The record companies do alright even with the outlay of producing music. And most labels pay NOTHING towards the recording at the end of the day. Say a record label stumps up £1,000,000 for an advance to cover the recording and usual living during that time. Once the record starts to sell all the money pays off the debt. Once the debt is covered then the artist and record company can make a profit on it according to the deal they signed.
And they've done very well over the last ten years when a lot of product drops on their mat ready to go - little bit of mastering and Bobs ya Uncle. A fair amount of dance music over the last ten years was done in small/bedroom projects studios with the record labels just taking delivery of the final mix and mastering and pressing it.
The real issue is more money should go to the artist rather than the labels.
Another good one is touring. A lot of labels give the band "tour support" ie the record label will give them a budget to get them out on the road early in their career and do a proper job when the money recieved for the gig is not near enough to pay for that. Therefore they can build a market for the produst and sell records. So the band will sign off on that budget and it will be recouped from record sales. So even though the record labels are treating it as a promotional expense for them to profit on they dont share any of the costs of that promotion - that money will be paid for by the band before any profit is seen.
They don't need anymore ways to make money for doing next to nothing.
'Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity'
Using that logic my computer is worth millions.A CD is limited to what is on it.My computer is literally unlimited.Any amount over $5 is too much for any CD !
Using that logic my computer is worth millions.A CD is limited to what is on it.My computer is literally unlimited.Any amount over $5 is too much for any CD ! 