There is a quirky, out-of-place restaurant near where I live that I discovered. It's a small place with unusual-but-good food and a hodgepodge atmosphere. It is quite far off the road, and doesn't even have a sign out front. When I've asked the people who work there about the place, they always point out that they have never done any advertising as if it's a point of pride. It feels like a well-kept secret, and I'm in the know about it. I've told people about it, and they've thanked me later. People say they didn't know it existed, and that they can't believe it had been there so long. Strictly word-of-mouth, and always worth it.
I'd like to think I'm like that as a solo artist. I am so thankful for my audience. I am one of those artists who has built a fanbase without racking up a lot of streams or press coverage. I've never gone viral, and have never done anything to get publicity. No advertising or marketing whatsoever. I don't engage much with my audience, nor do they reach out to engage with me. They just like listening to my music. That's enough for them (you). Like that restaurant - which, by the way, is called The Grafted Root Eatery in Grand Blanc, Michigan - I'm a small artist, with some unusual-but-good songs, a hodgepodge variety to my music, and you only hear about me from other fans. A homegrown, farm-to-table vibe in a way.
I'm not a full-time artist. My talent isn't the best, and my drive isn't the strongest. I do what I can, and I probably do more than most. I do absolutely everything myself. I don't do a lot of pre-release campaigning on social media. My releases are all basically "surprise" releases, unless you read this blog. I make art for the sake of art, not caring about being commercial, but I've released 13 albums, and I have a small but slowly-growing fanbase.
I do not suffer from second guessing or pursuing perfection. If I were compulsive about putting out perfectly written and perfectly recorded songs, I wouldn't have the catalog I have. The volume of artists, albums, and songs hitting the streaming services every day is staggering. There are not a lot of completely DIY artists who have stuck with it as long as me. The data reveals that although the fanbase isn't huge, it is a loyal, lasting one with a ton of repeat listeners. It isn't for everyone, but if it is, they keep coming back for more.
We need the small businesses, the individually-owned establishments, the favorite quirky restaurants of the world, the guilty pleasure places, those that dare to be different, the ones you've frequented for a long time, the places with more character, the ones you only recommend to certain types of people whom you know will appreciate them. Supporting the local independents instead of the corporate chains feels better.
When I was a "local" ski bum in Vail, CO for several years, we had "secret stashes" of powder that the tourists didn't know about. We knew where to find fresh tracks days after the last snowfall. You were careful about who you shared these places with, and thankful for those who told you about them. It's the same kind of thing with Scott Cooley fans, I suspect. Maybe my website and blog give you enough about my identity and the narrative behind the music to satiate your curiosity, but somehow, there seems to be a strong connection.
Artists like me think the system stinks, and the system thinks we stink. They're doing what they can to eliminate us, but then the only music you'll be able to find and listen to is what they sunk money into to make it appear popular.
If you look at my "reach," the tools that measure traction show that I am indeed a secret that has been kept well. 😉 That doesn't mean I don't have true fans. Increasingly, however, the streaming stats alone are what are used to measure music success. There is a pro-rata pool, and the incentive to inflate it with fraud is a real problem I've come to understand a bit more lately.
For a while there, in the last couple of decades, there was the appearance of democracy in the music business, with the idea that relaxed gatekeeping and affordability allowed anyone to release music, and seemingly the best would rise organically.
There was an illusion that DIY musicians could theoretically compete against any artist if the music was good enough. As with any business venture, the mom & pop stores could compete with the WalMarts, so to speak, if good enough. The reality is that WalMart has put a lot of mom & pop stores out of business, and the same kind of thing has happened with the music business.
Record labels were forced to get into bed with the music streaming services, and they have worked together to consolidate the power lost to combat the "threat" of unsigned artists. Understandably, they reward popularity, and are doing whatever they can to increase the gatekeeping to make it more difficult for DIY artists to succeed.
Music streaming platforms do not currently distribute each user's subscription fee only to the artists they actually listen to. Seems wrong, but that's not the only thing. There are a lot of other types of fraud happening. Things that may be legal but still feel wrong.
There is engineered success by people with the money to manipulate the system for artificial growth. This type of thing has been in the news more often recently, and casual music fans without much knowledge of the music business are feeling cheated.
There is evidence that the illusion of popularity can cause actual popularity. Perception becomes reality. Fake success attracts real attention, which reinforces the illusion. Fake streams divert the value of real streams. Casual music fans are increasingly becoming aware of the various types of music business fraud and feeling duped by it. Like fake news, some are able to recognize it more easily than others.
They have a lot of names for this type of thing:
- algorithmic targeting
- trend simulation
- simulated listeners
- purchased streams
- purchased playlist placement
- simulated playlist engagement
- fake fans
- fake plays
- algorithm manipulation
- fake sentiment
- synthetic listeners
- playlist promotion
- paid influencer recommendation
- streaming farms
- bot networks
- artificial plays
- algorithmic recommendation
- manufactured popularity
...to name a few. All of this helps to partially explain why today's popular music doesn't always seem to be very good. The deep pockets of major record labels allow for paying for all of the above while redirecting or diverting money away from independent artists like me who rely on authentic listeners. It is systematically unfair.
Anyone who points these things out and explains them always end up stating that this type of cheating has always happened in the music business, and then they always bring up payola, which was paying radio station disc jockeys to play certain songs.
No one wants to do well at anything if they had to cheat. When the cheating and exploitation is rampant, those gaming the system justify it as a necessary strategy. Many see it as one of those "If everyone's doing it, and you can't beat them, join them" types of situations.
I refuse. I'm proud to have what I believe is "organic traction." I've never paid for any of the above, and I don't plan to ever pay for any of it. I've never even paid for conventional advertising. I wouldn't feel good about popularity that isn't real.
No amount of marketing, ethical or otherwise, can make up for music not being very good in the first place, and in the long term, the popularity won't last. It's nice when other people like my music, but if I like it, and that's what matters most. I write/record/release because I have fun doing it.
I haven’t evolved to the point of playing the game of buying fans, streams, playlist adds, radio airplay, influencer recommendations, or resorting to publicity stunts. We know that people tend to believe what they read online, and if an artist appears to be popular, that can make them even more popular.
Recently I’ve read that music marketing companies set up thousands of fake social media accounts to stream and praise their clients’ new music and make it go viral. Manufactured popularity is something that can be purchased. They are calling it trend simulation. They use technology to game the system.
Maybe this is a big reason why it’s so hard to believe that the music in the top-10 lists is so popular. Makes you wonder if there is a general decline in both song quality and people’s tastes, but then I’ve also read that the older music from the 1960s to 1980s remains extremely popular, which makes sense because it seems so much better in comparison.
I don't claim to know how labels think, or what they do. I'm sure they chase trends. I'm sure they purchase popularity in one way or another. It seems that what works now is perfect production above all else. Major labels find a young, good-looking person to come in and record vocals for the album and music videos. They don't have to sound good, just look good.
They hire producers, pro songwriters, pro engineers, pro session players, etc. to make the tracks perfect first, then they record some vocals, tune them to perfection, then shoot some videos. Then they pay for all of the aforementioned things on the list above to market/promote the heck out of it. Next thing you know, they are the featured musical act on Saturday Night Live.
Why would I care? If I buck the system by intentionally not engaging in any of these tactics, I guess it means I either can't afford it (true) or don't feel right about it (also true). Can amateurish music with imperfections and low production quality be a style that trends upward? I think so, particularly if the songs are good. That's the value I offer.
No amount of system gaming can ensure success for bad music. Few artists will claim they don't mind getting ahead via unethical means. That said, no matter how much money you sink into "breaking" an artist can make up for a lack of good songs. I think our radars for detecting anything made with AI will improve and get more fine-tuned within the general population, just as we're now able to spot spam emails better than twenty years ago.
Now when I hear that almost half of all new music being uploaded to streaming platforms is made with or by AI, I wonder if people’s tastes will shift to appreciating music like mine that is obviously the opposite. As a backlash to the artificially-perfected pop stuff, basic recordings of real acoustic instruments into real microphones without digital trickery could become the cool new thing.
And when you know an artist hasn't resorted to any of the shady marketing on the list above, or any marketing at all for that matter, you can feel even better about it as a fan. There was an implied promise when independent digital music distribution became possible. Real music made by a real person with zero marketing can resonate and gain real popularity. I'm not banking on it, but it would be cool if it really was possible.
When it became fairly easy and inexpensive to record your own music at home, it made sense that you would want a way to try to sell it online. There was this idea of an "anti-label" that would give creators control in the early 2000s, and the independent digital music distribution aggregator services that sent music to music download and streaming services (also known as digital service providers) seemed to offer artists the ability to maintain ownership while reaching a global audience. Upload your music, then the world decides if they like it or not. There was a perceived promise that the music would stay available.
Policies are being put into place to not pay artists if they don't meet popularity thresholds, and further, to outright remove their music if it's not popular enough. Just having it available doesn't mean anyone will know about it, and even if they do, it doesn't mean they will want to listen to it, so some marketing spending could help. You could sink a lot of money into breaking a new artist in an unpopular genre, and it would be a big risk, even if you purchased fake fans, etc.
Take Blues music for example. It's not popular right now, yet so many types of popular music sprang from it. There are still fans, and there should be room for new blues artists. If the trends and algorithms say there's no market for it, it shouldn't matter. We need room for the non-popular types of music to remain available. The fringe styles, the micro-genres, the outsider art, the secret stashes.
Music is such a joy in people's lives, and it's too bad that it's all starting to sound more like McDonald's instead of Grafted Root. On the other hand, McDonald's has a lot going for it, as I pointed out in my song One More Mile To McDonald's. There's nothing wrong with liking what you like, popular or otherwise. It may be bad for you, but you don't care. Back when I was a drinker, my preferred adult beverage of choice was regular Budweiser, the king of the macro-brews, which I chose over microbrews to the chagrin of my friends during the early 90s boom of microbreweries in Colorado.
Speaking of blues, I've had them lately, and I've been writing and recording some lately too, which I'm now getting ready to release some of. So don't worry, I'll be further contributing to the deluge of unpopular music in an unpopular genre yet again soon. More niche mom & pop music in the age of mainstream fakery. Check back within the next month or so to learn more!
