Feedback most wanted… really?
By Parmon: Lately I read several discussions which go into the topic of missing feedback in the netaudio world. I want to bring up this topic again, from my point of view, to discuss it further.
Let’s start by looking back, to pre-internet times. I assume, that it wasn’t common that listeners had direct contact to the labels or musicians. So we still live in a time of new ways, in the time of change and learning. Today we theoretically are very close to musicians and labels. It seems to be quite easy to write an email and to get in touch. Maybe some of you already made this experience. But we are not only in the age of quick communication, we are also in the age of ”too much” communication. Besides this there is also a lot of unwanted communication attempts like SPAM. And there is noise, so much noise in the communication streams, which means there is data, we don’t understand, but read, as well as data, we can’t focus on.
“I just wanted to tell others, yeah, these are still my favorite tunes…”
But let’s first talk about the daily ways of dealing with (netaudio) music. At first, there is, let’s say, a gap between the time we find music, then downloading it, listening to it, maybe listening again and again and maybe again and possibly then, after days or weeks would be the right moment to give a feedback. This gap in time can also be seen as a disconnection from the source, from where we downloaded the music, which can also be seen from a usability perspective. A listener had to search and find the websource of the music to give the feedback. Before this, he has to want to give feedback, but why would he want to do that? But of course it would be possible. One example: I wrote reviews on archive.org, but years after the releases came out. I just wanted to tell others, yeah, these are still my favorite tunes and everybody has to listen to them. I am active in the netaudio world, so it’s no big deal, except for the point in time. But why should a listener do that, who maybe not knew the artist before, nor the label? I would say, there is no historic tradition to contact the producer of an artwork directly or via label. Maybe i am wrong.
“Netlabels get downloads from nearly all continents and countries in the world.”
At this point, we can also think about the topic, who in the world is talking about music. There are many cases, people just don’t talk about music. They are pure listeners, enjoying the waves, everyday. They could express their joy through a heart, stars or whatever to click next to a release on a website, but why should they come back to a single website, they visited some time ago? Maybe there hasn’t even been a possibility or they found the music shared somewhere else. Again, the “time gap” is active too. Another point is, that it is not very common in education to talk about music. Some know and may play an instrument, and they can also talk on musical aspects, but not the vast amount of people. Another point is the internationality. Netlabels get downloads from nearly all continents and countries in the world. I think, there also is a language and a cultural barrier. But lets assume, there are people, who love music (records, netaudio, whatever), who can talk about music. How do they do it? Classically they will talk to each other, to friends, which means in real life, drinking beer or meeting at work. The newer way is to talk via chat or IM. But a question: is it common to talk to unknown people about this, which includes the musicians and labels as well? So again: Why should a listener do this? The listener would do it, if he 1. would know, that the musician and label would like it and 2. the listener is able to express smth. in the language of the label and 3. would do it in an altruistic way then, to “jump” over the time- and usability-gap, do smth. that others, unknown people would like. This is about the listener to musician/label feedback.
As read in some comments there is also the topic of quality of the comments and feedback. It’s often, that the feedbacks consist of love and enjoy-messages, which is fine and motivates the musician a bit, although i guess, most musicians don’t need it this way, but it’s nice. I think, there are other ways for musicians to be motivated, like getting invited to a compilation participation.
I am one of the maintainers of the netlabel phonocake.org and we made a poll with our artists and they voted 80 to 20 % against comment boxes next to the releases. The main arguments were, that a release is finished and no serious discussion about it is necessary and 2. that there are other ways and platforms to express or to show that someone likes a release. And for us, the label, thats okay. The talk on the music shall be elsewhere, we are not an international website community.
“The point of a label brings me to the most important topic of this text…”
The point of a label brings me to the most important topic of this text… it’s the topic of nonverbal and maybe lets call it indirect feedback. If someone writes a recommendation or review in his private blog, this is indirect nonverbal feedback, which makes us happy. He or she selected and found us and found us worth to be mentioned. It’s also great, if someone takes a track for videos or movies or smth. like that, there are many forms of nonverbal expression of respect which is also a kind of feedback. For a label it is a great honour, if a musician, we know for years and whose music we silently love, sends us a demo. Or if someone puts a link to our website. Or if we meet somebody new in the city, and the topic comes to the label and he says, that he has known it for years. Thats rocking the EGO. But we don’t need it, because we don’t do it for this. We have quite different motivations, which could fill another text like this.
Another interesting topic is, what musicians want… they are not that much interested in feedback i guess, except for comments on an unfinished track at soundcloud. They mostly look, if they look for (online) contact, for communication and collaboration with other musicians. This is what my talk to many musicians shows. They want exchange on techniques, maybe collaboration with an acoustic instrument playing musician, help with mastering, info on new tools, infos on demo-making and so on. This has nothing to do with feedback, this has to do with communication and should be one of the main goals, because this will form the scene.
But of course, i think, there is way too less communication between labels together. The best would be if label maintainers would listen to other labels releases and discuss or get in contact. But that’s not the reality, at least not mine. One important reason is, that there is no single place to do so. I could imagine, that many label maintainers also think, that this communication is unnecessary. And it’s also a question of time. We don’t do music labels as our full time passion. I can imagine, that pro label owners have more time to listen to music. Fascinating it would be to know, if (indie) record label maintainers talk to each other. : ) Naturally, in a market situation, they could be seen as competitors. From the point of attention netlabels could also be seen as competitors, but they have the possiblity to come over this point and see themselves as comrades or colleagues or smth.
Finally I will tell how I listen to netaudio music: There are maybe ten netlabels I actively follow, in the sense of listening or trying to listen each release. These are for instance Yukiyaki, Tonatom, Kahvi, Stigae, XLR, Passage, Jumble, Swishcoteque, jisatsuken, Klitorik, Sublime Porte. And then there are some, i visit every half a year or so. Then it is great to find an online player on the site.
“This is the typical luxury problem in a capitalist society.”
Personally, my way of listening to music and the formats i listen to are quite diverse. I listen to netaudio EP’s, love digital mixtapes, preferably made by friends, radio, CD’s & records, online communities, audiobooks and so on. Often i get recommendations by friends and of course we have a private darknet filesharing system too (using Wuala). But we also meet to play records. Through the labels i am involved in I also listen to a lot of demos. And there is music i only can enjoy live. This is a wide mixture of formats and inputs. And music i love is listened to by me quite often. So, to be honest, i already feel quite saturated. I don’t really need new musical input. This is the typical luxury problem in a capitalist society. But it is possible to tempt and/or attract me. In my case this is with new demos or when friends make new releases or i find music by a new artist, maybe by accident. Then i also dig through his various releases in the net and find many new netlabels. But normally I don’t really search for new music often, except i am preparing a new dj mix, which i enjoy quite a lot to do. That’s the moment, when i start to search music, mainly in the netaudio world. At this point, i want to behave like a DJ in a record shop: listening and skipping 200 records to just choose 10. This is quite egoistic and I don’t think about that the musicians or labels might wish for feedback. I really don’t care in that moment. But in the end, when i have chosen a netaudio track from hundreds, it’s nonverbal communication again. But I also don’t care about the feedback topic while listening my fav albums. I only care in communities or when artists wish to have concrete feedback on their music, then i can write half a page to them, which tries to be a constructive critic. That action needs quite some of my attention and time, which i am willing to give, for friends. And friends are mostly connected to communities, online or offline.
So, what i want to say : Don’t look for feedback that much, look for real communication, write emails or in contact forms or find places actively instead of waiting or expecting things to happen. On the other hand I am sure, that the tools, sites and communities for netaudio and peeps will grow and communication possibilities for all active participants in the netaudio scene will grow.
parmon
www.phonocake.org
proofreading by Mumlan (Thank you. <3 )
Picture By: Andrew Mason
Really well put parmon. I think you have highlighted several key aspects of the netlabel scene (and at least a few of music consumption in general) here. I agree with you on being overwhelmed by the volume of stuff out there. I need time to absorb and appreciate music. I also don’t care about the latest “hot” thing, just music my soul resonates with, wherever it comes from.
As you know, we had a nice discussion the other day on these matters here in Dresden, where I quoted many things from this website and other sources. A few related quotes I find particularly right and which express things much better than I could are:
“Most of the time the only interaction some netlabels/artists have with anyone is a promo blurb about some new release — or ten new releases. There may as well be a mechanoid behind some of these labels. Do they listen to their peers? Do they even know their peers exist? Who knows? But hey, they have several new releases this month. Why even participate in a community if you don’t want to communicate?”
C. Reider
The following two I particularly like and without trying to be pedantic, I would advise artists and netlabel owners who seem to be in a hurry to “succeed”, to take this advice:
“Be patient – it can take months or years sometimes to reach critical mass. But it can happen, and it can happen organically.”
Darrell Burgan
“The bigger problem in getting something out there that works takes years and years, but most of all it takes a very special kind of devotion. It is a giving and taking, where the taking may have to wait a couple of years, yet we need to give and give to eventually reach that two way street.”
Mark Stolk
These come from:
http://www.vuzhmusic.com/blog/2010/11/03/response-to-silent-world-of-netlabels/
These quotes, as well as what parmon says above, reinforce my opinion that with netlabels we have the chance to experience _personal_ communication through music. Unfortunately, this cannot be on a massive scale, because as parmon said, most of us have conflicting passions, which do not allow us to fully commit to making music. This doesn’t mean we can’t make beautiful things happen though.
Another subject touched upon above is the fact that people don’t get the chance to actually _listen_ to music. They (and I include myself into “they”) usually have music as a background, while doing something else. Personally, this helps me to subconsciously filter out music I don’t like and mentally note down the music I want to delve into. But delving into takes _time_ for me. Which brings me to another point I want to make:
Slow down.
The two short quotes I pasted above kind of imply what I am about to say. I think that most people in this scene are probably like me and parmon: they don’t care about 0 day releases. For me, the currently available volume of netlabel music is abundant for my ‘delving into’ for at least a decade.
Suppose that people who are like me are a considerable part of the netaudio listeners in total (it is my impression that this is true, but I digress). Would they be able to keep up with the pace of artists / netlabels releasing music phrenetically, or would they eventually get drowned in the sheer volume of musical output and possibly give up on said artists / netlabels?
I believe that in order to listen to and get to love a piece of music and _believe_ in the person who made it, one needs time. If the releases are more and one tries to keep up, less attention will be paid to each individual release. Therefore, giving out too much music feels like disrespecting the individual artists who worked to make that music, by giving them less chances to stand out and be heard.
One might argue that quality music will always find its way to the surface. This mechanism is not unbiased though and will eventually favor those who actively pursue promotion. While this may not be a bad thing, I feel it has a hint of a commercialistic / capitalistic undertone, which I dislike. I’d much rather have a more “Zen” scene, where everything flows more naturally, where instead of certified “middle men” between producers and acceptors, everyone is a _mediator_. I find this a very attractive concept, but that’s because I have nothing else to gain from my music / netlabel: that’s the only purpose for me. Profit of any kind does not fit in such a picture.
Hello.
Forgive me for a slightly tangetial comment.
But I believe that CC and related licenses will come roaring back once some fundamental education ripples through the average user base.
Music companies are holding on to their last five years of profits, but soon once people learn at the gut level “If you use X copyrighted clip you will be sued” then the market will turn to CC-type licenses.
Well said.
I’ve noticed that commercial labels send me demo links to pages that allow streaming. The ZIP and artwork are not available for download until you provide feedback. Do you think this would be a good idea for netaudio?
I mix the odd netaudio mixtape and I’ve received some wonderful comments from artists, thanking me for including their music!!! wow. It should be me thanking them and everyone else thanking them.
I am a little upset sometimes to see dormant netlabels, because I want them to release forever! I was reluctant to send a comment on a 4 year old release. After reading this I’m going to make a comment.
I got some nice pointers from your article. Thanks a million.
Warren
Stefanos, Hi, to be honest, iam not that overwhelmed any more. It’s a fact, one can’t follow all the netreleases and this is like i felt in record shops fifteen years ago. So it’s more about finding good releases, that match our taste without being too much style-centric. I liked your top ten box you put at Memoryformat Blog. This is, next to mixes and podcast and selected review sites a great way to get a selection. And yesterday i found myself following a reviewer at archive.org. I really like it, when well known and active musicians or DJ’s write reviews there. If i know them and their music/taste/selection then i can expect good recommendations, even if the releases are four years old. To be honest, sometimes i wish this kind of “record shop situation”… to have a very quick player with all the newest releases very close. I think, online shops like wordandsound or ZeroInch are great for having such player, also persistant on the site. This is quite enjoyable when searching special tracks. I think, there are also sites for netaudio, which are close to that, but i know opinions, like Konrad’s (rowolo netlabel list, now clongclongmoo) who absolutely prefers to only link to the websites of the netlabels, because he sees this as an important point in the whole aspect of a netlabel, also to be independent from central sites, which is, of course, also quite understandable for me.
I like the comments from the discussion at the vuzh page you posted. These are great. And i follow your idea of having the chance for personal communication and also for a creative interacting between listeners, listeners to musicians and musicians to musicians. One last.fm developer once said in an interview in de:Bug: the future and goal is not to listen or stream or own the music, but to interact with the music, the story behind, the artist, the context. In my opinion, when this can bring to more communication then. Yesterday a friend told me of another idea: to combine a DJ mix playing online with popping up context data like a soundcloud comment, but telling stories about the artist and samples or whatever, while a track in the mix is playing.
Warren, Hi. Of course people and sites can force their visitors for feedback, although i wouldn’t do or recommend it, for the reasons i wrote… for instance excluding people with different languages. But what do those sites get? Mostly a “Like” or “Want to have” message, which, like said, is fine but not so relevant. But i might be wrong. Let’s ask them : ) Listening to streamed content is indeed a quite direct connection between listeners and creators, but maybe too close and quick to bring out a valuable comment. This direct commenting sounds quite similiar to Soundcloud timelined comments, although Soundcloud seems to have another, not so obvious, function bound together with the commenting in tracks: Sometimes I feel, that people only comment to create a “link” to their soundcloud page, which is okay, but I would say, this is kind of a fake feedback then and more or less real link. So fake feedback could also happen when you force peeps to fill out a feedback form. It’s the same with forcing people to fill in email adresses before downloading, like often seen at Bandcamp pages. I understand the background of the artists, but i really really do not like it, because in the newsletters, that will follow, there is often no unsubscribe link. Let’s say it clear: it’s SPAM then, even if i did like a release by the artist. So no wonder, i will put in a one time email adress to get the release. I like newsletters and think, this is the best way to reach people online directly, but the use of the newsletter also has to be free of choice.
Hi Parmon. Thanks for sharing your point of view with us.
Btw just for the record: I insist that FB-Like, retweet and any kind of mention is a form of feedback too, or as you called it – indirect feedback, but it’s still a feedback :)
The first form of feedback is the decision to download a release, maybe after pre-listening to it. Apart from that the level of direct feedback on the internet for free information, free software or services has always been very low.
Also, another short comment regarding the people who consider themselves free music sharers, but complain about the lack of feedback: if _something_, material or not, is expected in return when offering a product, then the product is not fully accepted as free. If one is sharing music for free but constantly asking for feedback and publicity and bitching when they don’t come, then the music is not actually free.
Free music – is the opposite of commercial music which customer has to buy. That’s all.
All the other ‘parameters’ are far-fetched. At least that’s how most people define ‘free music’.
have 1 thing to add to this discussion: t61 done right.
@ Alexander: I consistently disagree with you. Even if most people defined free music in a certain way, that still doesn’t make it the right way. Free means I have to do absolutely _nothing_ in return for what I am provided. Giving something _for free_ doesn’t mean that it is _free_. No amount of opinions can change this _fact_. Demanding feedback, an e-mail address or whatever else, material or non-material, in return for providing music means that the music is not free. There are websites trying to give ‘scientific’ definitions of free, but I think it’s as simple as the above sentences.
Expectations are expactations and forcing ppl to do something in return of getting music is still forcing.
Concidering your two last comments you don’t see any difference?
Anyway I’m not that person who belives that sharing music for free is the main goal and Great Ideal. More than that I’m absolutely sure that most artists on the scene would sign the record deal with a proper label if they have a chance.
If it would be more effective for our artists I would transform Mixgalaxy Recs into commercial label without any doubts. But it is not at the moment (and I doubt it will ever be).
@ Alexander – As you say, the commercial model will never work for 99% of the artists in this scene, it doesn’t even work for the majority of artists who’re already involved in it, that’s reason in itself to have some idealism about the free sharing model. I agree with you, to a degree, that creating ways for artists to profit whilst sharing their music for free would be good for obvious reasons but this alternative exists because the commercial system has failed, we need to evolve that rather than trying to emulate the old model. And not just for artists and the immediate audience either, there’s a whole raft of more abstract cultural reasons to do it.
@ Stefanos – As Alexander said – hoping for and encouraging feedback isn’t demanding it and while there’s no element of forced involvement I don’t like the idea of audiences stubbornly refusing to contribute simply because they don’t have to. Plus your model of ‘free’ is just that, your model, I understand your reasons for believing in it but it’s not a universally accepted concept and there’s no reason to assume/assert that it should be.
Anyway, lots here that merits a reply but it’s Saturday morning and I’m not quite up to wading through it all. Post again later hopefully. All good though.
“that’s reason in itself to have some idealism about the free sharing model”
In my opinion, it’s not the reason. It’s just a possibility to be heard by people that are not your friends/relatives :)
I mean it’s like rain. It’s just exists. What so special about it?
I remember the time long before Jamendo and current netaudio trend – there were sites like mp3.com or soundclick. com where unsigned artists uploaded their music. And there were special message boards like Funender.com where those mp3.com artists streamed each other’s tracks for better chart positions.
Yeah kinda cheating and naive, but at least those artists understood what they were doing and what for. They all had a purpose.
And then suddenly this new paradigm appears. It emerged that sharing music for free is already a purpose. o_O
I wrote my essae because as a netlabel curator I have been looking for ways and methods of raising the niche our netlabel belongs to a new level. That’s why I was talking about hubs/centralization/communication – whatever. While many netaudio enthusiasts are just fine with pure free music idea which actually hasn’t been changed since mp3.com days – more and more people are involved in producing/composing music, they want to be heard and that’s why they upload tracks to Jamendo, Soundcloud, Bandcamp etc. or release it on netlabels.
Nothing that outstanding. Just raindrops keep falling.
[...] Feedback most wanted… really? [...]
@ Alexander:
“More than that I’m absolutely sure that most artists on the scene would sign the record deal with a proper label if they have a chance.”
Then the scene you are involved in is very very different than the one I am involved in. I’m in regular contact with several people who either run netlabels or release music on netlabels and I don’t know a single person who thinks the way you think.
@ Dylan:
“Plus your model of ‘free’ is just that, your model, I understand your reasons for believing in it but it’s not a universally accepted concept and there’s no reason to assume/assert that it should be.”
Regardless of what my model is, the word ‘free’ means something, as does the word ‘freedom’. Admittedly, it may mean different things to different people, so again we are stuck in the details of terminology. And it is true that I feel more comfortable with ‘free’ meaning what I described above: something that can be acquired for absolutely nothing in return. I do not know if this is universally accepted, I just know that it is widely accepted among my peers and that is enough for me.
I’m not assuming / asserting anything as regards to what anything should be. I just don’t like the idea of people stubbornly demanding ‘contributions’, in the sense of personal gratification, when nothing of the sort is due. If some kind of reward comes to one’s efforts, fair enough. If it doesn’t come, still fair enough. That doesn’t mean that people who feel the need to make music will stop making it.
[...] Feedback Most Wanted @ Netlabelism.com VN:F [1.9.7_1111]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)Share/Bookmark [...]
if you can’t call it ‘free’ music then what do you call it? barter. You give me your email address, we give you a free LP. Some would call that a bad trade:)
I think there is a need for *encouraging* feedback. Commercial releases get instant feedback when they are bought. I parted with hard earned cash for this album = I like your music enough to part with my cash.
Sometimes feedback and encouragement is the only thing that keeps some artists producing work.
We are humans, we crave for a pat on the back, a wink, a ‘well done’, ‘maybe if you changed this a little’,'I didn’t like this release but I think you’re a talented musician’. We need interaction, communications, encouragement, knowledge sharing…
So you release a free EP, you receive no feedback. Are you confident enough in your own work to continue? Nothing wrong with feedback. Positive or negative.
@Stefanos Kourtis “I’m absolutely sure that most artists on the scene would sign the record deal with a proper label if they have a chance”
I agree with you. Not sure what you mean by ‘proper label’ :))
That last statement was mine :)
Proper label is the label which is able to satisfy artist’s expectations in exposure/hype/feedback/cash – depends on current artist level and skills. And niche :)
I share the same point of view. And I’m sure that thousands of artists who give their music for free – do it not just for to praise Free Music Sharing ideal. It’s cool to say so in interview though.