Digital Distribution: Does it make sense?
As far as digital music promotion goes, I'll stand by my long-tail principles here when I say I think this is a two step process:
1. Make it available
2. Help me find it.
Although IODA/Orchard and other digital distributors will all pitch that they have a "marketing" staff or a "licensing" dept. to justify their commissions charges, the truth is most indies are way at the bottom of the food chain. My understanding is that IODA's marketing dept. consists of TWO individuals, for a catalog that's approaching 80,000 tracks!
Now that point 1 has been put to bed by most labels and artists, let's look at point 2.
In digital music the only method of gaining extra exposure for your releases at the point of sale is editorially. Used to be that paying a store for a Co-Op would get you P.O.S. exposure, but now Editors at the various services are responsible for the albums that make it into email blasts, daily downloads, brand partnerships, iTunes Store banners and other exposure programs.
In my opinion, the only way to get the ear of editors is to form solid working relationships with your reps at the various services on a person to person basis. Work with reps, reps flag your releases for editors, editors take note and feature, more $$$ for you.
Although I'm still working with IODA, I'm beginning to believe that Digital Distributors simply muddy the waters as far as music promotion goes. Although the service is convenient, if you give up all of your responsibilities of service and promotion to a third party, you deny yourself the chance to build relationships, awareness of your label and ultimately sell more music.
Comments
3. No DRM encumbrances.
4. 128 kbps MP3 does not offer sufficient audio quality.
These both may just be details of a properly implemented step #1, but they must not be overlooked. The fact that Apple is paying heed to both points with iTunes Plus downloads would seem to confirm their importance, though some would argue that the move is political.
As for quality, I will point your readers at the chron article you sent me to last week.
The quality issue is one that has less awareness among the general public, but I strongly agree that it would be too easy to overlook. With listening devices (stereo systems, headphones etc.) advancing almost as rapidly as the music, it'd be foolish to avoid "future proofing" Digital files by keeping them at 128kbps.
As the resolution of the MP3s continues to increase, the amount of people who can distinguish the difference becomes smaller and smaller...But that's just another niche market that can, and should, be serviced.