*gags*

instant_zen wrote:i won't pass judgement on the validity or artistic prowess of anyone's band, but i just think that if a band is good enough, they should be able to network and "get out there" without using myspace as a tool. the way i see it, most of the bands that use myspace as their *primary* (important emphasis here) means of networking are largely crappy ripoff genre bands that have little new to offer to the musical realm.

i say this, mind you, with the mentality that i am one such musician. i write songs for myself, and play in a band for the two other people that play in that band. i think it's an incredible release of tension, and i enjoy it a great deal, but i have no intention of forcing my personal artistic output on others.

that's my biggest problem with myspace: it's just another form of commercial. i don't need to be bombarded with anymore commercials. i avoid t.v. because i hate commercials. i don't need an analogous venue on the internet (yes, i know this could be taken a million ways, but you know what i mean).

again, i'll admit to using it. but i don't use it for booking shows, or for selling CDs, or for any other type of networking. i think networking over the internet is largely null and void until you make some sort of real contact (i.e. telephone, real mail, or meeting in person).

I don't use it for any of the things you mentioned either but as a tool to allow people to listen to your music it is a valuable - and relatively democratic - resource. Ten years ago it was pretty simple in the UK, you made a record, you sent it to John Peel and if you got lucky he played it. You could get distribution OK and with a few phone calls could tour the country and sell enough records to get your money back.
That's not happening anymore, there are no outlets to allow people to hear your music in a 'non-pushy' way. If you've spent time, effort and your own cash putting a record out then fuck it, it needs to sell copies to allow you to recoup the cash. I don't have a bottomless pit of money you see? So things like Myspace are valuable because they don't cost any money and they are widely accessible.
I can't vouch for the US but in the UK there is an underground of bands that might get in the music press every so often or get some attention and then there is something below that that doesn't even make a blip on the radar. Which is why Americans moaning that there's no good UK bands cracks me up - how could they have heard them? But that's another point.
All I know is that people have ordered records my friend has put out on his label because they heard the band through Myspace and liked it. That is fucking AMAZING. End of story. He's shipping out Cds to Miami, to Copenhagen, to Moscow. Still small time but resources like this are such a help. I often think people rally against things like this without ever thinking about why they do it.

also, there are also several genres of music where 'playing out' regular is really an option - e.g. ambient/electronica, etc - so in that case, Myspace is very handy in getting that sort of music out to the 'masses'

gjhardwick wrote:also, there are also several genres of music where 'playing out' regular is really an option - e.g. ambient/electronica, etc - so in that case, Myspace is very handy in getting that sort of music out to the 'masses'

You mean "isn't really an option" you mong.

It's also like a big, condensed mailing list.

New albums and tours are sent out in bulletins and it's all very unintrusive (compared to getting 20 e-mails a day from a bunch of record labels and band websites).

instant_zen wrote:i won't pass judgement on the validity or artistic prowess of anyone's band, but i just think that if a band is good enough, they should be able to network and "get out there" without using myspace as a tool. the way i see it, most of the bands that use myspace as their *primary* (important emphasis here) means of networking are largely crappy ripoff genre bands that have little new to offer to the musical realm.

Haha...wow..you must nice life, huh? I guess you don't have rent and a car payment and have to feed and clothe yourself. I guess you aren't like the rest of us who have to hold down a full-time job in addition to pursuing our musical ambitions. That is the reality of myself and everyone else I know in a band. There is not always time to "get out there".

It must be nice.

It is a very awesome tool for the independent artist.

the only thing i don't understand is, why do we seem to need it? how the hell did bands in the early 80s (or even the early 90s, pre-internet) network? how the hell did they do it? my point is, there must have been some more substantial, real way to network that involved--Gasp!--actually talking to people and actually making physical contact with people and not subjecting yourself to some cutthroat internet resource in which your success relies solely on your ability to post 40 "bulletins" a day.

as far as you UK-ers go, i can't really say anything about England, since i don't live there, but i can sorta see where you're coming from. Americans have no excuse. one more time, i'll repeat:

how did American bands network pre-internet? why do we need the internet?

answer me this, and i will be happy.

instant_zen wrote:how did American bands network pre-internet? why do we need the internet?

answer me this, and i will be happy.

I don't have an answer that will make you happy. I don't think anyone does.

Yes, bands networked pre-internet. Musicians networked pre-telephone as well. I know several bands who've booked 1-3 week tours through the use of email exclusively. It's not a bad thing. I know people who racked up hundreds of dollars worth of phone bills booking shows just 10 years ago.

I just booked a show in Kansas City, MO at a venue who prefers to book bands via internet/email. From sending the initial email to getting a positive response took about 18 hours.

Of course it's better to talk to people directly, but that's not always an option. Especially for guys like me who don't really like people.

I look forward to us beating this dead horse for a while longer.

instant_zen wrote:my point is, there must have been some more substantial, real way to network that involved--Gasp!--actually talking to people and actually making physical contact with people

just because one has an internet presence doesn't mean he or she is a shut-in, and not also making efforts in the quote unquote real world.

Eksvplot wrote:

instant_zen wrote:my point is, there must have been some more substantial, real way to network that involved--Gasp!--actually talking to people and actually making physical contact with people

just because one has an internet presence doesn't mean he or she is a shut-in, and not also making efforts in the quote unquote real world.

i suppose this is beginning to tap into not just my distrust of myspace, but my distrust of the internet in general. i use it for entertainment (see, this), but i'm really uncomfortable with the social barrier it creates around each of its users, and don't like the fact that it's so often used for "serious" business interaction.

i have to go to a lecture presently, but i'll be back to explain in further detail why i think the internet is a negative social trend. also, i don't think this is a dead horse at all. i think it's one that's very much alive, and one whose mouth we need to more closely examine.