Do Musicians Really Need to Starve for Their Art?

In my last post I listed several “Free Music” sites that exist. While there seems to be an understanding that there is a future in “Free Music” distribution, no one seems to agree 100% on how the industry should be managed: commercially or non-commercially.

In principal, I think one of the most pure embodiments of the "free music" concept is Alonetone.com. Alonetone is completely severed from any form of music industry with commercial interests, which as an artist myself, I find completely appealing. But I just make music for fun. I’m not trying to put food on the dinner table with my material. Which brings me to my question: why the hell is there a need to see professional artists starve to validate their work?

The point I'm trying to make is that the new "Free Music" industry model should be capable of providing financial vehicles to professional artists based directly upon the appreciation of the public. Under the major record label industry model artist profits were based directly upon the appreciation of the public as a result of heavy influence by the major labels.

It can take a lot of money, time, and talent to make a truly high quality album that people love. So why shouldn’t artists be able to make a buck in return?

In Alonetone’s “about” section you’ll read:

“[T]here are plenty of websites for musicians to upload their music. Why alonetone?
Well, most of the 'free' services you'll run into elsewhere are running ads, funded by investors, or actually owned by media conglomerates. In general, they are hoping making money off of your "content"...erm...music. Most music communities are overly obsessed with genres and popularity, and we're just not turned on by that. Time for something new, don't you think? alonetone was started to provide a non-commercial alternative. Something useful, something different, something that the musicians can feel like they own."

So to me, Alonetone is an excellent site for the casual musician who wishes to post their original music that they in hopes of it being shared to people who want to hear it. However, I don’t agree that the commercial world is something that “Free Music” sites need to fear. In sharp contrast, I’m not saying post adds everywhere (no one hates clutter more than myself), but I do think we should try to embrace it.

Free Music sites simply eliminate the need for major label management of artists. Fans can explore and share their favorite music with their friends to their hearts content; however, if someone is trying to make a buck off of the musicians content, the musician should receive a kickback. That includes the “free music” sites themselves. Indeed, SoundSprout is completely transparent with regards to profit sharing with musicians. The important part I think of what SoundSprout is doing is building the infrastructure for which musicians who distribute their work for free to their fans can also be justly compensated not only by their fans, but also for commercial uses of their works.

In the newly emerging “free music” industry, up-and-coming musicians will need a home just as much as amateur musicians. If we don’t give them one, they’ll just go back to hopelessly seeking the ease-and-comfort of the major label contracts.

In the end, our goal for SoundSprout is to be more than a site that musicians feel like they own, rather like an employee-owned company it is a site that we collectively actually own.