http://www.nasirjones.com
The website is for fans of the artist (Nas) to be updated with his activities (such as upcoming album releases & live shows) and to also purchase merchandise such as clothing and physical copies of the artist's music.
It looks really simple and it's straight to the point. There isn't too much going on with the colour scheme as it's mainly just a combination of dark colours, which suits Nas really well looking at where he rose from before his stardom (Queensbridge). By exploring the website, I think it's main intention is to get the fans (and visitors of the site) to purchase from the site, whether it's the music or to see him perform live. As soon as you go on the website, it's already advertising Nas' documentary to you.
I found it very easy to navigate (especially since you don't have to scroll down when you reach the home page) as everything is clearly labelled at the top.
By looking at the website, I think one of it's main purposes is to sell items via the website, but more importantly to get people into the music so they can keep buying stuff (merchandise, tickets, etc).
How it comes across to me, the website tells me that this is an established artist, as he's performing here, there on this day and on that day.
http://flying-lotus.com/youre-dead
By the looks of it, for now, the website is being used to promote his latest project that recently came out, however that may change if FlyLo (Flying Lotus) has another project in the works or if he thinks he doesn't need to promote the album any longer. The website is for fans to be informed about when & where the artist will be playing so they can book tickets and it also directs them to other websites if they want to buy the album, each website having different deals and so on.
From the very start, the website shows simplicity as it only has 2 colours: black & white. It does the job well as the mixture between the two colours makes the website all the more eye-catching. It's intention goes straight to the point as it gives the visitor the essentials: tour dates, tickets, where to purchase the album, etc.
The website is really easy to navigate as all you need to is scroll and find everything you need, rather than clicking on other tabs to access different parts of the site for different reasons.
For the type of music Flying Lotus makes, which is quite experimental, I think the colour scheme was one of the smartest choices as it can easily attract more people rather than having all these flashy colours to try and maintain the attention of the visitor.
I feel that the website is telling me that Flying Lotus is a simplistic artist that's trying to do things differently.
http://mantramind.weebly.com
The website is for me to use as a "business card" if I were to be talking to someone else in the music industry (even if they weren't in the industry and liked music, I'd still show it to them) so they can have an idea of the kind of music I make and a glimpse of what kind of artist I am.
In comparison to other artist's websites (especially those that specialize in hip hop), it's a bit more abstract. It shares the dark toned and gritty feel as other websites but then it's a bit different with all the random different colours. I feel I reflect my intention pretty well through the mixture of colours as I'm trying to get across to the visitor (hopefully a fan of my music) that although I'm specializing in a genre where so much as been accomplished, I'm trying to take steps in a different direction from my predecessors and do things differently.
I find the website easy to navigate myself as there are 3 tabs (home page, about page & contact page) and they're very hard to miss. I also make things convenient for the visitor by having a button directly linking you to my SoundCloud and a button that directs you straight to my e-mail (on the contact page) so you can send me an e-mail inquiring about anything.
As mentioned earlier, colour plays a big role in more ways than one in regards to my website. To reflect my music, I wanted to keep the website looking simple and a bit complex, but to hold the attention of the visitor nonetheless and to make them more curious by making them ask themselves things like "Who is Mantra?" etc, etc.
In the "About" tab, you gather a strong indication of my imagery as there's a bio, however, the strongest piece of imagery is perhaps the first thing you see when you enter the website. On the home page, you have someone who's running uphill whom appears to be doing so without shoes or socks. I chose this as my theme because I feel it perfectly represents where I stand in the music industry: I'm just another young musician with aspirations and goals, who is far away from where he wants to be so I have to keep running uphill until I get there.
Sunday 31 May 2015
Friday 29 May 2015
Monday 11 May 2015
Textures & Acoustic Environements
Track 1:
1.
At first, the texture is monophonic as there is a unison melody with a rhythmic accompaniment (drum hits) then the drums develop rhythm and hi-hats are added into the mix, whilst some of the brass players hold notes which serve as a drone which assists the other musicians playing the melody.
After the dance, the texture becomes homophonic because while half of the band is doing the melody line, the other half accompanies it by singing "hey, sexy lady!" then shortly after that, it becomes monophonic for a moment then it turns polyphonic because instead of the other half of the band singing "hey, sexy lady!", they play it through their brass instruments so two individual melodic lines are playing at the same time, then they drop out so it becomes monophonic because you can just hear the melodic line then it ends with the texture being homophonic.
2.
Yes. Because they're outside, they don't have any reverberation so they can play as loud as they like and everything in the music can still be heard. For instance, if they performed their cover of "Gangnam Style" inside a room (especially how they played it), there would be a lot of reverberation and a lot of things within the music would clash with each other and wouldn't sound particularly nice in comparison to playing it outside. On top of that, the overall loudness of the performance would increase tenfold.
3.
Yes. I noticed a difference in the drums and brass as the camera moved positions. From 0:27 onwards, the detail of the drums becomes more and more vivid the closer the camera gets (notice the hi-hats). (Note: 1:01 - 1:06, the detail of the drums spikes).
When it comes to the brass band itself, from the very start, it sounds like they're playing at a live outdoor venue and you happen to be a distance away. The closer you get, the sound of the brass becomes much more clear and defined, especially from 1:48 onwards.
Track 2:
1.
In regards to the first group, it starts off being homophonic as they all sing the melody together in their respected vocal ranges, then it turns polyphonic as the bass singers (both furthest away from the camera) sing their part, the soprano/tenor singer (in the middle) sings the melody which is then repeated by the woman in blue almost a bar after (that would make it a canon) and the woman in green (baritone) assists the bass singers. After the group, there are two tenor singers who are singing together in a monophonic texture.
2.
They are in a cathedral/church with a hard floor (most likely marble) and a round ceiling, on top of that, there is a lot of space within the building.
3.
Yes. I think it's appropriate for this environment because there aren't too many of the same types of vocals (a pair of the same, at most). Also, there isn't too much going on at the same time, so you can hear all the vocals mix in really well together.
Track 3:
1.
The texture is homophonic as it's a band performing together. The drums provide the rhythmic accompaniment so the band can stay in time together. The pianist plays the role of a bass player throughout whilst the synth player is playing and repeating little melodies in a subtle manner so the attention stays more on the singer, then he has an improvisation section to himself which lasts for about 8 bars (maybe 8 and a half). The singer is accompanied by the guitarist who strums chords during the chorus and picked notes for half of the first verse.
2.
Because it's recorded in what appears to be a studio that specializes in acoustic recordings, it gave the instruments a raw sound that hasn't been mixed down at all which, in my opinion, worked out really well for the band.
1.
At first, the texture is monophonic as there is a unison melody with a rhythmic accompaniment (drum hits) then the drums develop rhythm and hi-hats are added into the mix, whilst some of the brass players hold notes which serve as a drone which assists the other musicians playing the melody.
After the dance, the texture becomes homophonic because while half of the band is doing the melody line, the other half accompanies it by singing "hey, sexy lady!" then shortly after that, it becomes monophonic for a moment then it turns polyphonic because instead of the other half of the band singing "hey, sexy lady!", they play it through their brass instruments so two individual melodic lines are playing at the same time, then they drop out so it becomes monophonic because you can just hear the melodic line then it ends with the texture being homophonic.
2.
Yes. Because they're outside, they don't have any reverberation so they can play as loud as they like and everything in the music can still be heard. For instance, if they performed their cover of "Gangnam Style" inside a room (especially how they played it), there would be a lot of reverberation and a lot of things within the music would clash with each other and wouldn't sound particularly nice in comparison to playing it outside. On top of that, the overall loudness of the performance would increase tenfold.
3.
Yes. I noticed a difference in the drums and brass as the camera moved positions. From 0:27 onwards, the detail of the drums becomes more and more vivid the closer the camera gets (notice the hi-hats). (Note: 1:01 - 1:06, the detail of the drums spikes).
When it comes to the brass band itself, from the very start, it sounds like they're playing at a live outdoor venue and you happen to be a distance away. The closer you get, the sound of the brass becomes much more clear and defined, especially from 1:48 onwards.
Track 2:
1.
In regards to the first group, it starts off being homophonic as they all sing the melody together in their respected vocal ranges, then it turns polyphonic as the bass singers (both furthest away from the camera) sing their part, the soprano/tenor singer (in the middle) sings the melody which is then repeated by the woman in blue almost a bar after (that would make it a canon) and the woman in green (baritone) assists the bass singers. After the group, there are two tenor singers who are singing together in a monophonic texture.
2.
They are in a cathedral/church with a hard floor (most likely marble) and a round ceiling, on top of that, there is a lot of space within the building.
3.
Yes. I think it's appropriate for this environment because there aren't too many of the same types of vocals (a pair of the same, at most). Also, there isn't too much going on at the same time, so you can hear all the vocals mix in really well together.
Track 3:
1.
The texture is homophonic as it's a band performing together. The drums provide the rhythmic accompaniment so the band can stay in time together. The pianist plays the role of a bass player throughout whilst the synth player is playing and repeating little melodies in a subtle manner so the attention stays more on the singer, then he has an improvisation section to himself which lasts for about 8 bars (maybe 8 and a half). The singer is accompanied by the guitarist who strums chords during the chorus and picked notes for half of the first verse.
2.
Because it's recorded in what appears to be a studio that specializes in acoustic recordings, it gave the instruments a raw sound that hasn't been mixed down at all which, in my opinion, worked out really well for the band.
Tuesday 5 May 2015
Royalties
Royalties
What are royalties?Royalties is an agreement between musicians (i.e. writers, composers, etc) and those who want to use their music for their own purposes. Musicians get their royalties by having their music played on TV/film (this would be known as a synchronization fee), radio, record sales (both physical & digital), merchandise & live performance, amongst other things.
Licensing is very important in regards to royalties because if a venue (can also be a public place like a store) plays music, then it's mandatory for them to purchase a PPL & PRS license (read below for more on PPL & PRS). The relevant societies will then collect the money and gives them to the relevant musicians (writers, composers & performers) as royalties.
There are three main collection agencies (In the UK) when it comes to royalties: PRS, MCPS & PPL.
PRS (Performing Rights Society):
PRS collects royalties and pays them to the writer(s) (both instrumentation & lyrics) when a song of theirs is performed live and that doesn't just mean concerts, it also includes if the song was played in the public (radio, TV, etc). Those who write lyrics to songs get a PRS royalties rate of 50% AT LEAST.
MCPS (Mechanical Copyright Protection Society):
MCPS royalties are paid to a songwriter whenever a copy of their song has been made, however if the songwriter is apart of a band, then it isn't unheard of for the songwriter to share the MCPS royalty with the band. However, MCPS royalties can work a bit more complicated and difficult for the songwriter. For example, it can work in ratio of "numbers of albums made:numbers of albums sold" and other ways so it can work in the advantage of the label, especially if they are major.
PPL (Phonographic Performance Limited):
PPL collect royalties from recorded music and distribute them to the recordings artists whom performed on the recording. This also includes sold CD's, music played through TV, radio, etc. If you run a business and you want to play music for the background, you'll need a PPL license if you're going to play music on the grounds of your business (i.e. inside the store) and the employees of the business can be counted as the "general public", so licensing is a MUST for businesses that want to play music.
What is copyright?
The right to prevent other people from copying your work and using it for their own benefits (in this case, recorded music & lyrics), so this allows the copyright owner to do what they want with the work and protect it, however, copyright works differently in the case of songs and recorded songs. When it comes to songs, the initial copyright owners would be the songwriter who wrote the lyrics and composes who wrote the song, but when it comes to recordings, the owner of the copyright would be whomever arranges the recordings (including booking and paying for studio time) and that could be the record label, for example.
The importance of royalties & copyright and what the industry might be like without it
In the music industry, royalties & copyright are perhaps one of the most important things. If the music industry didn't have these two things, in my opinion, it would be a much more crooked & shady industry and law would be much more involved than it is now and it would also be much less appealing.
For instance, why enter an industry doing something that you love when there's a high chance you won't get as much money as you'd deserve or even get any? why enter an industry where there's always a chance you can get screwed by anyone at any moment? why enter an industry where you make a great song and see someone else take credit for it?
When it comes to this topic, the questions can go on and on for days, however there have been some cases in the past & present concerning this specific matter. In my opinion, the following examples can give us an indication of what the industry might be like without things such as royalties, licensing & copyright.
Below is a video about Milli Vanilli and their tragedy (In my opinion, I think wasn't their fault as I felt they taken advantage of, however this happens in the current music industry). However, the reason I shared this was because I felt this can strongly represent of one aspects of the industry, especially if it didn't have the things in questions (royalties, licensing & copyright).
In this case, if the industry didn't have these things, you would have millions of people running around claiming things they can't do (i.e. sing) and get all the credit for it. However, the focus would be more on the labels (especially the major ones) because they would solely take advantage of people that have aspirations and push them into deals that would make them puppets so they sing & dance on stage to pull in money (and I wouldn't be surprised if they chose people who were "eye candy") or they would find talented people who can make hits and push them in a deal where they must work for their label and ONLY their label so you can't work with another, let alone sign with another (look at Ma$e with Bad Boy Records) just so they can fuel income for the label and the worst part of it; none of them will probably get paid. On that note, the industry would be a much more violent place behind closed doors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)