Welcome to EvO:R Entertainment
The EvO:R Street Journal
The EvO:R Street Journal
Dedicated to the culture, business and interests of the indie artist.
EVJ delivers controversial points of view, hard-news commentary, Industry Insites,
artistic prose and photography and welcomes responses (pro or con),
feedback and topic suggestions from readers. If you would like to
submit an opinionated article, inspired poem, photo or essay to EVJ,
forward all copy to Editor ESJ and
put To the Editor in the subject field.
Why Are Music Events Starting To Sound Alike?
By Noel Ramos (Executive Director - IMC2004)
Over the years, I've stuck my neck out and spoken publicly about the things that I strongly disagree with regarding the typical music conference. When I started to create the first IMC, I implemented a lot of procedures that were designed to eliminate the problems I'd seen all too often. Many of my ideas were looked upon as radical, different... even ridiculous by some.
One of my viewpoints which drew the most fire was that all the hype about
"major label A&R Reps" and "showcase for us and you might get signed" is total BS.
I was sick and tired of reading all the hoopla about this artist and that artist
that "got signed after showcasing for [Fillintheblank] Music Conference." The truth
is, no artist ever "got signed" simply because they performed at a conference. If
a deal got done, you can bet that performer was already being pursued by A&R Reps
well in advance of that music conference.
I decided what independent artists needed was a conference of their own. An annual gathering that totally eliminated all the useless BS and misleading hype. They needed workshops and panels that applied specifically to THEM and their needs as indies. At this conference I imagined, NO ONE would "get signed," and we'd be glad about it. We'd focus on education and networking, not on "showcases." I knew that many artists and industry people who were still stuck on that major label path and strongly believed that they absolutely had to "get a deal" would not appreciate an event like this.
I wasn't worried about it, because I wasn't designing the IMC for them
I've weathered a lot of criticism for my policies and procedures that I created for the IMC, but if my ideas about music conferences were so wrong, why are others suddenly starting to sound like me as they promote their events? Just take a look at the other conferences' promo stuff and watch for phrases like:
"THIS CONFERENCE IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY!"
"We're not like the other guys."
"We're not for everybody and that's ok."
"If you have no desire to learn about the music business, this isn't the conference for you."
"What makes us different from other Music Conferences?"
"Take advantage of the many networking and learning opportunities this conference has to offer."
"Get valuable one on one advice from industry about your music and your career path."
"The conference will focus on the registrants interaction with panelists, speakers, exhibitors, musicians and professionals from all aspects of the music industry."
"Useful seminars addressing issues and challenges for the independent artist and one on one sessions..."
"Why should I pay a registration fee? We want to make sure bands/artists take registration seriously."
How weird... that sounds like me talking! I lifted those lines right off of their web sites. They may have ridiculed my ideas but now that they've started incorporating many of them into their own events, it tells me I must have been onto something all along.
It's no big surprise to me that music conferences are quietly shifting away from the "showcase for us and you might get signed" hype and moving toward a platform that caters to independent musicians who want to sidestep the mainstream music industry. Let me once again stick my neck out by predicting that in the next few years, most music conferences will begin to downplay the "showcase for us/A&R Reps/get signed" angle, and instead will begin to focus on education and networking for indie musicians.
I'm not really foretelling anything shocking though, since many of them are obviously already doing exactly that.
Maybe the IMC wasn't such a crazy idea after all, eh?
Here's another radical idea I want to implement... most music conferences get more expensive as they grow. They capitalize on their increasing attendee numbers and their popularity to make more money. With the IMC, I want to do the opposite, we'll get more affordable as we grow... our prices for registrations will go down.
Why? Well, why not? If we grow and more people come to the event, we'll naturally attract more sponsors, and we'll make more on registrations so why not spread that around a bit? It just seems right to me that if possible, we should work towards making the IMC more and more affordable, especially for the musicians who are attending in order to learn and network.
We're also going to put a limit on how many performance applications we accept, and the number of performers we feature. Many conferences just keep taking those $25 -$35 application fees even though they know it's impossible to actually listen to 1500 music submissions.
1300+ bands each spent $35 on absolutely nothing.
I won't have that at the
IMC. We'll limit it to 200 applications. That way we'll always be able to feature
about 100 - 150 performances at the IMC. More than that just wouldn't be effective
for the bands. There are only so many music fans in any given area, and trying to
attract too few of them to too many shows only defeats the purpose of the performances.
Limiting the number of performance applicants and performances will also help to keep
the focus on education, where it belongs.
Provided by the MusicDish Network. Copyright ©
Tag It 2004 -
Republished with Permission
ESJ is looking for writers/poets for our next issues.
All work is appreciated and will be published (with the exception
of articles containing racism, bigotry or other demeaning topics)
Also, this is a PG-13 rating and will be censored if you do not edit
it. Please e-mail The EvO:R Street Journal.