music talent, support a global roster of thousands of artists and typically spend US$1 million to break successful pop acts in major markets.

The figures are published in a new report issued today highlighting the work of major and independent record companies as the principal investors in artists’ careers. Advances, recording, marketing and promotional costs are the biggest items of record company spending on artists, commonly totalling six figure sums.

There are more than 4,000 artists on major record companies’ rosters combined, and many thousands more on independent labels. There is continuous re-investment of revenues derived from successful acts into new talent. It is estimated that one in four artists on record companies’ rosters were signed in the last 12 months.

Record companies are the largest investors in music talent, ploughing around 30% of their sales revenues - around US$5 billion worldwide - into developing and marketing artists. This includes an estimated 16% of sales revenues that is spent on artist and repertoire work (A&R), a proportion that significantly exceeds the proportionate research and development (R&D) expenditure of virtually all other industries. In addition, labels pay significant sums in royalties to featured performers.

Recorded music has a massive economic “ripple effect”, helping generate a broader music sector, including live music, radio, publishing and audio equipment, estimated to be worth US$160 billion annually. IFPI estimates that more than two million people are employed globally in this broader music economy.
“Investing in Music” report

Investing in Music is published today by IFPI, representing the recording industry worldwide, in collaboration with WIN, the international network of independent record labels. The report provides new figures and outlines the special skills and services companies provide in developing and promoting artists.

Alison Wenham, Chair of AIM/WIN, says: “The direct route afforded by the internet is open to all. However, mixing the talents of business and creativity is often a minefield, with creativity often compromised by the challenges of running a business, which requires totally different skills. Artists generally prefer to leave the complex administration of a rights based business to someone else.”

The report uses data from IFPI’s member record companies and case studies from around the world, including David Guetta, Kasabian, Little Boots, Jason Mraz, Belanova, Mousse T and Stephane Pompougnac. Highlights include:

* A&R combines internet technology and traditional scouting skills, playing a critical role in bringing artists to a wide audience. Labels help their artists cut through the digital noise, with more than 2.5 million hip hop and 1.8 million rock acts registered on MySpace alone.
* Record labels invest increasingly through “broad rights” deals across different activities of an artist’s work, including live and merchandising and branding. Multi-album deals are often important in allowing a return on this substantial investment. In many cases, artists and record labels enjoy long term partnerships.
* The work in the studio to record the album and select the singles remains a very significant investment and area of collaboration.
* The marketing skills and resources of record companies, from video production to online promotion, are essential in bringing artists to a mass audience. An international marketing “war machine” helps artists develop into global stars.
* Despite the success of the live music sector in recent years, recorded music remains the foundation for a successful artist career.

John Kennedy, chairman and chief executive of IFPI, says: “Investing in music is the core mission of record companies. No other party can lay claim to a comparable role in the music sector. No other party comes close to the levels of investment committed by record companies to developing, nurturing and promoting talent.

“One of the biggest myths about the music industry in the digital age is that artists no longer need record labels. It is simply wrong. The investment, partnership and support that help build artist careers have never been more important than they are today. This report aims to explain why. Investing in Music is about how the music business works. It explains the value that music companies add, helping artists to realise a talent that would typically go unrecognised and get to an audience they would otherwise not reach.

“Much of the value added by music companies is invisible to the outside world. Yet it is the investment and advice from labels that enable an artist to build a career in music and which, in turn, creates a beneficial ripple effect throughout the wider music sector.”
High levels of investment

It is estimated that the recorded music industry spends around 30% of its total revenues - around US$5 billion a year - discovering, developing and promoting talent. Of that, a global average of 16% is spent on A&R, with a higher than average level in certain countries such as the UK (where A&R investment totalled 23% in 2007).

Global music industry investment in A&R is considerably higher than similar investments in other industries. In the UK, the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry, widely acknowledged as a leader in research and development, invests 15% of its gross revenues in R&D (BIS R&D Scoreboard, 2008).

A&R spending today, however, is under greater pressure than ever from the impact of illegal file-sharing and other forms of piracy. In France, industry data shows record companies invested 12% of their turnover in marketing artists in 2009, a proportion that fell from 15% in 2006, at a time of reduced revenues which have been largely attributed to illegal file-sharing.
How the investment breaks down

Investing in Music outlines the very substantial investments involved in developing and marketing successful artists. In the UK and US, it is estimated that it typically costs more than US$1 million to break a pop artist. This is spread across an advance paid to the artist, recording costs, video production, tour support and promotional work. A typical example of the breakdown of the costs of breaking a new pop act in major markets is as below:

Advance US$200,000
Recording US$200,000
3 videos US$200,000
Tour support US$100,000
Promotion/marketing US$300,000
TOTAL US$1,000,000

* Payment of an advance to the artist. Such an advance allows an artist to give up their day job and concentrate on writing, rehearsing, recording and performing music. Advances are recoupable from an artist’s sales, but are not recouped if those sales do not reach certain levels, leaving the record company bearing the risk of investment. A typical advance paid to a new pop act in major markets is US$200,000, but often will be higher. Advances for an established “superstar” act will commonly be in excess of US$1 million.

* Financing of recording costs. Costs could be over US$200,000 for a new artist to record an album, though employing a top producer can drive this above US$50,000 per track. Hiring large numbers of session musicians or an orchestra can also drive up the budget. In this way, investment in recordings benefits a wide community of musicians and technicians.

* Production of videos. Video costs can also range widely. Some of the most expensive ever produced involved days of filming and editing, costing around $1 million. A typical cost for filming videos to promote a new artist’s album is around US$200,000.

* Tour support. New artists in particular need to be heavily supported by record companies. The level of tour support required is highly dependent on the nature of the artist. Tour support would typically cost around US$100,000 for a new artist in one market.

* Marketing and promotion. These are often the biggest budget items for a record label taking an act to the public. Labels invest heavily in marketing and promoting artists to a broad audience. Such promotion builds the brand identity from which artists can then earn money from numerous sources, such as live touring or merchandise. A typical investment in marketing and promoting a new act is US$300,000.

* Royalty payments. Payment of royalties is usually based on a percentage of revenues, licensed or synchronised income revenue streams. Teams in music companies are responsible for collecting and distributing royalties to the featured performers, producers and copyright owners.

The virtuous “circle of investment”

Recording contracts typically commit artists and labels to work together to produce a series of albums. Artists benefit from heavy upfront investment that would be difficult to secure elsewhere and record labels have the opportunity to recoup their outlay over a period of time.

Achieving commercial hits is the basis of the “circle of investment”, by which music companies plough back the revenues generated by successful campaigns to develop new talent and help fund the next generation of artists.

Continually investing in new talent is a hugely risky business, as only a minority of the artists developed by music companies will be commercially successful in a highly competitive market. Estimates on the commercial success ratio of artists vary between one in five and one in ten.

The level of investment in new artists required remains high, despite the development of new distribution channels for recorded music. In fact, the fragmentation of music distribution across many different physical and digital channels has often brought extra costs to record companies that are now working with many more retail partners.

* US$5 billion a year invested in artists by record companies worldwide
* Around 30% of revenues spent on artist development and marketing
* US$1 million to break a new artist in major markets
* US$160 billion “broader” sector employing two million people

via musicindustryreport.org

These days, most of the people you’ll be pitching your work to prefer being sent links to music rather than MP3 files. However, if they like what they hear, they’ll likely want to have it for permanent download so they can listen to it and/or play it for colleagues more readily. And there are a few people who want to be sent files in the first place.

If someone only wants a few files, you can simply send them via email. But if someone wants an entire album (a common request from music writers who are reviewing you), it can be easier and quicker for everyone if a file sharing service is used.

So, I’m here to bring one such service to your attention: Drop.io.

It was recently used to send me an album download, and it’s one of the best options I’ve seen. You can easily make a full album (along with the cover artwork) available for download in zip format. (For album downloads, I find that zip format is often favored by recipients since it automatically creates a folder of properly-sequenced tracks — fast and organized.) If the download is only meant for certain people (industry people, for example), you can opt to password protect it, an option that’s not given by many other services. If, on the other hand, you want to give an album or song(s) away to fans for free, you can also use this service, but opt to make the download public. However, in the later case, you might want to consider an option like Bandcamp.

The Dropio site should cover all the information you need to get set up, but here’s the introductory video to get you started:

By Christian Boone

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Shots were fired, though no one was hit, during an altercation between groups affiliated with local rappers Gucci Mane and Young Jeezy that closed Walter's Clothing in downtown Atlanta for about 30 minutes.

The fight started around 4 p.m. Thursday when Mane's group walked into the store -- popular with celebrities -- and spotted Jeezy's associates, said witness Patrick Morrison.

"There was a physical altercation inside the location between several men," Atlanta Police spokesman James Polite confirmed to the AJC. One of the men produced a weapon "and as a result a private armed security guard of a local entertainer discharged his weapon."

Polite said the security guard,  employed by local rapper Waka Flocka, has been detained.

The fighting was intense, witnesses said. "They just started going at it," said Morrison, a Walter's employee.

Waka Flocka, aka Juaqin Malphurs, is a member of Gucci Mane's 1017 Brick Squad. His pseudonym alludes to the sound of cocking a semi-automatic pistol.

"Whoever he is he's got a big swollen eye now," Morrison said.

In January, Malphurs was shot in the arm while washing his car on Old National Highway. Police said he was approached at the Bubble Bath car wash by armed men demanding his jewelry.

Meanwhile, Gucci Mane, aka Radric Davis, is serving time at the Fulton County jail for a probation violation. He is set to be released in May.

His dispute with Young Jeezy dates back to 2005, according to Allhiphop.com. Their feud supposedly ended last December during an appearance on DJ Drama's Gangsta Grillz show on Hot 107.9

DJ Drama, who recorded several mixtapes with Young Jeezy, became involved in the feud when he decided to record with Gucci Mane in 2008, the site reports.