Shelleyevie69

[B][/B]Hey I'm doing an assignment for college where I have to collect data and I would like to get people's opinion on whether they think it is necessary for an artist to be signed to a label anymore. With the internet and social mediums giving a huge advantage for distribution and self promotion and artists choosing to release music independently, is there really any need to be signed to a label in order to be successful in the music industry ?
Your feedback will be greatly appreciated !

The Batlord

Of course you need a label. If you take a CD up to the counter at the store and there isn't anything on it to scan then you can't buy it.

__________________

Oriphiel

You don't need a label, but you probably won't become anything other than a cult/underground band without one.

Machine

Not really although it greatly helps, it depends though are you counting indie labels?

__________________
boost my ego

listen to me stroke my delay pedal

ever wanted to hear death grips songs... but they're acoustic? me neither.

Therewasmethatisscott

The thing I do not understand about labels and record companies is, well, i know they should still exist, but it seems like they were more useful back in the day when you needed to record in a studio and they only had records. Now they have .mp3s so i don't understand why most people don't just do everything themselves? I can record decent quality on an 100 dollar tablet that almost soudns studio!

Oriphiel

Because unless you have thousands of dollars to spare, you're not going to be able to promote yourself to the point where people actually know who you are, and you certainly won't be able to tour and merchandise on the level that professional bands are expected to. Modern record labels are basically money-lenders in this regard.

Isbjørn

I can't name anyone who has ever gone big without a label. Even indie bands need their indie labels.

Well, unless you're making Minecraft parodies on YouTube.

__________________

jacktricity

no you don't need a label to be successful... you just need "semi-decent music", a friendly attitude, & A LOT of engagement with fans. no fan engagement, no record deal. simple as that.

jacktricity

this is true... actually money has nothing to do with theh equation... all money is, is a form of communication... it's a "pat-on-the-back" so to speak... spending money on a band, is no different than playing video games at chuckee-cheeses. it just show you support the message. it's no different than church. when the pastor says something you agree with, you put in %10 of your income for the greater good. music is no different. but a music label is ideal.

EPOCH6

Depends on what you mean by success.

You can get pretty far on your own in the local scene, you can maybe tour your country and neighboring countries in driveable distance if you do really well. But to succeed internationally you really do need to the foundational loans and funding for worldwide touring. Record companies back performing artists because it comes back twofold or more for them. The only artists I can think of right now that are enjoying worldwide success without record labels backing them are artists that used to be on record labels but have recently ditched them.

But if you mean creative success and decent recognition, yeah you can go straight Bandcamp and Kickstarter and at least build a sizeable audience.

If you want to make this a balanced assignment you're going to have to find examples of artists that are enjoying worldwide success without ever piggybacking on a record label.

__________________