James Riordan Interview by Derek Sivers

James Riordan wrote not one, but two of the best books ever on the music business. First was "The Platinum Rainbow" (Swordsman Press) with Bob Monaco, which became the largest selling book ever written about the music biz. In 1987, Riordan wrote "Making It in the New Music Business" (Writer's Digest Books), which is a must-have for any reader of this magazine. You may also know him as the author of "Break on Through", the great biography of Jim Morrison.
This year he has returned to his own music as the leader of HYPNOISES, an alternative rock band now recording their first CD, ("The 20 Year Scream").
He's a pioneer and popularizer of the "Do It Yourself" approach to the music business. Please check out his book and this informative interview!

DS: You wrote Making It in the New Music Business in 1987 and its advice is timeless. Now nine years later, what new suggestions would you give to meet changes in technology or the music scene since then?
JR: The biggest change has to do with the economics of recording. It's so much more viable now to actually purchase your own quality recording gear. Not necessarily for final release, but in terms of putting something together. Perhaps you decide later to re-cut in a 24-track studio, but basically it allows you to do anything you want to do, which a record company can hear, that you can do for your own release without having to compromise because of expense. The person running the gear is still more important than the gear.

DS: I've found a lot of people have a hard time breaking from the old ideas of "If you're making a real record, it has to be in a big 24-track studio."
JR: Some artists get all psyched up when they go into a big room with all the meters, tracks, and all the expensive gear for $150/hr. If that's what it takes to get your best performance, that "old mentality" may be true. Some people just can't gear up and deliver it in a basement with a couple machines.
Where it used to be that hardly anyone could get the money to go in to record, nowadays almost anyone can afford to make a great sounding recording of their music.

DS: Yes, which I see as tied to your theory which you presented in Making It in the New Music Business - empowering the musician by saying "Look, you can do this yourself." You were talking mostly about releasing the record, but now this also applies to making the record.
JR: It's an extension of that. Now more than ever it's possible to record quality things, sell them, market them yourself, without a major label. The big stopper at that point is getting major airplay. You still need a major record label or a lot of money (or a lot of luck.)

DS: Do you recommend that musicians try to keep their records on their own label, rather than just using it as a way to get the majors' attention?
JR: It depends how accessible the music is. If someone is doing some Elephant Folk music, and it's not going to get played on radio stations, then the majors may not be able to do much for you anyway. If you're doing mainstream or commercial music, there's no question the majors can do more for getting your record played, distributed, and sold, than you can do for yourself.
The other factor is "What kind of person are you?" Some people are really into doing the music for the sake of the music. They want to record it as a milestone, as a way of logging off and saying "Okay - this is my second album period. Now I'm moving into a new phase." - They're not suited for rock stardom. Maybe they don't want to tour or anything else. Those people should stay with their own label if they don't want to deal with the other pressures or it - the press, the touring, and the idea of having business executives control your career. Some people don't work very well with others in the first place. So it's something they can look at as an option.

DS: I've always wondered why, if having your own label was such a good idea, the Eric Claptons, Jacksons, and Aerosmiths of the world are just artists on a major label.
JR: There are a lot of headaches to running this on your own. The bigger it is, the more headaches there are. But there's another side to it. Perhaps you don't feel comfortable with having businessmen control your career. So you decide "I'm going to press it myself. I'm going to distribute it myself." But then you need to become the businessman! You're going to have to play those roles yourself if you don't want somebody else in the role of promotion man, distributor, advertising guy, all those kind of things.
Once an artist on a major has achieved some degree of major success, then the record companies become very easy to deal with. Record companies are only hard to deal with if you're not making them a lot of money. Once you're making them a lot of money, they're not that hard to deal with!
If you're in the position of a Clapton or Aerosmith - well then the record companies are great! They take you out, you do what ever you want.

DS: What if everyone took your advice and released their own record? Would that harm the market? Is there such a thing as too many indie labels?
JR: The record business is like a big dysfunctional family. There are a bunch of practices that nobody likes, but they can't get rid of, because they're dependent on them. (payola, contract re-negotiation, etc.) Everyone releasing their own record would phase a lot of that stuff out, but it would also phase out some of the advantages. The advantages of the big labels are the interconnectiveness.
Let's say a new artist gets a mid-size record deal. They've got an album out. They don't have the money to travel the country and tour. Maybe they can pack into a van and a station wagon, but that only goes so far before they're going to run out. They'll never build up a national following doing that. They need a record company for that. Or a big agent. Or someone making that link to take the career another 5 steps.
Perhaps you don't feel
comfortable with having businessmen control your career. So you decide "I'm going to do it myself." But then you need to become the
businessman!

DS: One great and unique aspect of Making It in the New Music Business was that for each general direction, you gave a list of short-term goals that the reader should take. These goals demystify anything from "star quality" to selling records, and turn it into an inspiring plan. Could you explain how anyone can apply this technique?
JR: The biggest problem that most artists have in succeeding in the music business is they don't take a realistic approach. They sabotage themselves. If they were in another business, (say they quit music and open a shoe store or repair cars,) then they'd take a much more realistic approach.
But the music business is so filled with myths, image and hype, that they don't approach it like a business and say "Okay - what are the five things we need to accomplish next? How much time to we set to do this? What's out goal here? When we get to this point, when do we re-evaluate?"
Instead they often say "We'll get out there and jam around and hope we get discovered." But it just doesn't work that way.
Napoleon Hill [author of Think and Grow Rich - which everyone should read] said "Whatever you can conceive and believe, you can achieve." Well the key word here is "believe."
I've done all permutations of this. For example - take the Billboard charts and set the type with the name of your band & the name of what you want your album to be, and paste in in there convincingly so it's #1 on the charts. Every day when you wake up and go to work you can see that as an aid to help you believe that it's feasible & possible. It's not necessarily going to make it happen in three weeks. But it's making a big jump. It's like going from 0 to 60.
The problem with most people in the music business is they're so negative, they've been rejected so many times, they're in such an impossible business, that there's an unwritten code that says "Yeah I'm doing this but I'm not really going to get anywhere." Because it's uncool amongst their peers, family, and other musicians to say "We're going to the top." Everybody says "Oh yeah - well who are you?" - Then you have to deal with a lot of B.S., anger, and things you don't want to deal with.
The best attitude is to not say anything negative. Not putting yourself or anyone else down. Not cursing your efforts, but not going around shooting your mouth off either. A quiet reserve. It's what you need and what the band needs.
People ask me, because I have a new band, the Hypnoises, which I just started this year at age 47, "Is this serious, or is this a hobby?" The answer is "both". The point of a hobby is something that you enjoy doing that's fun. Well it isn't fun for me unless I'm doing it serious. I've done it too many times. I've had too many things happen in the past with record deals or this or that, that it only makes sense for the guys that I'm working with to really DO it. Do it right. Cut a CD. Make a video. Get out there and play. Build up the gigs. Get the right people involved.
Yeah, it's a hobby in the sense that it's something we're doing for our enjoyment, but yeah it's serious because we're doing the same way we would if it was the only thing for us. The only difference is I'm writing books and scripts during the week. Somebody else is a real estate agent. Somebody else is an artist. But the way we approach this is totally serious.

DS: You've been in the music business longer than most readers of this magazine. How do you see today's music scene fitting into the big picture?
JR: It's very cyclic. You go from big music business, where the labels control everything and nobody breathes without label approval. That stifles the art so people start breaking out, doing stuff on their own, establishing labels on their own. These labels get a little success, and they build and start to attain some real success. Pretty soon they're having a significant factor in what's going on in the music business. Then the big labels come back and gobble them up, make them part of the big business, and the cycle starts over again.
I think that's it's still going on in a business sense. They can't predict public taste, so they just flow with it. Like "alternative..."

DS: "Alternative" music today means "anything with a guitar."
JR: [laughs] Alternative generally means "an alternative to something else" or "alternative to mainstream". Well what happens when the alternative is the mainstream?

DS: Let's close with two Making It in the New Music Business quotes: "Succeeding in today's music business requires a whole new approach." and "The new artist must find ways to stand out from a great many competitors."
At that time [1987], artists releasing their own records was pretty uncommon. Do you foresee an even newer approach opening up?
JR: I foresee a lot of artists no longer going the label route. What you may see is a cyclic return to the days when there were actually local recording artists. In the early days of rock & roll, there were such things as local radio stations that played a lot of local artists. That's pretty much gone into the past because of syndicated programming, tip sheets, and other methods that determine what's the most profitable for a radio station to play.
But because of the technology and being able to release their own CDs and tapes, a lot of artists are not really pursuing a recording deal. They have a local following. They play. They put out their music. They sell that. They go on to the next one. As opposed to every kid's dream to be on the cover of Rolling Stone, signed to Atlantic Records, and all that.
I see artists all the time who, if someone came up to them and offered them a great record contract, they'd take it, but they're not really pursuing a record deal, they're just putting out great records. So that's another option that's surfacing. Still the lion's share of people will pursue the fame, though.

TOP (Index) / Hit Me / CD-Rom / SongoftheWeek /
Diary / Musician / Studio / Useful / or Personal.

James Riordan wrote not one, but two of the best books ever on the music business. First was "The Platinum Rainbow" (Swordsman Press) with Bob Monaco, which became the largest selling book ever written about the music biz. In 1987, Riordan wrote "Making It in the New Music Business" (Writer's Digest Books), which is a must-have for any reader of this magazine. You may also know him as the author of "Break on Through", the great biography of Jim Morrison. This year he has returned to his own music as the leader of HYPNOISES, an alternative rock band now recording their first CD, ("The 20 Year Scream"). He's a pioneer and popularizer of the "Do It Yourself" approach to the music business. Please check out his book and this informative interview!

	DS: You wrote Making It in the New Music Business in 1987 and its advice is timeless. Now nine years later, what new suggestions would you give to meet changes in technology or the music scene since then? JR: The biggest change has to do with the economics of recording. It's so much more viable now to actually purchase your own quality recording gear. Not necessarily for final release, but in terms of putting something together. Perhaps you decide later to re-cut in a 24-track studio, but basically it allows you to do anything you want to do, which a record company can hear, that you can do for your own release without having to compromise because of expense. The person running the gear is still more important than the gear. DS: I've found a lot of people have a hard time breaking from the old ideas of "If you're making a real record, it has to be in a big 24-track studio." JR: Some artists get all psyched up when they go into a big room with all the meters, tracks, and all the expensive gear for $150/hr. If that's what it takes to get your best performance, that "old mentality" may be true. Some people just can't gear up and deliver it in a basement with a couple machines. Where it used to be that hardly anyone could get the money to go in to record, nowadays almost anyone can afford to make a great sounding recording of their music. DS: Yes, which I see as tied to your theory which you presented in Making It in the New Music Business - empowering the musician by saying "Look, you can do this yourself." You were talking mostly about releasing the record, but now this also applies to making the record. JR: It's an extension of that. Now more than ever it's possible to record quality things, sell them, market them yourself, without a major label. The big stopper at that point is getting major airplay. You still need a major record label or a lot of money (or a lot of luck.) DS: Do you recommend that musicians try to keep their records on their own label, rather than just using it as a way to get the majors' attention? JR: It depends how accessible the music is. If someone is doing some Elephant Folk music, and it's not going to get played on radio stations, then the majors may not be able to do much for you anyway. If you're doing mainstream or commercial music, there's no question the majors can do more for getting your record played, distributed, and sold, than you can do for yourself. The other factor is "What kind of person are you?" Some people are really into doing the music for the sake of the music. They want to record it as a milestone, as a way of logging off and saying "Okay - this is my second album period. Now I'm moving into a new phase." - They're not suited for rock stardom. Maybe they don't want to tour or anything else. Those people should stay with their own label if they don't want to deal with the other pressures or it - the press, the touring, and the idea of having business executives control your career. Some people don't work very well with others in the first place. So it's something they can look at as an option. DS: I've always wondered why, if having your own label was such a good idea, the Eric Claptons, Jacksons, and Aerosmiths of the world are just artists on a major label. JR: There are a lot of headaches to running this on your own. The bigger it is, the more headaches there are. But there's another side to it. Perhaps you don't feel comfortable with having businessmen control your career. So you decide "I'm going to press it myself. I'm going to distribute it myself." But then you need to become the businessman! You're going to have to play those roles yourself if you don't want somebody else in the role of promotion man, distributor, advertising guy, all those kind of things. Once an artist on a major has achieved some degree of major success, then the record companies become very easy to deal with. Record companies are only hard to deal with if you're not making them a lot of money. Once you're making them a lot of money, they're not that hard to deal with! If you're in the position of a Clapton or Aerosmith - well then the record companies are great! They take you out, you do what ever you want. DS: What if everyone took your advice and released their own record? Would that harm the market? Is there such a thing as too many indie labels? JR: The record business is like a big dysfunctional family. There are a bunch of practices that nobody likes, but they can't get rid of, because they're dependent on them. (payola, contract re-negotiation, etc.) Everyone releasing their own record would phase a lot of that stuff out, but it would also phase out some of the advantages. The advantages of the big labels are the interconnectiveness. Let's say a new artist gets a mid-size record deal. They've got an album out. They don't have the money to travel the country and tour. Maybe they can pack into a van and a station wagon, but that only goes so far before they're going to run out. They'll never build up a national following doing that. They need a record company for that. Or a big agent. Or someone making that link to take the career another 5 steps. Perhaps you don't feel comfortable with having businessmen control your career. So you decide "I'm going to do it myself." But then you need to become the businessman! DS: One great and unique aspect of Making It in the New Music Business was that for each general direction, you gave a list of short-term goals that the reader should take. These goals demystify anything from "star quality" to selling records, and turn it into an inspiring plan. Could you explain how anyone can apply this technique? JR: The biggest problem that most artists have in succeeding in the music business is they don't take a realistic approach. They sabotage themselves. If they were in another business, (say they quit music and open a shoe store or repair cars,) then they'd take a much more realistic approach. But the music business is so filled with myths, image and hype, that they don't approach it like a business and say "Okay - what are the five things we need to accomplish next? How much time to we set to do this? What's out goal here? When we get to this point, when do we re-evaluate?" Instead they often say "We'll get out there and jam around and hope we get discovered." But it just doesn't work that way. Napoleon Hill [author of Think and Grow Rich - which everyone should read] said "Whatever you can conceive and believe, you can achieve." Well the key word here is "believe." I've done all permutations of this. For example - take the Billboard charts and set the type with the name of your band & the name of what you want your album to be, and paste in in there convincingly so it's #1 on the charts. Every day when you wake up and go to work you can see that as an aid to help you believe that it's feasible & possible. It's not necessarily going to make it happen in three weeks. But it's making a big jump. It's like going from 0 to 60. The problem with most people in the music business is they're so negative, they've been rejected so many times, they're in such an impossible business, that there's an unwritten code that says "Yeah I'm doing this but I'm not really going to get anywhere." Because it's uncool amongst their peers, family, and other musicians to say "We're going to the top." Everybody says "Oh yeah - well who are you?" - Then you have to deal with a lot of B.S., anger, and things you don't want to deal with. The best attitude is to not say anything negative. Not putting yourself or anyone else down. Not cursing your efforts, but not going around shooting your mouth off either. A quiet reserve. It's what you need and what the band needs. People ask me, because I have a new band, the Hypnoises, which I just started this year at age 47, "Is this serious, or is this a hobby?" The answer is "both". The point of a hobby is something that you enjoy doing that's fun. Well it isn't fun for me unless I'm doing it serious. I've done it too many times. I've had too many things happen in the past with record deals or this or that, that it only makes sense for the guys that I'm working with to really DO it. Do it right. Cut a CD. Make a video. Get out there and play. Build up the gigs. Get the right people involved. Yeah, it's a hobby in the sense that it's something we're doing for our enjoyment, but yeah it's serious because we're doing the same way we would if it was the only thing for us. The only difference is I'm writing books and scripts during the week. Somebody else is a real estate agent. Somebody else is an artist. But the way we approach this is totally serious. DS: You've been in the music business longer than most readers of this magazine. How do you see today's music scene fitting into the big picture? JR: It's very cyclic. You go from big music business, where the labels control everything and nobody breathes without label approval. That stifles the art so people start breaking out, doing stuff on their own, establishing labels on their own. These labels get a little success, and they build and start to attain some real success. Pretty soon they're having a significant factor in what's going on in the music business. Then the big labels come back and gobble them up, make them part of the big business, and the cycle starts over again. I think that's it's still going on in a business sense. They can't predict public taste, so they just flow with it. Like "alternative..." DS: "Alternative" music today means "anything with a guitar." JR: [laughs] Alternative generally means "an alternative to something else" or "alternative to mainstream". Well what happens when the alternative is the mainstream? DS: Let's close with two Making It in the New Music Business quotes: "Succeeding in today's music business requires a whole new approach." and "The new artist must find ways to stand out from a great many competitors." At that time [1987], artists releasing their own records was pretty uncommon. Do you foresee an even newer approach opening up? JR: I foresee a lot of artists no longer going the label route. What you may see is a cyclic return to the days when there were actually local recording artists. In the early days of rock & roll, there were such things as local radio stations that played a lot of local artists. That's pretty much gone into the past because of syndicated programming, tip sheets, and other methods that determine what's the most profitable for a radio station to play. But because of the technology and being able to release their own CDs and tapes, a lot of artists are not really pursuing a recording deal. They have a local following. They play. They put out their music. They sell that. They go on to the next one. As opposed to every kid's dream to be on the cover of Rolling Stone, signed to Atlantic Records, and all that. I see artists all the time who, if someone came up to them and offered them a great record contract, they'd take it, but they're not really pursuing a record deal, they're just putting out great records. So that's another option that's surfacing. Still the lion's share of people will pursue the fame, though.