My mind was blown yesterday. For some reason, while the EMI collapse hit me, and the V2 castration winded me, hearing that MUTE UK is winding down to 15 people (from many more) and leaving their long-stayed building on Harrow Rd for the corporate boredom of the EMI offices…that hurt. For the unaware: the Mute Building, architecturally and intrinsically was just another type of Mute release…a STUMM if you will…cold and concrete like a Fad Gadget record, while filled with warmth and expectation, like the inside of the cabin adorning the cover of Nick Cave’s Murder Ballads. Inside, the staircases were loudly wall-papered with the industrial sounds of Mute music, heading upwards to the Mute recording studio which shared the floor with music legend Andrew King (see the history of: Pink Floyd, T-Rex and The Clash) behind the Mute publisher’s chair. A one-stop-shop. Mute kingpin/hero Daniel Miller had mastered the art of breaking bands big while keeping to the ultimate in aural esthetics, with a team of people who worked so well to support a noble and winning cause.

The cause remains. And while Mute thankfully still exists, it will never be the same.

These are tragically exciting times. Labels are being completely redefined. For the major, it is about bailing out the ship with as many bodies as needed until they can float past the next stockholders meeting and pop hit. For the indie, the changes are more morphic, and undefined. Sub Pop, a corporate owned label with a simulated indie feel, is having huge success with the Shins. Last week, more than a handful of indie releases graced the Billboard 100. But for many labels, sales are ebbing and it is about cutting costs and getting ready for lean times. Record sales are getting harder to come by, and kids these days are pressing Jeff C’s RECORD button (see his last post) with and increased amount of ease.

So what is to become of the record label? I own one and have Muteish visions of working sucessfully with music that I love. I actually partake in several others as well. And my big questions are everyone’s questions: how can one get the physical CD sales back up? Is it worth while signing new talent? Since an indie label has the benefit of being flexible, how does one maximize on today’s opportunities? What are the ways of making money/growing the band/securing a future. Hard questions to be sure, had by an idiot, asked with sound and fury.

Unfortunately, none of the answers are simple, none of them defined.

Record labels are still relevant. Artists need them. Most, I find, need a structure to help with the making/manufacturing and marketing of a record. So they need to survive, albeit change. The deals between the artist and the label need to be redefined. It seems to me that the only way to work in the 21^st century is to go into business with the artist as a partner: less front end costs, more back end money making potential. The risk is bigger than it has ever been, and thus to survive, it needs to be levied as much as possible.

Some executives out there, like Steve Pross, think that record labels are almost purely promotional vehicles for the bands to grow their touring/manufacturing and publishing businesses. The concept for years has been that bands will not make money from their record sales and instead will make money from the momentum the sales incur (i.e. the touring, merch, etc). BUT WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THE LABEL OWNER WHO MAKES MONEY LAST IN THE CHAIN?

It is my experience that the label owner is left with having to think “out of the box” (sorry for dropping that line, Celia) about how to increase the revenue stream cut short by the low sales expectations. I started by changing the type of deal I was doing. After, I redid the website and explored outreach tactics to the people who were already fans of the label. Then, I started a publishing wing, where we co-publish a certain amount of songs on every record, songs the artist gets to choose. Artists’ lawyers are generally fine with the deal, because the artist is free not to pick the potential hits. Meanwhile, the label gets to help the artist set up their publishing business and, now that I have grown it and hooked up with a bigger publisher-Bicycle music-gets to have the benefit of a new team pushing the recordings for new opportunities.

I have also started a download only section of the label, which allows me the flexibility to work with both known and unknown artists on a less-risk basis, but still allows me to grow the label brand and catalog (we have not even talked about branding, which is also so important). With friends, I am also working on high-end box sets that are set to appeal to a certain type of consumer.

I feel that the record label has to distance itself from being the focal point of the band’s career. Mark Geiger once discussed how the label is just one finger in a hand of the band, used to grasp a career; but for some reason, it has always been the label that must jump start the band’s various activates, more often than not, with money. There is always a time to press the MONEY button, but not too soon and, when done, with great care and thought. The record label SHOULD be responsible to the band for getting the record out there, making calls to the appropriate people, and supporting the band’s touring and other efforts through publicity and radio outreach and by always looking for an opportunity to present itself.

Indie stronghold In The Red records is a one man powerhouse that, for the most part, does all its marketing in-house. Some of the records do well (In The Red has an amazing brand identity within it genre, making all the releases do pretty well) and others do brilliantly. The reason is not because one marketing campaign was different than the other: the reason is that some music tends to stick better at a given time, an eternal fact that will never be understood or can not be counted upon.

Yes, record labels still perform a major service, but unless there is ample funding involved, I would dissuade someone from starting a traditional record label. The word traditional is key here. There needs to be a more three dimensional approach, which could include: PUBLISHING songs on a record, a DIGITAL ONLY platform within the paradigm, a MERCHANDISE platform that the artist and label can venture into together, a way of CHANGING THE MUSIC BUYING EXPERIENCE by bundling music with other related commodities, and finally a FORWARD THINKING, INTERNET EMBRACING, daily changing way of marketing records. And we have not even approached the concept of WHAT WE DO WITH THE CD FORMAT WHEN IT FALLS APART and HOW DO WE BEST APPROACH FOREIGN MARKETS IN THESE TIMES (panel, feel free to jump in).

The collapse of EMI, V2 and Mute simply demonstrate dramatically how the model is changing-not going away. The fact that indie labels such as Jagjaguar, In The Red, Kemado, Rounder and Drag City still exist prove the sustainability and prowess of the indie model. In these times, there is no room for decadence, high budgets, and lethargical movements. But there is room for new ways of doing things and taking different types if revenue streams and running them through a bigger river.

I am sure the other panelists will have much more to say, and rightly so the floor is theirs….