The new De La album

Controller_7

So yesterday I get an email about their kickstarter and they had a goal of $110,000. Not a huge amount of money, but still not small. Well, it only took them two days to double the goal. Wow.

I love them, so it's not that surprising, but it's pretty impressive.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1519102394/de-la-souls-new-album

HarveyCanal

So bizarre to me that they did a kickstarter campaign. I mean, they basically treated it as an album/merchandise pre-order platform. But one would think that De La would has the cheese/class enough to invest in their own project enough to put it out, THEN sell it to the public. Whatever though, their call.

jlee

Are Kick Starter plans essentially "free money" if you hit your goal though? It seems like the "investors" get pretty simple returns in this area, which would suggest that if you have the goodwill and a large fan base (which it appears De La still does) then it's a no-brainer to try and raise money this way.

I watched the video and it was a bit disheartening to see them trying to convince fans to give them money for the new project -- but the reality is that it takes money to complete an album -- and I don't think with the industry being the way it is, a Kick Starter seems that uncouth. I'd probably be more bothered to see them working the concert circuit of ICP-Gathering of the Juggalos or something.

TL:DR -- it's hard to make money these days for aging/seasoned artists -- so do you.

asstro

If it was a standard pre-order kind of thing I would have ponied up for a copy just because I love De La. But they are asking 45 bucks for a vinyl LP, that shit is bonkers. I'm all for artists getting paid fairly but give me a break.

HarveyCanal

jlee said:

Are Kick Starter plans essentially "free money" if you hit your goal though? It seems like the "investors" get pretty simple returns in this area, which would suggest that if you have the goodwill and a large fan base (which it appears De La still does) then it's a no-brainer to try and raise money this way.

I watched the video and it was a bit disheartening to see them trying to convince fans to give them money for the new project -- but the reality is that it takes money to complete an album -- and I don't think with the industry being the way it is, a Kick Starter seems that uncouth. I'd probably be more bothered to see them working the concert circuit of ICP-Gathering of the Juggalos or something.

TL:DR -- it's hard to make money these days for aging/seasoned artists -- so do you.

Hit up Tre Mason for the seed money. He's got it.

DJ_Enki

jlee said:

TL:DR -- it's hard to make money these days for aging/seasoned artists -- so do you.

Yeah, I think it's this, but in the bigger-picture, this whole thing is interesting to me. People have spent years yelling, "Fuck the labels! Tear 'em down and fuck 'em in the face!" but not putting much thought about what's going to replace said face-fucked labels. It's been kind of an Underpants Gnome theory:
1) Tear down record labels
2) ???
3) Profit!

Well, it looks like this sort of patronage model is going to be at least part of the replacement. Which has its ups and downs. One other thing to note, though, is acts like De La Soul can do this because they're De La Soul. They're known, they're established, they have their fan base. How well would this strategy work for an unknown act? How do you get people who have no idea who you are to pony up some cash so you can make an album? (These aren't really rhetorical questions, either. I'm pretty disconnected from the whole Kickstarter thing, so I have no idea if people have a high success rate using it.)

LaserWolf

DJ_Enki said:

jlee said:

TL:DR -- it's hard to make money these days for aging/seasoned artists -- so do you.

Yeah, I think it's this, but in the bigger-picture, this whole thing is interesting to me. People have spent years yelling, "Fuck the labels! Tear 'em down and fuck 'em in the face!" but not putting much thought about what's going to replace said face-fucked labels. It's been kind of an Underpants Gnome theory:
1) Tear down record labels
2) ???
3) Profit!

Well, it looks like this sort of patronage model is going to be at least part of the replacement. Which has its ups and downs. One other thing to note, though, is acts like De La Soul can do this because they're De La Soul. They're known, they're established, they have their fan base. How well would this strategy work for an unknown act? How do you get people who have no idea who you are to pony up some cash so you can make an album? (These aren't really rhetorical questions, either. I'm pretty disconnected from the whole Kickstarter thing, so I have no idea if people have a high success rate using it.)

Yes.
I have ponied up for 2 recent local artists lp funds.
One is an aging, almost famous, grunge guitarist who is recording a country lp.
The other is a young sax player recording her first jazz lp.

Both were able to meet their goals because they have a fan base from live gigs.

parallax

You guys likely heard about the dudes who made Super Troopers nailing their goal on Kick Starter to produce a sequel?

I think it's smart to go this route because you then hold 100% control of your 'art'. No studio can exercise edits or reap a portion of profits. And the amount can be literally raised in days, if not hours, without having to pitch to money-men.

Good for De La for seizing on the opportunity.

white_tea

jlee said:

I'd probably be more bothered to see them working the concert circuit of ICP-Gathering of the Juggalos or something.

In 2015, this is not a false choice, and if it scares me, I'm going to say so (shout out: Outkast).


Also, still waiting for A.O.I., Pt. III: The DJ Album.

sticky_dojah

asstro said:

If it was a standard pre-order kind of thing I would have ponied up for a copy just because I love De La. But they are asking 45 bucks for a vinyl LP, that shit is bonkers. I'm all for artists getting paid fairly but give me a break.

Between this and the DE La Smells record store day stunt I kind of lost interest to follow them. Call me lazy or poor, but I'd much rather have a label involved and get some nice 7"'s and an album for decent money.

Horseleech

parallax said:

I think it's smart to go this route because you then hold 100% control of your 'art'. No studio can exercise edits or reap a portion of profits. And the amount can be literally raised in days, if not hours, without having to pitch to money-men.

Good for De La for seizing on the opportunity.

Good for them, but I don't think this always results in the dream scenario that it might appear to, at least not to the consumer.

RAJ

Someone please explain to me how "kickstarting" to make a record benefits the donator? Do we get a "piece of the action"? Record companies do.

RAJ

Also... what if this album sucks? I'd want a little sip of the juice before I donated $10,000 to be on it.

ppadilha

RAJ said:

Also... what if this album sucks? I'd want a little sip of the juice before I donated $10,000 to be on it.

They don't expect you donate $10K, you donate about what you would be willing to pay for a De La album (maybe slightly more but records are expensive these days anyways) and you get a copy of the album in return. For $10K you'd probably get special mention in the liner notes, although I would want my name mentioned in one of the songs or a concert in my house or De La delivering christmas presents to my children.

I don't understand why people would be pissed at a crowdfunding campaign. The artists are basically guaranteeing the bare minimum in sales so they don't lose money making the album and I imagine the fans that paid are hardcore enough that they don't care that much about the quality of what comes out.

What does suck is when crowdfunding campaigns become prerequisites for distributors, i.e. a writer has to crowdfund their new novel before a publisher is willing to pick it up, or a filmmaker has to crowdfund their new film in order for a distributor to become interested, when BITD they would have gone in as investors. There is a point now where this is just a mechanism for minimizing risk more than anything else.

RAJ

ppadilha said:

RAJ said:

Also... what if this album sucks? I'd want a little sip of the juice before I donated $10,000 to be on it.

They don't expect you donate $10K, you donate about what you would be willing to pay for a De La album (maybe slightly more but records are expensive these days anyways) and you get a copy of the album in return. For $10K you'd probably get special mention in the liner notes, although I would want my name mentioned in one of the songs or a concert in my house or De La delivering christmas presents to my children.

I don't understand why people would be pissed at a crowdfunding campaign. The artists are basically guaranteeing the bare minimum in sales so they don't lose money making the album and I imagine the fans that paid are hardcore enough that they don't care that much about the quality of what comes out.

What does suck is when crowdfunding campaigns become prerequisites for distributors, i.e. a writer has to crowdfund their new novel before a publisher is willing to pick it up, or a filmmaker has to crowdfund their new film in order for a distributor to become interested, when BITD they would have gone in as investors. There is a point now where this is just a mechanism for minimizing risk more than anything else.

$7500 - You're on the Album

Attached files

ketan

This isn't on the new album, but it's from the sessions... and colour me somewhere between underwhelmed and relieved (pale brown with bright green spots?).



I like the chorus, and the verses are good. But the beat is just too MOR. I want to be amazed by how fresh their new stuff sounds...

By comparison, I was impressed when Get Away dropped in '13: