Music's 'Moneyball' Moment: Why Data is the New Talent Scout (ft.com) 34
An anonymous reader shares a report: A&R, or "artists and repertoire," are the people who look for new talent, convince that talent to sign to the record label and then nurture it: advising on songs, on producers, on how to go about the job of being a pop star. It's the R&D arm of the music industry. [...] What the music business doesn't like to shout about is how inefficient its R&D process is. The annual global spend on A&R is $2.8bn, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, and all that buys is the probability of failure: "Some labels estimate the ratio of commercial success to failure as 1 in 4; others consider the chances to be much lower -- less than 1 in 10," observes its 2017 report.
Or as Mixmag magazine's columnist The Secret DJ put it: "Major labels call themselves a business but are insanely unprofitable, utterly uncertain, totally rudderless and completely ignorant." In the golden age of the music industry, none of that really mattered. So much money was flowing in that mistakes could be ignored. There was no way to hear most music other than to buy a record, and when CDs entered the market in the 1980s -- costing little to produce, but selling for a fortune -- the major labels were more or less printing their own money. But then came the internet: first file-sharing, then streaming slashed sales of physical music so deeply that the record business became a safety-first game.
Every label executive has always wanted hits, but these days the people who run the big imprints want guaranteed hits. The rise of digital music brought with it a huge amount of data which, industry executives realized, could be turned to their advantage. In his first public speech as CEO of Sony, in May 2017, Rob Stringer asserted: "All our business units must now leverage data and analytics in innovative ways to dig deeper than ever for new talent. The modern day talent-spotter must have both an artistic ear and analytical eyes." Earlier this year, in the same week as Warner announced its acquisition of Sodatone, a company that has developed a tool for talent-spotting via data, another data company, Instrumental, secured $4.2m of funding. The industry appeared to have reached a tipping point -- what the website Music Ally called "A&R's data moment." Which is why, wherever the music industry's great and good gather, the word "moneyball" has become increasingly prevalent.
Or as Mixmag magazine's columnist The Secret DJ put it: "Major labels call themselves a business but are insanely unprofitable, utterly uncertain, totally rudderless and completely ignorant." In the golden age of the music industry, none of that really mattered. So much money was flowing in that mistakes could be ignored. There was no way to hear most music other than to buy a record, and when CDs entered the market in the 1980s -- costing little to produce, but selling for a fortune -- the major labels were more or less printing their own money. But then came the internet: first file-sharing, then streaming slashed sales of physical music so deeply that the record business became a safety-first game.
Every label executive has always wanted hits, but these days the people who run the big imprints want guaranteed hits. The rise of digital music brought with it a huge amount of data which, industry executives realized, could be turned to their advantage. In his first public speech as CEO of Sony, in May 2017, Rob Stringer asserted: "All our business units must now leverage data and analytics in innovative ways to dig deeper than ever for new talent. The modern day talent-spotter must have both an artistic ear and analytical eyes." Earlier this year, in the same week as Warner announced its acquisition of Sodatone, a company that has developed a tool for talent-spotting via data, another data company, Instrumental, secured $4.2m of funding. The industry appeared to have reached a tipping point -- what the website Music Ally called "A&R's data moment." Which is why, wherever the music industry's great and good gather, the word "moneyball" has become increasingly prevalent.
So- (Score:2)
With all this data, and history behind them, perhaps they could come up with some new talent that doesn't sound like all the other existing talent that's come before them?
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't think so Tim."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So- (Score:5, Funny)
(I'm pretty sure that's never been done before.)
Re: (Score:1)
Remember when bands actually were bands and not just people singing while carrying out choreographed movements? Too many "bands" today and over the last couple of decades or so would have been classed as nothing more than Solid Gold Dancer wannabes not that long ago.
Remember when singing didn't involve the aural horror of auto-tuning? Cripes, I get shivers whenever I have to listen to someone who obviously can't carry a tune but is pimped & packaged as a singer or rapper trying (and failing badly) to s
Because the music industry... (Score:2)
... wasn't already pumping out gingerbread men songs that all look and sound exactly alike, performed by artists that look and think exactly alike, and crush anything that doesn't fit their mold.
Re: (Score:2)
The averaged each Joe and Jane and offered music that's similarly constructed.
Re: (Score:2)
Hearts and Flowers (Score:2)
Data is not the next talent scout; at least not their data. It's a desperate attempt from a dying industry to stay relevant. They should send their scouts to find the bar where all the television network executives are listening to the world's smallest violin playing Hearts and Flowers.
Musicians like Lindsey Sterling don't need scouts to get noticed. YouTube, Spotify, and Pandora's algorithms will lift the superstars in a much more natural way then any record label ever could; even with their "data".
Re: (Score:1)
Musicians like Lindsey Sterling are a sign of the problem. It's not enough to be a musician. You have to be physically attractive and willing to do every possible gimmick to promote yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure that's a problem yet. I've never heard of this one. Punk band? Solo autotuner? I'd really need Google to tell.
Re: (Score:2)
No, just multiple appearances on a TV show with a large audience.
I don't think Lindsey Sterling proves your point. There should be other examples.
Re: (Score:3)
How about Pentatonix or The Piano Guys?
As for Lindsey, she started her YouTube channel in 2007 and appeared on TV in 2010 so I do believe that she is a good example of an artist who became known through venues like YouTube.
Music Industry has always been tech ignorant (Score:2)
At the end of time, when the history of humanity is written, there will be a special chapter on the music industry and how it failed to effectively incorporate new technology into their business models. This goes back to the cassette tape (and probably earlier), where the music industry was caught flat footed when consumers were able to cheaply and easily copy music for their own use to Napster and digital distribution and now in terms of picking new artists.
The only thing the music industry has ever had t
at least baseball has unions hear they rip off the (Score:2)
at least baseball has unions hear they rip off the artists even to the point of calling them both employee and independent contractors when it good to the label for ether way.
1 in 4 isn't so bad (Score:1)
This reads like a real sob story for the recording industry.
Lot's of industries that introduce consumer products have high failure rates. Look at potato chip flavors and even electronics.
Recording and distributing an album is not that expensive. The part that has become expensive is promoting it, mostly due to trying to use advertising to tell the public what to listen to.
Rather than pushing 1 sound they like thru they would probably be better served making 10 recordings of different things and give them al
I've been working with musicians since 1967 (Score:4, Insightful)
Musical talent isn't rare
There are millions of talented musicians who can't make a living playing music
Today's pop music isn't art, it's an artless, soulless industrial product, created by teams of trendmongers, marketeers, music writers, lyricists, arrangers, producers, engineers, choreographers and soon, computers running AI software; then tested with focus groups to make sure it sound good in the first 10 seconds.
As an artist, this sucks! It's the opposite of art!
We need to figure out a way for talented artists to make a living while making music they love
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There are millions of talented musicians who can't make a living playing music
So making good music just isn't that rare a skill, which delegates it to the level of hobby or at the most 'sport few people care about'. It's that simple.
We need to figure out a way for talented artists to make a living while making music they love
The only way to do this is Universal Basic Income.
Music industry churns our repackaged Disney talent (Score:2)
You want to hear really good music? Try using the BBC iPlayer APP - or travel overseas - just returned from a trip to Greece - what a nice change to hear bitchin' new sounds every place I went instead of Ke$ha, J-L(am
Use algorithm to pick artist, then same to sue (Score:2)