Skip to main content

The Scope of Artist-Entrepreneurship (conference proceeding)


Citation: Peltz, Philipp. "The scope of artist-entrepreneurship in the music industry."Instruments of Change: Proceedings of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music Australia-New Zealand 2010 Conference. International Association for the Study of Popular Music, 2011.

[...]

Ambitious musical activities outside of the established structures of the music industry are not new. The number of amateur and unsigned musicians has always outweighed that of professional and signed musicians. Today, the distinction on the basis of being signed by a record label or not is blurring. Decreasing entry barriers enable hobbyists and unsigned artists to enter established markets on a large scale.

The present research project utilised two datasets to estimate the total size of artist-entrepreneurship in the music industry. The findings reveal the sheer scope of this phenomenon. According to the figures, there are five times as many artist-entrepreneurs than artists signed by record labels struggling for consumer's attention. On average, every artist-entrepreneur produces and releases the same amount of music as the group of traditional artists through established structures. Thus, the total amount of new music seeking consumer attention increases by a factor of five. Artist-entrepreneurs generated sales of roughly $7 billion US in 2008. From the data one cannot discern if sales are cannibalized from the established industry or an increase of the total market size. Either way, established players have to rethink their business models and adapt to the new situation. How far this, in the words of Andrew Keen, "flood of amateurs” leads to a loss of culture or to a counter-movement to the mass media and the loss of individuality as criticised by Theodore W. Adorno can not be answered yet.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bibliography of my thesis 'Artist Entrepreneurship In The Music Industry'

Ackerman-Haywood, J. (2010). Artist follows inner drive toward full-time art career. The Grand Rapids Press.  Retrieved January 3, 2012, from http://blog.mlive.com/runningwithneedles/2010/10/artist_follows_inner_drive_tow.html Adler, M. (2006). Stardom and talent. Handbook on the Economics of Art and Culture, 1, 895-906.   Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, White women. Health Psychology, 19(6), 586.   Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (1977). The Culture Industry: enlightenment as mass deception. In J. Curran, M. Gurevitch & J. Woollacott (Eds.), Mass Communication and Society (pp. 349-389). London: Edward Arnold in association with The Open University Press.   Adorno, T. W. (1941). On popular music. Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, 9(1), 17–48.   Ahlkvist, J. A., & Fisher, G. (2000). And the hits

Digital Distribution Models Reviewed: The Content Provider’s Perspective (book chapter)

Citation (APA): Peltz, P. (2013). Digital Distribution Models Reviewed: The Content Provider’s Perspective . In Music Business and the Experience Economy (pp. 99-117). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Abstract Digital distribution has surpassed physical distribution in key markets and will soon be the dominant music distribution model in Australia. Four different business models (free, ad-funded, pay-per-use and subscription-based) and two different music delivery methods (downloading and streaming) currently compete in the market place. The author analyses each distribution model available in Australia and evaluates advantages and disadvantages from the content provider’s perspective. The most striking development is the blurring line between promotion and distribution. Content providers can either lower the barriers to access music in order to facilitate rapid music circulation and create a strong promotional effect to support various revenue streams; or heighten the barriers to acc

Some thoughts about where we are regarding digital distribution in 2012 (excerpt of an upcoming book chapter)

Digital distribution has surpassed physical distribution in key markets like the USA or UK and, thus, established as the dominant distribution practice. While the media often speaks of the next killer app that will revolutionize music consumption and dominate music distribution, the analysis of the current situation suggests that different forms of distribution will coexist. The reason is that consumers value music differently, prefer different formats and expect different experiences from consumption. The same applies to content providers. Each artist or record label is in a specific situation pursuing different goals. As a result, a variety of different distribution models have emerged, each with pros and cons for a certain situation. For content providers it is important to choose the appropriate distribution model that supports the overall strategy. The most striking development in digital distribution is the blurring line between promotion and