How Do You Get A Record Company To Listen To Your Song?

[Griff]

Say you've finished a CD of original songs. Maybe they're great, maybe they suck. But how do you find out if they're great or they suck? Many, if not most, recording artists don't write all their own material. They depend on songwriters to give them that next big hit, or at least the filler for their next CD. How do you get your songs into the hands (ears?) of record companies and performers?

Most record companies won't accept unsolicited or unrequested songs. If they show up in the mail, the companies just trash 'em. But every songwriter was an unknown at one time or another. So how does a newbie songwriter get his stuff listened to by people that matter? Do you have to hire an agent? If so, how do you find one? Do you enter one of those song writing contests, like the John Lennon Contest?

Anybody know what the process is for getting your original material at least listened to, instead of dumped without a second glance?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Mark

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by Griff
Anybody know what the process is for getting your original material at least listened to, instead of dumped without a second glance?
If all you want is a critique there are songwriter's organizations that have critiquing services from pro writers and publishers. NSAI is one. There are also some writers who critique on the side for a fee, usually high.

The sad fact is there are 1,000 songs coming in the mail not worth the A&R guy's time to listen to (or the producer, or whomever) for every one that is worth his time. So they'll ask publishers they know to send them good stuff and anything not specifically requested gets trashed. Even if you know someone who knows someone, you've got to have something really special before anyone will be willing to stick his neck out for you.

[LSchefman]

You can hire a well-connected entertainment industry lawyer to shop your stuff, and yes, it's expensive.

[trisonic]

I can only speak for myself but when I used to do it I would listen to everything handed to me.

Two points:

1. I would never listen beyond three songs (usually only the first one).
Simply a matter if time.

2. I would take it more seriously if the band (or whatever) already had a "pro" manager or someone I had heard of representing them.

What you have to remember is that these guys want to find "the next big thing" - I turned down "Oxygene" - Ha! We all have off days.....
My first boss turned down The Beatles (the tape stunk) but he did sign The Rolling Stones, no one is perfect.....

Best, Pete.

[trisonic]

Originally posted by LSchefman
You can hire a well-connected entertainment industry lawyer to shop your stuff, and yes, it's expensive.

Hey, Les, Great minds think alike.........or something.......


Best, Pete.

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by LSchefman
You can hire a well-connected entertainment industry lawyer to shop your stuff, and yes, it's expensive.
Those I know who sometimes shop songs do so very, very rarely. They have to be pretty impressed to even consider it. It's not like anyone off the street can simply hire them to plug songs.

There are also fee-based "song pluggers," well-known and respected pros who shop songs from established writers to publishers for one-shot contracts.

It boils down to this: no one wants his time wasted. Anyone who can get your songs in front of someone who can actually get them cut has his own reputation to consider and won't simply "shop your songs" (at least with any chance of success) only because you walked up to him with a check in your hand. The songs have got be of a certain commercial calibre to start with. Besides, they're probably flooded with CDs every day (from people just as willing to share their millions as you) that they don't ever get a chance to hear. So the question is...

...how do you get this person to hear your songs? :D

[tonefreak]

I would spend more time gaining a following than shopping the songs around. Getting the word out can be more effective than getting some exec to listen to your stuff.

garageband.com has a service where people will critique your song. Entering song contests are good. Basically, do whatever you can to get your music out there.

[LSchefman]

>>Those I know who sometimes shop songs do so very, very rarely. They have to be pretty impressed to even consider it.<<

There are plenty who will present material simply because they're retained to do so, and some of them are bigger names than you might think. :eek:

[loudboy]

Judging from what I hear on the radio, I think that a record label person would be about the last person I'd ask to give me an opinion on whether my songs sucked or not. <g> "Well, you're no Ashlee Simpson, but if you work REAL hard..."

Record 'em, then get your butt out there and play 'em for people, they'll let you know.

When you've sold 10,000 copies at shows and from your website, the labels will find YOU.

Loudboy

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by LSchefman
There are plenty who will present material simply because they're retained to do so, and some of them are bigger names than you might think.
OK. Song plugger, like I said. But I doubt that they represent many unpublished new writers going for their first cut, and I doubt that the sole redeeming quality of the material is that the author can afford the service. That makes no sense. The songs would have to be commercially viable, otherwise who would continue to meet with them?

Would you listen to crappy material just because the person who brought it to you was paid to push it onto your desk? Even if you did it once, would you do it twice?

[Griff]

Good information. Thanks guys.

[LSchefman]

>> I doubt that the sole redeeming quality of the material is that the author can afford the service. That makes no sense. The songs would have to be commercially viable, otherwise who would continue to meet with them?<<

There are lawyers and others who will take on the task just to make a buck off the artist.

I didn't say it was a good idea.

It was a warning.

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by LSchefman
It was a warning.
:confused:
OK...

[LooksLikeBass]

Sell 10,000 copys and the record company will find YOU

I wish...

Although it does definately help! I would agree with the statement of "do whatever you can to get your music out there"

[Igneous]

Those days are long past. Unfortunately.

I would say build a good following, in whatever area you are. Promote yourself intelligently, and cross your fingers to hope that the local radio station really wants to push your stuff. Be weary of signing things because these days you could do most of the work yourself(ani-difranco).

getting "signed" doesnt mean what it used to.

Tour,tour,tour(of course if your not a human who has to survive and pay bills etc... then you can do this like you were 18 again!)

If shows keep putting you in the red(beer,gas) think about if its worth it. pick carefully. And no damn benefit shows(well, limit them!)

Networking is most of it. There is virtually no artist development anymore. Thats why your seeing these bands that are in there 30's now starting to make it as opposed to being 19(VH)

As someone who lives in an arear that has spawned MANY successful acts in the industry lately, I have personally watched my friends go through the motions of what its like. A signing certainly doesnt mean lasting power.

Its a gloomy subject but the truth be told its about 95 percent luck and the othe 5 percent talent(or not even)

Good luck!!!!:dude

[Griff]

Thanks + 2 guys.

[LSchefman]

This is a true story I've told recently in another thread, but it bears repeating.

My partner in my indie record label is a well known entertainment lawyer, whose clients include such Detroit area industry successes as Eminem, Kid Rock, P-Funk, etc. It's a long list.

Recently, he presented one of our artists and one of his law clients to the president of a well known industry giant major label. The president of the label said, "Cool stuff. I like it. So remind me," he said facetiously, "what TV show do these artists star in? "

Why was he presenting our artist to a major? Simple. We want major label distribution. The other artist was simply someone very talented who paid him to shop a deal.

So getting your stuff listened to by a major player can be done without much difficulty by someone who is well-connected, but that doesn't mean SQUAT. No one in the biz is going to say, "Oh my God, this is IT, the stuff we've been waiting for all these years! Sign this guy immediately, and get me his autographed picture for my office wall!"

In the past two years, downloads have taken the industry from a 40 billion dollar business to a 26 billion dollar business. That 14 billion has forced the industry to trim back, go for "sure things", look for the short dollar instead of the long haul, and has caused a million other problems, and IT'S GOING TO GET WORSE. The industry will shrink another ten billion or so over the next couple of years.

Acts that were being signed with a 500K advance are now being signed for 200K, and the ones that would have been signed for 100K a few years ago? Well, this is the truth, the labels are now offering artists stuff like "3 months rent." (!)

Of course this wholesale reduction in available money is not only going to tie the industry's hands, it's already closed some pretty big and famous studios that used to deliver that "major label sound", it's meant that sessions have to be a lot shorter and as much as possible done in home studios or project studios, etc.

Now, if no one is making any money, no one is going to do the blocking and tackling necessary to break an act; what's in it for them?

The business is in bad shape, a major label isn't necessarily the thing - though not much viable has come along to replace it, Ani DiFranco notwithstanding, there aren't many artists with her drive and business acumen. Oh yes, it takes business acumen.

Go ahead, try to get booked at decent paying gigs making your own phone calls; not many people can take the rejection until their career makes that takeoff turn.

[LSchefman]

>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by LSchefman
It was a warning.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


OK...<<

Yes, Michael, a WARNING. Artists are desperate to get their work heard by some industry person, which is not hard for a halfway decently connected lawyer to accomplish easily, and it is not hard to separate said desperate artist from his/her money.

The lawyer has their coupla grand retainer. It took a letter or two, maybe a phone call to get the record and press kit into the hands of someone who throws it on the pile. If nothing happens, "Well, I got it to Joe Blow, the VP of Capitol, and I guess he didn't like it." Or the very deadly, "He thought it was promising. They want to hear more stuff. By the way, I already used up your retainer, here's your bill for the balance."

That's a LOT different than meeting with someone you know really IS looking for new material and artists, because you actually have some real, meaningful contacts, sitting there with the person, and putting your reputation on the line because you believe in the work.

[LSchefman]

Oh yeah...how do you know the difference?

This is just my opinion.

A good entertainment lawyer will want to see you perform; he/she might turn out for a few shows. He/she will listen to the recordings you've made, and if he or she lacks a lot of musical judgment, will do more than play the record for a secretary and his kids and say, "Whaddaya think of this?"

Instead, that lawyer might play the record for producers in the area, or friends in the business, other artists, etc.

This will take place BEFORE a retainer is quoted. The lawyer should also realistically assess how much work will be necessary to bring the artist up to speed, improve the shows, the press kit, the recordings, and other essentials.

It matters less how many famous artists the lawyer has relationships with than whether that lawyer is experienced in the area of law, believes in the work, likes your live show, likes the band, whatever.

If someone you're interested in having represent you has done the background work first, and has a genuine interest in you as an artist, you'll see it, and you will get better work from that person IMHO.

[Griff]

Thanks X 3 (or is it 4 by now? Regardless, Gracias.)

[MichaelK]

The reason I said "OK" with that "huh?" icon was because your original post read more like a suggestion than a warning.

That's all.

[Orren]

Originally posted by LSchefman
In the past two years, downloads have taken the industry from a 40 billion dollar business to a 26 billion dollar business. That 14 billion has forced the industry to trim back, go for "sure things", look for the short dollar instead of the long haul, and has caused a million other problems, and IT'S GOING TO GET WORSE. The industry will shrink another ten billion or so over the next couple of years.

I think it's pretty reductive to say that the 14 billion shrinkage is due completely to no other factor on this planet except illegal downloading. I teach 13-15 year old kids every week, and in that same amount of time, I noticed that the focus of the boys switched from music to video games and the girls from music to actresses. When I'd chat about what was cool and why, it turns out, the major's shortsightedness is working against them. The kids were finding music boring. "Radio sucks," "MTV Sucks," "There's nothing good anymore" is what I used to hear. Why? Because they also thought that most of what the majors were pushing them were shit, and so their easily captured attention moved to other areas of flash and corporate marketing. That's not to say none of them downloaded music, sure they had. But not as much as you'd think, because they didn't find it worth downloading.

Notice I'm talking in the past tense. Over the last 6 months or so, I noticed a change. When I'd give the kids free time, I began to see first a few kids, then half the class, now everyone whip out their iPods. And the kids without iPods are borrowing them from non-Jewish kids (its religious education I teach).

I asked them how they get their songs. A few of them said from buddies who bring over MP3 CDs. But 90% of the classes told me that it was from buying .99 cent songs on the iTunes Music Store. And here was the cool part--they were finding music on their own! They were listening to other, random buyer's "iMixes" (meaning, users sharing playlists of songs), checking them out, and buying songs. They'd listen to their favorite artist's playlists, and buy songs. So these kids had really eclectic iPods! Teens with reggae and rock and dance and gansta rap! It was great to see--they were excited again, but finding music that other teens listened to, and getting into it. Sure, one group of white Jews is not the whole world, but you can be sure that their entire suburban southern Californian schools think the same, and probably their friends in other schools, and so on, and so forth...

Do I think this will give the majors back their 14 billion? No. Will it stop illegal downloads? No. But it will help to get kids back into music. And they do feel that the iPod and the iTunes Music Store is the best music store available (no point arguing sound quality with them--time to start mixing for earbuds... :/ ).

And I think it speaks well for independent artists who can get into the iTunes Music Store and other such online music stores. Even CD Baby can get you there, on consignment. This doesn't mean the majors are dead, or even starting to smell--big money promotion will always be the fastest and most sure fire way to brainwash the masses. But it means that the promise of "access" that the Internet offered artists is finally beginning to happen. And it's damn exciting!

And you know what? I bet it wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been for illegal downloads becoming so amazingly popular, so fast.

Orren

[LSchefman]

>>I think it's pretty reductive to say that the 14 billion shrinkage is due completely to no other factor on this planet except illegal downloading<<

Interesting how you put that; I certainly never claimed that no other factor on this planet has caused problems for the industry. One big factor is CD copying; another is illegal production outside the US, and the distribution of these infringing materials all over the world. But the biggest problem, by far, and the one that most clearly correlates with industry sales dropoff, is illegal file sharing.

Record sales were down 5% in 2001; they fell another 8.7% in 2002; they fell another 3.5% in 2003. In 2003, more than 1000 retail stores closed. I do not have the numbers yet for 2004, but estimates are that this trend has continued.

This puts the squeeze not only on the labels; in turn, promotional and tour money is reduced, recording funds are reduced, advances are reduced, etc. This in turn puts the screws to the industry that supplies the labels, most dissapointing to me is what has happened to some of the great studios.

OK, so what's the source of the problem?

I recently attended a seminar at University of Michigan law school, on some of these problems - I'm pretty involved in the music biz and legal issues surrounding it. Panelists were lawyers in the industry mostly on the artist side of the table; law professors; artists; producers, etc.

They were armed with numbers. The downward curve for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003 are mirrored by the upward curve in illegal file sharing, CD copying, etc. to a "T". The 13-15 year olds you know are a small segment of the problem, which started with college students. Dorms, as you know, got high speed internet long before it became common in homes. And college students have traditionally been a huge market for records.

Peer-to-peer file sharing dwarfs the iTunes of the world; where iTunes may do 50 million to 75 million in sales in a year, the P-toP networks illegally share tens of BILLIONS of files. There are sites for illegal sharing all over the world. Then add the problem of CD burning, etc, and you have a very real problem that needs to be solved. It's quite easy for me to believe that in a year when tens of billions of songs are illegally shared, a corresponding dropoff in sales will occur, and that is exactly what has happened in the years since 2000.

The anecdotal evidence of your 13-15 year olds is what kids tell the teacher. That's usually what the kids want the teacher to believe, and rarely the full story, no matter how cool the teach is.

However, my point was that the labels are going for "sure things" because revenues are down. It wasn't to debate whether the cause is downloading or anything else. That revenues are down is a fact, and that fact makes it more difficult for new artists to have their material considered for publication.

The title of this post is "How do you get a record company to listen to your song?"

I was speaking to that question, trying to tell the person asking it why it's difficult now, and getting more difficult; the last thing I want to do is open the can of worms relating to downloads; we've beaten that horse to death here for years.

[enharmonic]

Avoid major labels like the plague. They're a sinking ship. Once the big acts realize that they can do it on their own, they won't re-sign, and once all of the cash cows are gone, the industry will dry up...just as it should for what it has done to music.

What do you hope to accomplish by getting a lable to listen to your music? They will do everything they can to take your publishing...which is your lifesblood as an artist.

I recently came to the conclusion that I wanted a major deal for all of the wrong reasons. I had to figure out if I wanted to be a musician, or be famous. Odds of getting famous are much better when you have big PR $$ behind you...but that doesn't mean that you're worth it...or even remotely talented. All it means is that you are a marketable product...not unlike a jag of bleach, or a sugary snack food. That's about how much the majors care about your music.

Find people who care about what you are doing, and do it for them. You might not retire to your own private island, but at the end of the day, you will have your integrity, and your masters :)

[LSchefman]

>>They will do everything they can to take your publishing...which is your lifesblood as an artist.<<

Actually, none of the majors insist on publishing any more. They may ask, just to see if the artist's lawyer is awake, but none require it.

The reason artists want a major label deal is for the distribution and radio promotion. It is VERY difficult for an artist to get distribution on his or her own, and radio promotion costs $200-300K for EACH major market.

Since airplay sells records, artists want some, and most need a major to get it. If, as you say, you value your publishing and your masters, remember that they are worth very little to you if you remain unknown and unplayed.

While the majors aren't good for everyone, to be sure, don't count them out just yet. There are a lot of people talking, and very few proving that alternative distribution is going to work for a non-already-famous artist.

The Ani DiFrancos of the world are few and far between.

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by LSchefman
If, as you say, you value your publishing and your masters, remember that they are worth very little to you if you remain unknown and unplayed.
Bingo. 50% of something beats 100% of nothing. But a major label deal as an artist is only one way to make a living, and even if you land it, it's extremely difficult to get to the point where you're even in the black.

There are many, many market niches, ways to make decent money in this business. But you have to find yours for yourself. Odds are, your best bet is to develop and expand what people are already raving to you about.

[LSchefman]

>>developing a "long-term view" (to quote LS) of one's own 'career' --- as well some psychological flexibility, and 80 tons of perseverance --- might help, as well<<

Yes, yes!

To add to that, one last bit: keep your overhead low.

[sears]

> How Do You Get A Record Company To Listen To Your Song?

Start a record company.

[hemlock]

Originally posted by LSchefman


The Ani DiFrancos of the world are few and far between.

Although she does run her own label, Ani became successful like most musicians- non-stop touring and selling CDs at shows. Not many have the drive and opportunity to do that for 5+ years.

One of the things I like a great deal about her is that she sees touring as independent from records. She tours to do shows, not in support of a new record.

What ever happened to Andy Stochansky? I always thought he was a great drummer.

[Gerry]

Originally posted by hemlock
One of the things I like a great deal about her is that she sees touring as independent from records. She tours to do shows, not in support of a new record.



That seems to be a common trend with many very successful acts who control their own cash flows, - ie, The Stones, Who, Doobies, Neil Diamond, Barry Manilow (- hey, we're talking the business end here, OK?)-
As you say, when you "tour to support a new record", you're probably at the mercy of the Record company's "accounting" protocols, where you generate several million dollars for them in record sales but end up owing them $100,000 when the tour's over.

[melondaoust]

Originally posted by hemlock
What ever happened to Andy Stochansky? I always thought he was a great drummer.

Gone solo, doing the singer-songwriter thing. His record "Five Star Hotel" is pretty good.