"... nobody records a demo on vinyl ..."
Duh! Since you seem to be a bit thick and slow, Ockham, let me spell this out for you. Commercial releases is what gets recorded on vinyl. There have been about 33000 - 36000 commercially released albums in the US every year since 1995. Of those, most were released by artists themselves, or independent publishing companies.
The "indepenent" artists looking for production, distribution and other support or resources (e.g. 'record deals') with major labels need to do something to stand out commercially from the rest of the pack. One method that works is to release a vinyl edition of an album, and be able to show that there have been sales. It's Simple: record companies are in the business of making money on acts they sign. WIth so many acts that 'look alike' to corporate executives, a band or individual needs to stand out in a way that is meaningful to a 'corporate type'; by showing that they can generate positive cash flows on the strength of their product or name.
" ...That's a matter of packaging though, you can just as easily put a CD in a huge case, I wish they did. ..."
You really need to get the facts before you make assertions that only express and declare your lack of knowledge. One of the main econjomies of scale that record companies realized with the introduction of CD's was in distribution costs. The initial CD's were in "long boxes", but record companies quickly (and willingly) eliminated those in favor of a smaller package size. The margins at record companies soared, since they could move more units per cubic meter (volume), or per ton (if by weight), or what ever measure was used. They also were able to use the excuse of a small package to rationalize not having any inserts, posters etc. The margin increases provided huge cash flows that allowed record companies to focus on manufactured MTV-acts, instead of looking outside for good live bands. That's a major reason why the metal era ended and we've had a decade of pop-divas, soft rock, rap, boy-bands, techno, etc.
But now that the sales of CD's are falling, and new acts are not showing any follow through on sales (beyond their big hits), record companies need to go out and find new talent that has credibility with audiences once again.
SO, that brings the scene 'full circle.' Bands that can show that they have some 'franchise' with an audience (people who will buy what the band releases or produces), will stand out when record companies look for new talent. I expect that SXSW2005 will prove that to be the case in spades. Bands that have huge attendance at showcases, lots of people wearing their T-shirts. an LP or something else that people want autographed, will almost certainly get deals, The rest -- doubtful at best.
I guess you have never been in a band, or never managed a band that made any real money from music (or elss you're in some band that's been a fringe act and which is going no place).
Duh! Since you seem to be a bit thick and slow, Ockham, let me spell this out for you. Commercial releases is what gets recorded on vinyl. There have been about 33000 - 36000 commercially released albums in the US every year since 1995. Of those, most were released by artists themselves, or independent publishing companies.
The "indepenent" artists looking for production, distribution and other support or resources (e.g. 'record deals') with major labels need to do something to stand out commercially from the rest of the pack. One method that works is to release a vinyl edition of an album, and be able to show that there have been sales. It's Simple: record companies are in the business of making money on acts they sign. WIth so many acts that 'look alike' to corporate executives, a band or individual needs to stand out in a way that is meaningful to a 'corporate type'; by showing that they can generate positive cash flows on the strength of their product or name.
" ...That's a matter of packaging though, you can just as easily put a CD in a huge case, I wish they did. ..."
You really need to get the facts before you make assertions that only express and declare your lack of knowledge. One of the main econjomies of scale that record companies realized with the introduction of CD's was in distribution costs. The initial CD's were in "long boxes", but record companies quickly (and willingly) eliminated those in favor of a smaller package size. The margins at record companies soared, since they could move more units per cubic meter (volume), or per ton (if by weight), or what ever measure was used. They also were able to use the excuse of a small package to rationalize not having any inserts, posters etc. The margin increases provided huge cash flows that allowed record companies to focus on manufactured MTV-acts, instead of looking outside for good live bands. That's a major reason why the metal era ended and we've had a decade of pop-divas, soft rock, rap, boy-bands, techno, etc.
But now that the sales of CD's are falling, and new acts are not showing any follow through on sales (beyond their big hits), record companies need to go out and find new talent that has credibility with audiences once again.
SO, that brings the scene 'full circle.' Bands that can show that they have some 'franchise' with an audience (people who will buy what the band releases or produces), will stand out when record companies look for new talent. I expect that SXSW2005 will prove that to be the case in spades. Bands that have huge attendance at showcases, lots of people wearing their T-shirts. an LP or something else that people want autographed, will almost certainly get deals, The rest -- doubtful at best.
I guess you have never been in a band, or never managed a band that made any real money from music (or elss you're in some band that's been a fringe act and which is going no place).
