I think that the direction of the discussion has brought forth a really important point. The industry is developing many different outlets for creative work in all areas of media. This development has come as a result of the ever growing and changing media industry. There are opportunities for artists to make money from video games soundtracks, web video production, and the like. Getting your music to the public is easier as well. I don't need a record label's massive distribution deal to get my music to someone on the other side of the world. Indie labels have a better chance of reaching their target audiences. Can we really just say that the industry is down and production side players are taking a pay cut due to consumers not wanting quality or the watered down market of engineers from recording schools? There is money out there being passed around, and we need to be tied into it. Forget getting paid by labels. Alot of engineers are taking a percentage cut from the bands and their management.
We need some reason in audio to determine how bands, managers, and the indies can grow and compete with the big record labels. When money becomes more available to them, they will compete for it. Competition at that level requires that recordings and songs stand out from the rest of the world. When the smaller players can make some money, they will be willing to pay for the better service, because thats how they will gain an edge over the competition. Quality is not keeping this from happening. It is something in the market itself, something about how the market model is arranged.
Lets look at the current model from the perspective of several different groups. I know these aren't well organized, but here goes nothing.
The Big Label way
Record label signs band, records record with a good budget paying out only what they know they need to in order get the product they need, spends lots of cash marketing it and getting it into stores and on the radio. They sell the cd for 10-18 bucks in stores and for about 10 bucks on iTunes. The keep a big chunk of publishing, a good size cut of sales. The marketing people make money, the distributer makes money. The band... not quite so much. The marketing is necessary in order to get people to drop cash for a cd (or a download). Just like any other product, you have to convince someone to spend their hard earned money on you product. Obviously the more you spend to blanket the market, the more return you potentially will get. They can blanket, so they do. The consequences of this model is pretty much what true fans of music have been complaining about for years: homogonized music, kids buy what they are told, sqeezing the little guy out, artists used and abused and not always really rewarded for their efforts. They sign these contracts because they want to survive the climate of the current industry. Its that or work at starbucks. Can't blame them. Everyone is making money except the artist. The producers/engineers are paid ok, but not as much as they might in a more expansively competitive market. After taking over a bulk of the marketing and distribution space, the labels are looking at the most cost effective way to produce a product that they know they can sell. They determine what kids get so they get to set the prices in the market.
The indie label/band method - i will refer to them as band because most indie labels have about the same resources and connections as many bands could if they really worked at.
Band saves up money, records record, and tours to sell it. Live shows are their marketing along with maybe local media. Everytime they play a bar or club, they ask consumers to drop 10 bucks on a cd. The consumer has already paid a 5-10 dollar cover and wants to have a couple of drinks. Even if the show is tight and rockin, the band still has a hard time selling the cd. Everyone with a spare room and a guitar center credit card is recording half ass records. Why would a patron drop 10 bucks on a cd they don't know will even be that great? They know that they could buy a few more drinks with the money (a sure fire purchase... they know what they will get). Band gets very little money and must work at starbucks. They never have money to record better stuff and no one ever hears their record. People rarely become fans of bands when they don't own the cd. There is no incentive to write better songs or pay someone to record a better sounding record, because they will not be sustainable as artists even if they do spend the time doing that. Its not like talent alone will get them rich.
Whatever solution we come up with should address the problem with some considerations. We want to encourage artists to become better artists. We want quality to increase. We also want the solution to be viable in the market place. When I talk to lay people about our industry, i usually describe it in the same terms as above. It always confused me as I talked about it as to what was limiting these smaller bands and indie labels. Then it hit me. They don't have fans. They need fans to sustain an income. They won't get fans if no one owns their cd. No one will own their cd if they are trying to sell it for 10 bucks at a bar.
I was one the road doing production work with a regional indie band back a couple of years ago. We probably played in front of over 15,000 different people over six months when you added up the bar gigs, the college gigs, etc. We spent alot of money on transportation and lodging and at the end of the day sold less then 1000 cds. The recording was done at a high end studio, engineered by myself, and co produced by two very experienced men regarded by many at a national level as top notch(one had alot of gold records, several platinum records, and a grammy or two under his belt). The songs were good and the recording performances were very tight. None of that mattered because no one bought a record. I believe that if they had heard the record, those that were into the genre would have listened to it over and over. Most really couldn't get a good idea of alot of the lyrical content because the venue's were generally loud, run down, with amazing(ly bad) sound systems. It all came down to not being able to sell enough cd's to get fans which would in turn provide more income oppotunities.
Hell... if we had just wanted to get fans, we would have been better off to give the music away. At least then they would have listened to the record that we spent over two months on, like it, and we might get fans. And fans would provide more income opportunities (like royalties, merch, and ticket sales. That would give us a better chance to survive. Then we would have more money to spend on good production for the next record just like we did the first time. Give the music away... what do you all think. Ill be back later to explain how i think this could work in the real world.