Contact: Sabrina Skacan

(310) 208-6500 x126 (DO NOT PUBLISH)

Sabrinas@geffenplayhouse.com

 

 

THE GEFFEN PLAYHOUSE TOASTS THE WORLD PREMIERE OF

CARRIE FISHER’S ONE-WOMAN SHOW

WISHFUL DRINKING

 

Written and Performed by This One-of-a-Kind Hollywood Royal, Wishful Drinking Chronicles the Ups and Downs of a Roller Coaster Life

 

November 7—December 23, 2006;

Audi sponsors Opening Night November 15, 2006

 

 

LOS ANGELES, October 27, 2006 — Does art imitate life or life imitate art?   Either way, life itself becomes the basis for Wishful Drinking, a one-woman show penned and performed by none other than the remarkable Carrie Fisher.  Staging her life’s experiences in the World Premiere spotlight of the Geffen Playhouse, Fisher narrates the episodes of her chaotic life with brutal honesty and banter: from her unusual childhood as the daughter of Debbie Reynolds and Eddie Fisher to her involvement with a little movie called Star Wars®, from her marriage to Paul Simon to the successes of her novels and screenplays, from her struggles with substance abuse and mental illness to the bliss of being a mother…to a teenager.

 

Directed by Joshua Ravetch, Wishful Drinking begins preview performances on November 7, 2006 with opening night commencing on November 15.  The production continues through December 23, however there is no performance scheduled for November 17 or November 23 (Thanksgiving). 

 

Using humor as her elixir of choice, Fisher holds the audience captive with hilarious and touching tales of her roller coaster life and the never predictable world of Hollywood. With unequivocal insights and secrets revealed, Fisher paints a rich portrait of a woman who has not only survived but flourished. Accompanied at the piano by Gerald Sternbach, Fisher breaks into song throughout her monologue, allowing the lyrics to accentuate the mood just like the golden age of movie musicals.  And yes, she can sing – it’s in her genes.

-more-

CARRIE FISHER (WRITER/PERFORMER)

Since her feature debut opposite Warren Beatty in “Shampoo” in 1975, Carrie Fisher has been a compelling force in the film industry.  She attained international recognition as Princess Leia, a role that made her a cultural icon, in the box office sensation Star Wars and the smash hit sequels The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi.  Other acting credits include “The Blues Brothers,” “Garbo Talks,” “The Man with One Red Shoe,” “Hannah and Her Sisters,” “The Burbs,” “This is My Life,” “When Harry Met Sally,” “Austin Powers,” “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back,” along with “Charlie Angels II,” “Wonderland,” “Stateside,” “Undiscovered,” “Romancing The Bride,” the upcoming “Cougar Club,” “Fanboys,” as well as previously hosting the Oxygen Network’s popular hit show, “Conversations From The Edge.”  Carrie became a sensation with The New York Times bestseller, “Postcards From The Edge,” for which she won the Los Angeles Pen Award for Best First Novel. Two additional best selling novels “Surrender the Pink” and “Delusions of Grandma” followed. Along with writing ABC Pictures “These Old Broads” for ABC TV, Fisher also wrote the screenplay based on her best seller “Postcards From The Edge,” which starred Meryl Streep and Shirley MacLaine.  She is currently working on a project for John Wells as well as having various other television/film projects in the works. On top of all that, she still finds time to write original pieces and conduct interviews for various leading magazines and newspapers, including Harper’s Bazaar, Vogue, Details, Travel & Leisure, and The New York Times. Ms. Fisher’s fourth and most recent novel, “The Best Awful,” received rave reviews and is out in paperback now.  She is currently adapting “The Best Awful,” with Bruce Cohen & Dan Jinks producing - but if she tells you what studio or network it’s for, she’ll have to kill you. Carrie Fisher’s experience with mental illness and addiction has made her a very popular speaker on the lecture circuit as well.  She has appeared on the Senate floor urging state legislators to increase government funding on medication for people living with mental health issues. She has received dozens of various awards for her courage and commitment to fighting mental illness and the stigmas that are associated with it.  Her outrageous sense of humor makes her an ideal speaker for other compelling issues such as surviving single motherhood and growing up Hollywood with a point of view that few celebrities have. She currently resides in Los Angeles with her daughter, Billie, and other occasional house-guests (like you care):  Sean Lennon, Craig Bierko, Doug Lewis, Michael Rosenbaum, Johnny McKeown, Gloria Crayton, Marianne Faithful, Francois Ravard, Charlie Wessler, Griffin Dunne, Edgar Phillips, James Blunt, Cyndi Sayre, …And Greg Stevens.  Oh…and her mother lives next door to her, as well.

 

JOSHUA RAVETCH (DIRECTOR)

Joshua Ravetch is a graduate of the Stella Adler Conservatory, New York where he worked with Ms. Adler before returning to Los Angeles to become the Artistic Director at the Stella Adler Conservatory & Theatre West, and where he taught Adler’s signature script interpretation and master scene classes. While there, he directed Ira Levin’s “Deathtrap,” which garnered five Drama Logue Awards including awards for direction and production. Mr. Ravetch’s other directorial credits include, Chekhov’s “The Seagull;” Clifford Odets’ plays, “Waiting for Lefty” and “The Big Knife,” which starred Academy Award nominated, Robert Forster. He also directed John Patrick’s “The Hasty Heart” and the NAACP Image Award nominated, “Love Acts” by Bart Baker at The Coast Playhouse. In addition, Ravetch wrote and directed the critically acclaimed play, “Girders,” which launched the season at The Coast Playhouse. He also wrote and directed “Beacon” with Brooke Shields, which was purchased by Warner Brothers Television as a pilot. Ravetch recently directed a staged presentation of his play “Invention” with Stefanie Powers at the Egyptian Arena Theatre and directed a reading of his play “Off Sides” with Christine Lahti and Robert Forster after developing it with Olympia Dukakis and director Jonathan Lynn here at The Geffen. Ravetch’s most recent play, “Writer’s Cramp,” was just performed as an in-house reading at The Geffen’s Audrey Skirball Kenis Theatre with Holland Taylor, Douglas Sills, Robert Forster and Bill Brochtrup.  Ravetch’s other writing credits include the feature, “Mainland” for Universal Studios, “George’s Diner” for Castlerock, CBS’ “Joan of Arcadia” and “Titan,” a new pilot for TNT. Ravetch also toured with the late-great Shelley Winters conducting a series of seminars on acting, playwrighting and “Old Hollywood.” Mr. Ravetch has been developing Wishful Drinking over the past year with Ms. Fisher and Ms. Painter, and this production marks Ravetch's first on the main stage here at The Geffen Playhouse.

 

-more-

KIM PAINTER (CO-PRODUCER)

Raised in Maryland, Ms. Painter graduated Salisbury State University with a focus on writing and photography before moving to Los Angeles as a free-lance photographer. Her photos have been featured in publications such as The New York Times. Painter started her Hollywood career at Jerry Bruckheimer Films, and then took a role with Carrie Fisher, where she became the associate producer of "Conversations From The Edge," Carrie Fisher's hit talk show, which ran for three seasons on the Oxygen network. During that time, Painter worked with Fisher on her best selling novel, "The Best Awful," and is assisting in the adaptation of that novel to a limited series, which Painter is currently slated to Associate Produce. Ms. Painter's other credits include the, "AFI Tribute to George Lucas" and the upcoming feature project, "E-Girl" which Painter is attached to co-produce, with Fisher attached to rewrite. Ms. Painter is currently running Ms. Fisher's production company and has been working with Fisher on the development of this show, Wishful Drinking.

 

Gerald Sternbach (At the Piano)

Gerald Sternbach is proud to commence his fifth season as the musical director for Reprise! Best of Broadway in Concert Series, in Los Angeles.  He has been nominated for eight Ovation awards, three LA Drama Critic Circle awards and recently won a Garland award from the critics of Backstage West. During the summer of 2005, he made his Los Angeles Philharmonic debut at the Hollywood Bowl as the on-stage pianist for Stephen Sondheim’s 75th Birthday-The Concert, also assisting Paul Gemignani with the music preparation. Jerry has been the associate conductor for “Seven Brides For Seven Brothers,” “Merlin” and “The Tap Dance Kid” (all on Broadway), “Les Miserables” (L.A. premiere company), and was the conductor for the national tour of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s “Song and Dance.” Jerry is also a prominent vocal coach in Los Angeles, and has accompanied such diverse stars as Marilyn Horne, Nancy Wilson, John Lithgow, Kelsey Grammar, Florence Henderson, Carol Burnett and others. Other musical direction credits including a number of benefits including “Divas Simply Singing,” “Les Girls,” “Do Re Mi,” “Two on the Aisle,” “The Perfect Year” and “Something Wonderful” and two benefits featuring the original casts of “A Chorus Line” and “Dreamgirls,” plus “A Hollywood Salute to Broadway,” one of the first AIDS Benefits held in Los Angeles.  As a songwriter/composer, his songs have been heard in ASCAP Rising Songwriter Showcases on both coasts, while also contributing music to the new musical “Heartbeats” (in collaboration with Amanda McBroom).

 

ABOUT THE GEFFEN PLAYHOUSE

Awarded the Preservation Award by the Los Angeles Conservancy, the Award of Excellence from the Society of American Registered Architects, and the Architectural Award of Excellence by the Los Angeles Business Council for its acclaimed 2005, $19 million renovation, the Geffen Playhouse begins its 11th season in 2006/2007, enjoying its stature as a leading West Coast theater company and the crown jewel of Los Angeles theater. Noted for its intimacy and celebrated for its eclectic mix of classic and contemporary plays, provocative new works and musicals, the Geffen continues to present a body of work that has garnered national recognition. Named in honor of entertainment mogul and philanthropist David Geffen, who donated one of the largest gifts ever made to an already-constructed theater, the company is headed by Producing Director and President of the Board Gilbert (Gil) Cates, Artistic Director Randall Arney and Managing Director Stephen Eich, and has produced eight world premieres, four Tony, four Pulitzer, and seven Obie-award winning shows in its storied 11 seasons. Proudly associated with UCLA, the Geffen welcomes more than 130,000 patrons each year, and maintains an extensive education and outreach program, designed to engage young people and the community at large in the arts. For more information, please visit geffenplayhouse.com.

 

EDITORS PLEASE NOTE:

Geffen Playhouse

10886 Le Conte Avenue, Los Angeles (Westwood), CA 90024

across from the UCLA Campus

 

-more-

WISHFUL DRINKING  (World premiere)

Written and performed by Carrie Fisher

Directed by Joshua Ravetch

Co-produced by Kim Painter

At the Piano - Gerald Sternbach

 

Show runs November 7—December 23 2006

Previews: November 7 to November 14

Opening Night: November 15, 2006

Sign Interpreted: November 26, 2006 at 2:00 p.m.

No performance on November 17 or November 23 (Thanksgiving)

 

Media sponsors: K-Mozart, KCRW-FM and Indie 103.1

Opening Night sponsor: Audi

 

Production Credits

Designer: Daniel Ionazzi

Production Stage Manager: Mary Michele Miner

Asst. Stage Manager: Susie Walsh

 

Tickets ($35 to $69) are on sale now at the Geffen Playhouse box office, online at GeffenPlayhouse.com, via credit card phone order at 310.208.5454, at all Ticketmaster outlets (Robinsons May, Tower Records, and Ritmo Latino locations), or by calling Ticketmaster at 213.365.3500. Performances are Tuesdays through Thursdays at 7:30 p.m.; Fridays at 8:00 p.m.; Saturdays at 4:00 p.m. and 8:30 p.m.; and Sundays at 2:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Performance times for productions at the Audrey Skirball Kenis Theater at the Geffen Playhouse vary; please visit GeffenPlayhouse.com or call the box office for specific performance times. Student rush tickets are available one hour prior to curtain for $15. For general information or to request a brochure, call 310.208.5454, or visit GeffenPlayhouse.com.

 

 

# # #

10.13.06

Music Industry Newswire COLUMN: Imagine a world in which you receive money every time your music is played. There are firms that appear to be working to make this dream a reality. Representatives of Soundmouse, Landmark, ASCAP and APM spoke about the intriguing possibilities on a panel presented by the California Copyright Conference.

Titled “Digital Recognition Technologies: How Do They Work and How Are They Being Used?” the evening event focused on the software and machinery being used to identify music tracks by their digital signature.

As mentioned in prior columns, there are two basic methods of audio recognition: watermarking and fingerprinting. With watermarking, data is embedded into a song file. Although inaudible, the identifying data is accessible by computer. You might think of it as a silent and invisible bar code.

With fingerprinting, there is nothing added to the file. The song is scanned and analyzed, with the findings stored in computers. In his 2003 article, “A Quick Review of Audio Fingerprinting,” Wes Hatch wrote: “Simply put, audio fingerprinting is the process by which we are able to identify some piece of music, given just a few seconds of input to go on. The ability to do so is quite an astonishing feat, one that requires a complex level of math and the compilation of huge databases.”

Secrets
The companies offering digital audio fingerprinting are all using “proprietary methods,” which is a polite way of saying the companies don’t want to discuss how their systems work. Techie types with whom I spoke hinted at the use of Fourier coefficients, Hidden Markov Models, Mel-Frequency Cepstral Coefficients, evaluation of spectral flatness, linear predictive coding analysis and other terms I accused them of making up.

Whatever the process, the companies state they can prove that their systems work. Do they work a hundred percent of the time? No, but few systems are perfect, and the tracking of song files is so sorely needed that many music publishers, songwriters and performers would probably settle for a fifty percent success rate at this point.

The watermarked or fingerprinted information can also include the same type of meta-data text you normally place on an MP3 file: song title, composer(s), copyright, publisher, contact information, etc. Obviously, this can allow for more far-reaching and more accurate identification and reporting of the use of music in all media.

Panel of Experts
Many of the questions from panel moderator Steve Winogradsky, a CCC past president and current partner at Winogradsky/Sobel, probed the effectiveness and efficiency of the new technology. Joining Winogradsky and CCC President Shawn LeMone (ASCAP) on the dais were Mark Vermaat of Soundmouse, Darren Briggs of Landmark Digital, Lynne Lummel of ASCAP, and Adam Taylor of APM Music.

Soundmouse
Based in London, Soundmouse is a cue sheet management service utilizing music recognition technology to ABC, Discovery Communications, Fox, Disney ABC ESPN TV, ITV, BSkyB, and the international arms of NBC Universal and Sony Pictures Television, among others. As their website states, they perform “automated recognition of music in difficult audio environments such as music buried within television broadcasts.” Vermaat points out that Soundmouse systems “are designed to handle the large-scale reporting demands of the broadcast industry as well as to make certain audio recognition is accurate and complete, with processing scalable at an affordable cost.”

Landmark Digital Services
In 2005, Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) purchased Landmark Digital Services. In so doing, they obtained rights to the patents of Shazam Entertainment Ltd. (Yes, the same Shazam many of you use in your cell phones to identify a piece of music you hear in a club, bar, restaurant, or wherever.) Part of this acquisition was the digital fingerprinting methodology called BlueArrow. As they describe it, “Using a patented algorithm, unique identifying features are mapped for all content.” Those mapped features are then compared to “program material gleaned from media broadcasts monitored around the clock.” Ultimately, “each fingerprint match delivers a title, identifying the exact time, date and source of the audio.”

ASCAP and MediaGuide
Mediaguide was founded in October 2002 by the American Society of Composers, Authors & Publishers (ASCAP) and ConneXus Corporation. Using fingerprinting and watermarking, they track music and advertising on 2,500+ radio stations in the top 150 U.S. markets. They state that their “audio and video fingerprinting technology can be embedded in broadcast head-ends, consumer devices and software applications. It can support asset tracking, community connections, copyright compliance, network quality assurance as well as creating new revenue streams through business intelligence, targeted interactive advertising and commerce.” Translation: you can make money from your music if you are in their system.

APM
Naturally, music firms with the greatest number of songs have a larger interest in automated tracking of their use. Since APM has a library that includes more than 300,000 titles, it made sense to have their president on the panel. Taylor, who is also on the board of the Production Music Association, has an interesting bio on his firm’s site: “For over two decades, Adam Taylor has been helping intellectual property companies, organizations and individuals manage and extract value from their copyrights, trademarks and patents.”

Who Goes With What
The three performing rights organizations each work with competing firms for music tracking. ASCAP is aligned with MediaGuide, BMI with Landmark Digital Services, and SESAC with Nielsen’s BDS and TuneSat. SESAC, in fact, has been active in this area prior to the other PROs.

Hunter Williams, a Senior VP at SESAC, provided written comments distributed at the event. “Today SESAC (through BDS) monitors over 1,600 radio stations,” notes Williams,” while pointing out that they are also in “a strategic partnership with TuneSat,” a fingerprint technology firm monitoring more than 100 TV channels. TuneSat originally planned to attend the CCC event but had to cancel due to scheduling conflicts. It is my hope they will post their views in the comments section below.

Pointed Questions
Winogradsky probed for the weak spots in the various methodologies. Vermaat pointed out that all sorts of music usage can have an impact on music recognition, including time stretching and audio processing such as EQ and compression, but also that audio is often of short duration and/or layered when used in motion pictures and TV programming. “The challenge for any fingerprinting technology in this field is to still make an accurate recognition regardless of these challenges,” Vermaat stated. He and others on the panel stated that “fingerprinting technologies in general have issues with these challenges.”

Lummel pointed to a hybrid approach to tracking, using technology to determine which songs were being played but often relying on cue sheets to determine precise usage, such as the length of the use and nature of the use, both of which are used by the PROs to calculate royalty earnings.

Taylor and Vermaat both noted that some of the new systems are helping generate more accurate cue sheets. “The cue sheet isn’t dead,” notes Taylor, “but the technology is a new way of getting data into the cue sheet.” He also pointed out that problems with inaccurate cue sheets might not be resolved until “months or even years after the production” is completed.

“After a decade of industry attempts to streamline the process, tracking performances on TV is still a largely manual endeavor,” writes Williams. “Cue sheets are notorious for being filed incorrectly, late, and in some cases, not at all, which adversely affects payments to songwriters and composers.”

It’s not just cue sheets that can be a problem. Improper input of track data can cause difficulties, something I know from personal experience: on the “Electro Bop” album by The G-Man is a song in the Golosio catalog entitled “Sheena Sez.” It was inaccurately entered by the record company as “Sheena Sex.” Digital audio recognition may help rectify these types of errors because the song can be fingerprinted and will be recognized no matter what title is in the meta-data.

Winogradsky brought up a number of points that could possibly give a false or incorrect reading by the technologies, including the re-titling of tracks (a common practice in the music library world), and the use of pre-recorded tracks, loops or samples. Briggs started to describe how Landmark uses a “heuristic recognition technology” that is overlaid atop their regular technology, but did not go very far with the explanation. After all, that would entail revealing proprietary information. But all parties recognized that the techniques mentioned above cause problems in accurate recognition of the correct piece of music.

Questions from the audience were strong and pointed, especially when one of the attendees referenced the competing systems being utilized by the three different PROs. Lummel, in particular, was pinned down by the question, “Would you accept data from Landmark?” The room fell silent. Finally, after a long pause she said, “Maybe.” Speaking for songwriters, composers and music publishers, I see this as a hopeful sign.

Future Uses
As Wes Hatch has written, digital audio data recognition might have been helpful in dealing with illegal Internet transmission of audio files, citing Napster as a prime example. “With an effective implementation,” Hatch notes, “administrators would be able to prohibit the transmission” of material protected by copyright. Again, we can hope.

Article is Copr. © 2010 by John Scott G – all rights reserved. This version is also Copr. © Music Industry Newswire, a publication of Neotrope®.

SPHERE: Related Content — CLICK HERE to See What Else is Out There!
About The Author / Editor:

John 'Scott' G is a partner in Golosio Music Publishing (www.golosio.com) and owns the related firms G-Man Marketing, G-Man Music, FookMovie, and SongsAndSoundtracks. His albums, recorded under the name 'The G-Man,' are on iTunes. Copr. (c) John Scott G and Music Industry Newswire. UNAUTHORIZED RE-PUBLICATION OF THIS CONTENT IS PROHIBITED UNDER U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT LAW EXCEPT FOR QUOTING IN CONTEXT OF ANOTHER ARTICLE OR A SHORT SUMMARY LINKING TO THIS FULL STORY.

	Buzz up!on Yahoo!
Permalink:   http://musicindustrynewswire.com/2010/12/02/min3486_175444.php

Can you believe this woman?! In the morning, she gets dumped at the airport of a strange city--Reykjavik, Iceland, of all places--by a bizarre natural disaster. How random and unexpected is that? Without missing a beat, by nighttime she's pulled off a gig that would take weeks of planning, even for locals.

Starting Up in Real Time

It takes huge effort to reset the clock of a humongous existing organization like GM to real-time speed. It's an altogether different challenge to get a startup going at real-time speed from Day 1.

"The Internet fundamentally changes the time scales of business," says Brian Halligan, co-founder and CEO of HubSpot, an Internet marketing software company. (Halligan is my co-author on our book Marketing Lessons From the Grateful Dead.) "Because we started in the post-Internet age with people who live and breathe the Web, we run the business in a unique way. Instead of command and control, we empower people at the edges, and that changes the way you hire, promote, the hierarchy, and so on. We have a very different sense of trust and autonomy than most companies. And it has big importance for leadership."

Many companies tout their "open-door policies," but HubSpot has a "no door policy." There are no offices, even for the CEO. "It feels like there are fewer layers in the organization when anyone can just walk up to you with ideas. You can react to what's going on right away if you're not stuck behind a wall with a secretary guarding your door," Halligan says.

Since Halligan runs HubSpot as an always-on, real-time enterprise, the lines between "work" and "private time" blur to the point that the vacation policy was eliminated--people just take time off when they need it. "In my father's era, people worked 9-to-6 every day in an office," he says. "It was very structured, and he had to be in the office to get the work done. But our people have iPhones, and they are always online even on the weekends. It seemed very silly to us that people who sometimes worked for a few hours at home on a Sunday needed to formally request time off on a weekday. It just seems ludicrous to have this whole vacation policy so we said, 'Take whatever vacation you want; we trust you.' It's not command and control. Instead, it's very much about trusting and autonomy and pushing the decisions down so people can react in a real-time way."

The entire HubSpot organization is run on the Agile Scrum software development methodology. "The traditional way to develop software is called Waterfall," Halligan says. "That's where you develop very detailed product specifications and then you go away for a year to build off that spec. But what happens in business today is that in the year that you are building it, the requirements change quite a bit, so you deliver something that's just flat in the marketplace. Agile Scrum is the complete opposite. We never write detailed product specifications or plans. Instead we run monthly 'sprints' where we have four or five teams organized around a couple of developers, a product manager, and a designer, and they build to the product requirement backlog. When we make decisions on what to build, we change our minds like 10 times up to the very day before the sprint. It works extremely well because the competitive landscape changes in real time. As we get new input from customers, and we are able to react very, very quickly."

When Halligan told me about Agile Scrum software development I got excited. Here were the same principles I've been exploring in communication playing out in product development! Just as the traditional method of developing marketing programs takes tons of time, so also does the conventional method of software development. In both disciplines that added time means opportunities are missed.

Halligan says that working quickly is so essential to the HubSpot business that the Agile Scrum methodology has spread to other departments in the company. "Now marketing works the same way," he says. "So instead of a year-long marketing plan with all these lengthy campaigns, everything is on a monthly sprint cycle. We learn, we experiment as much as we can, and then we tweak it. We change our mind about what we are going to do a bunch of times between sprints, and then we typically lock it down the night before. The idea of working quickly is so essential to how we run our business."

« first‹ previous123next ›last »

« No Shoe-Strings Attached, Unless They're Converse | Main | Trent Reznor Understands Why Fans File-Share Music; Why? Because He Does It Too. »

2010.10.12

"We Have Had Almost Zero File-Sharing Of Pledge Artists," Says Benji Rogers Of PledgeMusic. Pt. 1

Recently, I spoke with Benji Rogers, founder of PledgeMusic, a crowdfunding platform for music and creativity. In the first segment of this two part interview, Rogers talks about the difference between crowdfunding and what PledgeMusic does, how the process encourages more active participation from fans, and things artists should consider when putting together a campaign.

How does crowdfunding disrupt the one-size-fits-all paradigm of financing the production of recorded music? Being that it's more democratic in nature, does it fund art that otherwise wouldn't get produced?

Benji Rogers: First, I’d like to speak to the difference between straight “Crowd Funding” and what I consider PledgeMusic does. To me using the words “crowd” and “funding” to describe the kind of intimate and unique direct to fan experience that we focus on is to sell it short. I fundamentally don’t believe that “crowds” or fans for that matter want to have much to do with “funding” anything.

This is why I shy away from the term in the first place. I also am not really a fan of the term “consumer” for the same reason. I’ve never met a consumer, but I have met plenty of fans and I feel that I can safely say that the last thing they want to do is to fund anything.

"Fans crave participation, inclusion, a feeling of belonging and so the wonderful part about having the web as a tool is that you can offer these experiences to your fans from miles away and with no price barrier."

This is another reason we didn’t even look into the fan investment mechanisms that exist as we all felt that fans are also not attracted to the idea of putting money into their favorite artists to make a profit. We tricked out the platform in so many ways to enhance both usability and functionality for artists whilst offering the fans an amazing journey that they can share with their band.

As creative as our artists wish to be in the way in the way which they share their music with their fans is what has lead to us doing so well as a platform, and so we de-emphasize the transaction of “funding” in favor of the much more experiential “Pledge.” We focus on the interaction and not the payment. I have never wanted to fund my favorite artists, but I have always wanted to be a part of what it is that they are. What they sell is a different matter.

But anyway, finally in answer to your question yes absolutely. Artists are no longer subject to anyone’s agendas but their own, and certainly no to the whims of a passing and often fickle gatekeeper or crowd. They can reach out to their fans with the music that they want to make and more importantly they can be more creative than they ever have been able to be in the way in which they deliver this music to the world. Artists are no longer subject to release schedules, trends in clothing, passing styles or genre, pigeonholes or former look or age restrictions and I suppose on the whole are no longer subject to what was.

They are only beholden to what either works or does not.

KB: What the web, the proliferation of digital technologies, and the rise of the networked audience leads to is "pull" marketing.

“Rather than treating producers as passive consumers whose needs can be anticipated and shaped by centralized decision makers, pull models treat [fans] as networked creators even when they actually are customers purchasing goods and services,” John Seely Brown argues in From Push to Pull. "Pull platforms harness their participants’ passion, commitment, and desire to learn, thereby creating communities that improvise and innovate rapidly.”

Crowdfunding utilizes a pull marketing model over the push method. In what ways does this change the level of involvement that fans have in the production process and their commitment to the resulting art?

Benji Rogers: Again I think this speaks to my first point about how we use and define the words “crowd  funding” in this context. To me the whole point is being missed in most cases by focusing on the transaction. If we talk about fans being “networked creators” by merely putting money towards an artists work then this is only speaking to a quarter of the potential at best. The transaction is the least exciting part of the equation as I stated above, but what really makes the fans feel a part of things is if they are actually engaging in the campaign on a deeper level. We developed the tools to share not just what the artist is selling i.e. “direct to consumer” as it is often called but also to share what the artist is doing. From the studio to the stage the fans can be taken along for the ride of their lives.

The artists can grant as much or as little access as they would like to but the principal of the fans themselves being able to share what they are doing, and how they are interacting with their bands amongst their peers is more powerful than just the transaction itself.

"Fans can literally change the course of things
as they are happening, and as the platform is
adaptive when live the very act of creation can be
shared and the maximum inclusion is possible."

This does not mean that all artists have to show every detail but it’s more that they could if they wanted to. We’ve had to check with lawyers and even with health and safety to see whether what certain of our artists wanted to offer was possible, safe and legal.

This speaks more to who the artists we work with are and not just the products that they sell. You can’t steal the experience as that would be missing the point and in essence you can’t buy it after the fact as it’s actually happening in real time nature. The fans’ interaction really does mean that artists can react in real time as well which I think opens an amazing door to what is possible as the platform further evolves. The fact of a charity being involved in each campaign has further increased these levels of not only financial but emotional participation and has led to a “nobody looses” attitude across the whole process.

Does crowdfunding encourage fans to be more active participants in their cultural lives and does it serve to more closely connect fans to the material processes of arts creation and those involved?

Benji Rogers: As I stated above I would argue that “crowd funding” is an extension of that with a few bells and whistles and that why I’m not a fan of it in the musical space. We have had almost zero file sharing of Pledge Artists as the fans that Pledge and who have interacted with their artists would be undermining the point of their Pledge in sharing the updates from “their” artists campaigns.

You will notice that the average “crowd funding” campaign reads in essence: fund my album, there are cool ways for you to buy, and you have 60 days to do so, and when it’s done I’ll send it to you along with what ever you bought.

What’s the fans incentive to buy? They could just wait and get it later? At the time of their choosing. What we help our artists bring into the world is a campaign that would read more like: Pledge here to be a part of the making of our new album and from day one you get access to our Pledgers Only updates page on which we will be uploading, rough mixes, demos, live tracks, video blogs, and youstream live events from the road and from the studio. There are limited exclusives available and 15% of all profits from this Pledge go will go to (for example) Musicians On Call, a charity that we love because…

We have had artists who have done and offered less than this and it’s had some success, but we built the platform with enough of an engine to really let our artists shoot for more and they sure have! Fans have also given us the feedback that the Pledge process is how they wish to receive all their music and band interaction in the future. The idea of just getting a format pales in comparison.

"This is why Pledgers often Pledge on multiple projects and have asked us to make out site more searchable and to better help them identify similar artists for them. We’re working on that by the way!"

KB: The greatest challenges of crowdfunding a record pertain to aligning a project with realistic financial expectations and coordinating the type of incentives that will promote fan participation. The right project with too high of funding needs will fail. So too, if the proper enticements aren't tied to the tiers of contribution; it won't gain traction among the target audience.

This leads to a complex merriment of the project, it's goals, and level of interest it can garner.  The incentives tied to contribution tiers tend to bring backers towards a greater degree of involvement in careers of artists and grant them access to extensions of their fandom that wouldn't otherwise be available to lesser fans.

What are the essential elements of contribution tiers that spur deeper participation among fans and how do they make backing the project, both better than not having the album, but also 'better than free' too?

Benji Rogers: I think I touched on this above. The exclusive packages, or offerings should not be considered the rewards, but should be considered the price of entry to the campaign.

• Offer Must Be Relevant To The Fans: They should be set up sensibly and should be based on items and experiences that are relevant to the fans and to the bands particular style of interaction. 

• Focus On The Experiential Side: They should focus on the experiential side of things, and as a rule anything, personalized, in person, limited in number but not too cost prohibitive and all things that lead to something personalized go the fastest.

• Cost The Pledge Tiers Correctly: We also try and help artists cost these things correctly, i.e. take into account shipping costs and the basic cost of items at the base level so that they can maximize profits.

As for the setting of the target amounts we have an algorithm built into the signup process from which we begin to get a picture of what that target should sensibly be. We hit a 77% success rate in campaigns hitting their target amounts and I think that this was in large part a result of using more than just a face value sign up process when approving projects. Also the majority of our artists do not display the amount of money that they are trying to raise. This is highly encouraged as it further de-emphasizes the financial transaction part of the campaign but also has lead to fans spending more money.

"We have seen that fans Pledge on average
30% more if the target amount is not disclosed"

Another interesting thing we found is that since we started the company only three fans have ever asked what the target amount was. If the campaign is great, and the rewards/updates (not the incentives to buy) are fantastic then fans really don’t care about the fund-raising side of things. Further to this we encourage artists to offer a broad range of exclusive items and we recommend that they not all be cost prohibitive. We focus on limited quantities of rare things at each price point. The ebay model can be seen to be rewarding only those who can afford and not those who just get there first. We’ve also been able to work with partners to save our artists money on things like manufacturing, studio time, mastering and promotion. Unlike a traditional crowd funding site we consider the Pledgers only updates to be the reward for all who participate and so we feel that from the fans perspective, if you Pledge the minimum of $10, €8 £8 then whilst the first few weeks may not show it, the following weeks and months become the most amazing value for money. Fans clearly want choices but we feel that these should never be too cost prohibitive. Strangely enough the slowest moving exclusives are the lowest priced, i.e. the digital download and the straight CD.

Kyle Bylin in Interviews | Permalink

Reblog (0) | | Digg This | Tweet This!'); Tweet This! |

Comments

Comment below or sign in with TypePad Facebook Twitter and more...