Producing Pop: Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Producing Pop: Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry"

Zoe Nicholson
8 years ago
Views:

1 GOLDSMITHS Research Online Book Negus, Keith Producing Pop: Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry You may cite this version as: Negus, Keith Producing Pop: Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry. London: out of print. [Book] : Goldsmiths Research Online. Available at: COPYRIGHT All material supplied via Goldsmiths Library and Goldsmiths Research Online (GRO) is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You may use this copy for personal study or research, or for educational purposes, as defined by UK copyright law. Other specific conditions may apply to individual items. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material. Duplication or sale of all or part of any of the GRO Data Collections is not permitted, and no quotation or excerpt from the work may be published without the prior written consent of the copyright holder/s. Contact Goldsmiths Research Online at: lib-eprints@gold.ac.uk

uk/5453/ COPYRIGHT All material supplied via Goldsmiths Library and Goldsmiths Research Online (GRO) is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights.

2 Producing Pop Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry Keith Negus Department of Music Goldsmiths University of London SE14 6NW Producing Pop was first published in 1992 by Edward Arnold. It is now out of print and the rights have reverted to Keith Negus. Producing Pop by Keith Negus is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Arnold. It is now out of print and the rights have reverted to Keith Negus.

3 Introduction 2011 Producing Pop is based on research carried out between 1988 and 1991, with much of the material derived from interviews conducted with music industry personnel in London, and during a short 3 week trip to New York and Los Angeles. In many respects it is a snapshot of the recording industry at a particular historical moment a time when the business was structured around the manufacture and distribution of physical artefacts. It was a time when I could while away an afternoon wandering around the large and small record shops that were then to be found in close proximity to each other in central London - stores selling albums as vinyl, cassette or CD, and offering a mind boggling array of single formats. Much has changed. Most obviously, digital technologies have redefined the way repertoire is packaged and distributed. But, much has endured. Record companies still place considerable emphasis on artist and repertoire (A & R) finding, acquiring and exploiting individual tracks, or back catalogue or the creative outputs of individual musicians and bands ( discovering talent ). Record companies (or, music companies as they are increasingly called) are still engaged in marketing; still recruit or subcontract staff to work on publicity and public relations; and musicians still make music in studios even if the physical space of the studio has become far more flexible (from bedroom to cabin in a forest to luxury facility on a Caribbean island). Despite numerous apocalyptic warnings lamenting or celebrating the demise of the record company, the major music and entertainment corporations, and numerous independent labels, are still here albeit with recording occupying a much more integrated and nuanced location within a bundle of rights; and revenue generated in multiple ways rather than through the direct purchase of sound recordings (an intensification of processes that were apparent and described, if briefly, in this book). I have heard and read many times that the so-called 360 degree deal (the multiple rights contract) by which a company takes a cut of all revenue streams from an artist s earnings is becoming an industry standard, whether a musician is negotiating for the first or fifth time. As they have always done, the labels provide finance upfront along with knowledge and expertise, and then seek a return on that investment. Whilst musicians have (in recent years) gained economic support from alternative sources private equity firms, distillers, sportswear manufacturers many deals of this type have benefited neither party, and the major companies have consistently continued to take the gamble of investing upfront in new music and unknown musicians (in many respects, this continues by default rather than design no one else seems to be prepared to take the risk). The records that the companies are now investing in, archiving and exploiting are far more than sound recordings. And the return on investment may come from a percentage of an artist s CD sales and digital downloads, or income derived from T-shirts, DVDs, films, books, song publishing, synchronisation across games and adverts, or a plethora of merchandise. The music corporation may be active and the artist may have assigned their song publishing, an autobiography or live promotion directly to the corporation, and make use of the in-house merchandising operation. Or, the company and artist may have struck a deal for certain activities with publishing, for example, assigned to another company (the 360 degree deal allowing for a passive cut of profits made elsewhere). Whilst such arrangements keep managers on their toes, accountants balancing the books and lawyers in work, they are the logical outcome and intensification of a type of cross-collateralisation that was being structured into contracts when I was writing this book, an effort to take advantage of media synergies (a buzzword of the 1980s). In turn, this is traceable back to the commercial possibilities introduced by the links between recordings, radio and film, connections that were used in business practices adopted by Bing Crosby (such synergies are referred to briefly in Chapters 1 and 2 here). Any book on the recording industry is bound to be partial and shaped by the times and circumstances in which it was researched and written. I am aware that Producing Pop has certain shortcomings (some of which I tried to address in Music Genres and Corporate Cultures, 1999, and others that I am still thinking about). I have some reservations about my use of the notion of the cultural intermediary as a way of characterising and framing the work of music industry personnel. I adopted the idea because it allowed me to move away from a model of music industry personnel as gatekeepers and gave me a route into debates about the cultural economy of production. But it meant that I downplayed and devoted less attention to how the workers I discuss in this book are contributing to the commodification of musicians and their music. Despite these reservations about the theoretical framing of the book, I believe that the details are historically valuable and practices still relevant to the way the industry operates. I know that the book continues to be used in teaching and research. I am happy for this copy to be circulated and made available in any freely accessible locations. Keith Negus March 2011 i ii

In many respects it is a snapshot of the recording industry at a particular historical moment a time when the business was structured around the manufacture and distribution of physical artefacts.

Producing Pop. Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry. Keith Negus

Producing Pop. Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry. Keith Negus Producing Pop Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry Keith Negus Department of Music Goldsmiths University of London SE14 6NW Producing Pop was first published in 1992 by Edward Arnold. It