to me, but not necessarily the way she is doing it. As production costs are so low these days, a more logical way of raising the $75K would be to get your fans to pay the $10 they would normally pay for the CD in advance. Then, say it is $3 to produce and send each CD you need roughly 11,000 fans to buy in advance and then you can give them say 10% of any profit thereafter. Everybody wins then, and if your fans have a cut of the profits they might help promote your record to friends, etc. Problem is, I doubt someboy like Jill Soluble has 11,000 fans though.

On the recording on a laptop, David Byrne said this and then backtracked and had to admit it is pretty hard to make a record for nothing. Not only do you have to be a musician, you need to be skilled at engineering and mixing too. By his estimation, $75,000 doesn't sound too extreme. Link is here: http://journal.davidbyrne.com/

I do wonder were the money will go? Do musicians want such a direct link with their pay masters ie us the public, if I'm paying for studio time they better get there on time, sober, shaved and ready to work. Also in terms of bands I like I already invested in them, what did they do with cash for the lps and concerts I already gave them? Is she not even giving you a free copy of the lp for your cash?

Is this not indicative of the way ahead, as record companies gradually go under, artists become their own cottage industry and produce small amounts, self promote and sell at gigs etc. Bit like the current folk club set up? The Marillion solution, which seems to have saved them from returning to the day job, Radiohead choose your own price and web only releases and Mick Hucknalls re-doing his back catalogue to self promote and survive are all other examples. Just desserts or sour grapes??

a couple of mics and software that would put Abbey Rd of 30 years ago to shame, all for less than £2000, doesn't mean you're in any postion to produce something of any technical or artistic worth. Sure, equipment costs may have come down massively but talent costs as much as it ever did. If you have to hire an engineer to make it sound good, an arranger to make it listenable, or a piano, or room with a piano, or a decent guitarist or drummer, plus space to put drummer and mics to record them with, the costs soon mount up.

"Why does everybody have to make an album as opposed to just recording a song or two?"

Some of us like hearing what an artist is capable of over a period of more than 3 mins. Does Word review tracks, EPs, or albums on its back pages?

Z

I suppose the difference is that not many cottage industries ask you for the money up front so that they can build the shed in which they're going to make the product.

The clever bit is that she's not simply asking for money - but that every contributor gets something in return. I'm sure there are plenty of Jill Sobule fans who'd pay $50 to see their name on the album sleeve.

As in the Dave Pegg boxset.
Clearly works, as there is nothing like a bit of ego boosting, altho' I can't see that many friends and relatives impressed by either a Dave Pegg or Jill Sobule name check.
No offence, Peggy, but however (mighty) fine your bassmanship is, your singing makes miners look anxiously at their canaries.

... but I would happily pay up front for any of my fave artists to record an album and then send it to me. The obvious problem is that how will anyone new break through, other than word of mouth? And what CDs will you guys review?

You have a business project -- in this case an album -- and need money to get it off the ground. Based on your track record and the current state of the sector, you show the bank your projection of your income and on that basis they front you a percentage of that income. Or not.

Oh, hang on. I seem to remember that sector-specific credit agencies like that used to exist. Weren't they called "record companies"?

Where's it all gone? If she (and I haven't even begun to hear of her before)has soldg enough in the past to justify a $75,000 recording, surely she could fund it herself. On the other hand, I just went to her website and she's up to $32,000 already, with 2 donations of $5,000 dollers each.

So on that basis, I've decided to record an album. Any donations, etc, etc...

made 6 albums in the last 17 years they obviously didnt shift many units otherwise she wouldnt be coming round with the begging bowl now. The industry as we know it is in the death throes but it is still possible for artists to get their product to the people without a major label deal witness Martin Stephenson and Ian McNabb. In reality the smaller labels are probably the better option of getting stuff out into the public domain - as I see it a smaller label can be your own label if no-one else wants to invest in you. Giving credit to Jill Sobule though - she obviously believes in her product enough to want to get it out there. Contrast that with my fave Mr Elvis Costello who has said he may never record another album - obviously making much more from his Lexus adverts - maybe his new hit will be drove my Lexus to Texas!!

for an artist I liked who was just starting out. Someone I'd heard at a small gig who blew me away would get my support.

It's a shame that, after so many releases and such critical success, Jill Sobule hasn't demonstrated to Satan's minions (that's accountants) that further investment would be a good thing, but one suspects they know how many copies the last 6 albums sold...

It's not as if selling low numbers means she's no good; my record collection is littered with good or better albums which were only ever bought by me, band members and their extended families.

Maybe after 6 albums, plus all the other stuff, working with high-cred musicians and so on, she ought to conclude that the conventional "single - album - tour - single - album - tour" musician's business model isn't really the best for her.

And that quote! $75,000? Do me a favour.

Ever heard of "The Texas Campfire Tapes"?

...as has been said, Marillion started this off way back around 2000 or so after the fans had funded a US tour without prompting from the band (indeed, AFAIK, the band were not even aware of that US tour fund at first). They did it again in 2004 and have done it this year.

I haven't forked out for that subscription thing but I will buy the album that emerges this year. It worked for Marillion- indeed, 100,000 sales per album (I've seen that figure quoted a few times...) is superb for a band that fashion/image-conscious UK music magazines will not touch. It is in many ways a good thing because they can make whatever the hell music they want, only having to answer to their fans without playing the industry game.

what she's offering for each 'price' seems perfectly ok to me. Good luck to her!

is customers paying artists not to record any more albums. Insert Mancunian band beginning with O of your choice.

on that Bandwagon too.

Actresses with insufficent demands for their skills get jobs as waitresses don't they?
I'm sorry, but if your music isn't commercially viable it's a hobby, not a divine calling. "Get" "like" "real". (And a Mac, Pro Tools or whatever it's called and a My Space account if you think anyone's interested. If it‘s good enough for Roddie Frame, sweetchops . . .)

There's nothing to stop people continuing to make music. The people who are so keen on albums are the performers. That's the great irony of the current crisis. The people who are most attached to the old way of doing things are the acts.

But the acts may now have the excuse they've been waiting decades for to return to the dreaded concept album and the rock opera, so that we'll feel duty bound to buy (or download with ads or finance in advance or whatever they come up with next week) the whole kerboodle rather than just the good bits.

I did do this for a struggling singer/songwriter. Basically I was asked to pre-pay for the record some six months in advance. Well I've done worse than that with gig tickets. For twenty of my hard earned earth pounds I got a personally signed CD & poster, my name of the sleeve notes [of smug value only to myself] Oh and 12 rather lovely tunes. Granted it's not something I'm prepared to make a habit of.

Painters have worked under the patronage of wealthy individuals for centuries. This is merely using the Web & VISA to extend that model to every would-be patron. $75000 does seem a bit steep though. How much of that is for 'fruit & flowers'.

Hi folks,

I'm a friend of Jill Sobule, her webmaster, and the guy who developed the website in question, and I thought I'd respond to a couple of points, perhaps to present an alternative view, perhaps to explain a few things that may not be apparent to everyone here.

First of all, I would like to point out that, while many of you may not know her, that doesn't mean Jill is nobody, or not important, or, for that matter, not beloved by thousands of adoring fans. In fact, she has a large, devoted, and decidedly international fan base, and has produced seven albums over her 18 year career, each to almost universal critical acclaim. She's had two hit singles here in the US (and elsewhere as well, but I don't have the details, so I won't pretend I do), has contributed songs to a number of movie soundtracks, composed original music for a television show for three years, and... well, plenty of other things. She is well known and respected among her peers, some of whom are more famous, some of whom are less. For you folks in the U.K., I can tell you she's worked (and toured) with a diverse group of artists including Billy Bragg, Paul Weller, Lloyd Cole, and Glenn Tilbrook, to name a few. She's toured multiple times with better-known US-based artists like Don Henley, Cyndi Lauper, and the late, great Warren Zevon. And that's just a few. I may be biased, but you can ask any of these artists, and they will tell you, Jill Sobule is the real deal.

So why haven't you heard of her? Because the music industry works that way, I guess. How many great musicians can you name that ought to be more famous, but for some reason aren't? Everybody's got two or three artists or bands they can name in this category, I'd venture, and if I could figure out why some great musicians hit it big while others labor forever in obscurity, I'd be a rich man. Jill Sobule, for her part, has not labored in obscurity, exactly, but neither is she an international superstar. She has a following, modest in size, but highly devoted in spirit. Maybe some day it will be bigger. Maybe it won't.

My point is, when you consider the idea that she's asking her fans to finance her next album to the tune of $75,000, before you declare the idea arrogant or audacious or doom-ridden, try mentally substituting some artist that you do know and are passionate about. Because the way you feel about that artist, there are many, many people in the world who feel that way about Jill.

A few other things... I'll try to be brief...

If Jill wants to raise money for an album, which is basically a business venture, why doesn't she go to a bank?

Because banks don't lend money for these sorts of ventures. They never have, because the investment is too speculative, and bankers, not being experts in popular music, have no way of predicting whether a given album will be a financial success or not. So they stay out of it. This is, in part, why record labels were invented.

But if Jill can't find a record label willing to put up the money for this album, why should she expect ordinary people to do it instead?

Who said she couldn't find a record label willing to put up the money? The decision to try this did not come about because no label was interested -- in fact, no label was asked. The decision came about because the traditional way has, for the most part, resulted in disappointment for everyone concerned in the past, so the idea was to try something different.

Why doesn't Jill just put up the money herself?

If you ask this question, you clearly have little understanding of the reality of being a working, non-superstar musician. It is, let's just say, not a job people do for the money.

$75,000 is way too much money. [Insert great artist here] recorded his/her/their last album for $89, and it sounds great!

Sure. Point taken. But keep in mind, the money we're trying to raise here is not just to pay for studio time and a few lunches. This budget is designed to pay all the expenses that would normally be fronted by a label -- this includes recording, yes, but it also includes (sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly) things like: manufacturing, distribution, promotion, marketing, touring... and more. And, by the way, while you certainly can make an album on your laptop for short money, that's not what we want to do. We're not trying to make a cheap record. We're trying to make a world-class record, with a big name producer and top notch musicians. And this costs money -- way more than you think.

Isn't the "album" paradigm dead? Don't people mostly buy single tracks now, and download them digitally?

The concept of the record album was not invented because of some need to produce music in bulk to make economic sense. Indeed, singles have always been available -- as 45s, as cassettes, as CDs. Yet artists have still generally produced albums, and people have generally bought their music that way. I don't think the advent of digital distribution has changed the viability of the record album, and the artistic reasons for producing an album have not changed either. I am not a recording artist, so I will not presume to speak to the exact artistic reasons why it might be preferable to create an album of songs rather than release individual ones willy-nilly. But anyone who has bought a record album knows the advantages (and, yes, disadvantages) of the album format. And I would go so far as to suggest that the idea of the album is still the preferred way for artists to package their work, and for devotees of those artists to purchase it.

So that's basically it. Oh, one more thing -- I know some of you think the "prizes" offered at the various contribution levels are "overpriced," but keep in mind, you probably feel that way because you are not a fan. But what if you were? Like I said up front, if you have difficulty buying this premise, try thinking that it's not Jill Sobule who's doing this, but rather some artist or band that you're personally crazy about. Does that change the calculus of this for you any? I'd bet it does.

And, finally, I'd like to invite you to come on over to the website and read more about Jill Sobule and her music. Listen to some of it. Read some of the comments from the fans who have donated to this effort, sometimes astounding amounts of money. Some links for you:
http://www.jillsnextrecord.com/aboutjill.asp (bio, critical reviews)
http://www.jillsnextrecord.com/music.asp (a variety of music over the years)
http://www.jillsnextrecord.com/guestbook.asp (comments from people who have given money)
http://www.jillsobule.com/LiveAtJoesPub.asp (download a full-length double-album live show for FREE)

Some of you may read and/or listen to this stuff and fall in love. Some of you will shrug. And some of you will probably hate it. That's OK. I'd love it if you became a huge Jill Sobule fan and even sent in money. But I'll settle for just the acknowledgment that, whether she's your cup of tea or not, Jill is a real artist, with many fans, and that she is entitled to conduct this noble experiment in alternative financing of her next release.

Thanks for reading. And your further comments are, of course, welcome.

I think your response is fair enough. Whilst there are those in this thread who are for a sterner approach, "talent will out" etc, the "rules" are and have irredeemably changed since, probably, Ms Sobule started out. And sites like this are populated by enthusiasts, often, of less than populist and, sometimes, less than popular, musics, even possibly sometimes deliberately, and the artists feted by "us" are maybe often as impecunious as you describe.Or more so. And, sadly, patronage by us old farts doesn't necessarily put bread on the table. (Glad to se how many have sponsored the production of output in ways other than purchasing the fully formed product, tho', Guys)

Just listened to a couple of tracks, "Supermodel", from the "Clueless" soundtrack so perhaps her best known/most widely heard. Probably very unrepresentative compared to the rest of her stuff, and broadly standard soundtrack dross. Listened also to "Kissed a girl", "Lucy at the gym" and "Now that I don't have you", and all are pleasant soft female indie, should there be such a genre. Pleasant enough. Could it be, and the titles are perhaps a clue,that Ms Sobule is nailing her flag to a certain market? Now it bothers me not a jot, as I couldn't care less as to the sexuality of the artists I like, but let's just say I would be a wee bit wary of the Indigo girls live, however much I enjoy their records.
Forgive me if this is out of order or possibly barking up the wrong tree entirely but the audiences of any niche genre can be daunting to those not aware. I remember going to see the Levellers for the first time, straight from work, in "Man at C&A" garb. Sore thumb? I should coco.....

I've been an admirer of Jill's ever since her first album came out, and I think they've got better and better. Her most recent, Underdog Victorious, is one of my favourite albums (and yes, I do still think in terms of collections of songs) of the last decade. She has a beautiful, sweet-and-strong voice with perfect intonation; and she's a songwriter of very high calibre. Her songs are full of wry humour, genuine poignancy, acute observation and - sometimes - biting wit.

If any of you subscribe to Emusic, have a listen to Underdog Victorious and at least download the first song, Freshman, which outlines the travails of a dedicated but not commercially successful musician. As she sings, "I bet you didn't know/I don't get much for this show."

I'll be making a donation.

So the artist herself has read the site here, and had a comment or two of her own. She asked me to post this for her, as she is running late to a gig and didn't have time to register for the site, etc.:

Boy, you are a snarky bunch. Again, the $75,000 (if I get it-I am half way there) is not just for recording but for promotion, marketing, publicity, touring (that costs a ton if I bring a band), etc. Maybe you're right, it is a bit much... but why not? Plus, what about my gambling debt?

By the way, $5,000 is a going rate here for a house concert. And... remember how shitty the dollar is.

love, jill

Oh, I have good inside information on the horse in the 3rd.

*Now* they complain of the exchange rate. Wasn't like that when they were buying London Bridge...

This isn't the first time a cult artist has attempted something similar.
Jane Siberry gives away downloads of her back catalogue and seats at gigs (she did pay-what-you-like long before the 'Head) and has a patron donation system which pays for studio time.
Martyn Joseph used the cash from being dropped from Sony to buy a home studio and sold the resulting album, Full Colour Balck & White, at gigs. It was later picked up by the Grapevine label for distribution.
Ex-Fat Lady Sings frontman Nick Kelly has put out two solo CDs, both times members of his mailing list paid for their CD in advance which covered the mastering & pressing costs.
I could go on.
I saw Jill supporting William Bragg a few years back and bought a CD at the 'merch' stall. I've since gone on to buy her back catalogue which reveals that she's getting better with age, so I've paid for my CD upfront.
I doubt The Man at GobalMediaConglomerate Inc. would be interested in Jill, so good luck to her.
Steve