The quality of Digital only labels?

citizen · Post by **citizen** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 9:52 pm

I hope nobody takes this the wrong way, but I still view digital only labels with just a shade of suspiscion. I guess my (skewed?) logic goes that if you have enough confidence in your music to release it, then theoretically you should eventually cover the costs of the first run of vinyl, and susequently proceed to do more releases. (and yes, i know it is vastly more expensive to master, press and distrubute)

Don't get me wrong, I have heard some great digital only releases, but I've heard more than a few which, at least to my ear, certainly don't make the grade production-wise. There really are some shockers out there.

At the same time it is great that people are now empowered to release music without the aid of a label, which certainly wasn't the case that long ago.

Your thoughts?

brutal traxx · Post by **brutal traxx** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 9:57 pm

Digital only is ok if the standard is as high as a vinyl release. BUT saying that , i have heard many many low quality songs released on vinyl aswell (in dubstep/breaks/dnb/trance/hardcore) so its 2 sided init.

The crap stuff makes the good suff look great! All about opinions init.

citizen · Post by **citizen** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 9:58 pm

Also, if there are any folk on the forum from sites that stock digital releases (Juno, Boomkat, Bleep, Addictech etc.), I'd be interested to hear what criteria you use when deciding to stock a digital only release?

Stylistic preferences aside, there are some pretty wild fluctuations in quality on some of these sites.

Surely not anyone can just say "hey, I did a tune, you should stock it".

manray · Post by **manray** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 10:48 pm

I ain't making music to sell it on the internet. It seems to me that the majority of digital only releases are purely shite. All about digital/vinyl combination.

For me it's all about the vinyl. I did a grime garage release bare years ago now and i still like to get the vinyl out and take a look at it

Ghetto as fuck with a sticker printed at home.

While i'm here i just uploaded new tune "BACK TO 87" on the myspace.... check its biggles if i say so myself/

djshiva · Post by **djshiva** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 11:06 pm

vinyl may be great for djs, but it cuts off an entire sector of people who might be interested in buying the tunes. personally i think it hurts the musicians making the music more than helps them.

i support wholeheartedly, more releases on CD or digital...but i agree that the quality control needs to be there.

dusk governor · Post by **dusk governor** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 11:30 pm

guerillaeye · Post by **guerillaeye** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:09 am

return of the cd-single maxi?

pure · Post by **pure** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:58 am

Well I can tell you my latest digital release on digital-tunes.net through resonant recordings was professionally mastered at a well known london studio.

plume · Post by **plume** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:52 am

format arguments are pretty silly, however I will agree that I've seen some digital only releases that make me scratch my head. That said I suppose there's the same in vinyl releases.

Use what works for you. I'm still all vinyl til I pony up $$ for seratto.

threnody · Post by **threnody** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:44 am

Brutal Traxx wrote:i have heard many many low quality songs released on vinyl aswell

Agreed.

I don't understand why people have beef with digi format.... For me the best songs of last year were only released digitally.... Dysfunktion/Shonx - Canton being my number 1!

Of course it is nicer to own a physical format somewhere down the line and for producers it's more prestigious to have a plate with your name on it but to be honest vinyl is a niche format with only a few genres still utalising it....Indie has reinvented the 7". DnB + Dubstep have it as the no.1 format but in house/techno/electro the MP3 has taken over largely and as for Grime it is almost exclusively MP3 (over MSN) and CD mixtapes.

Surely having tracks available for many years as a digital release is positive and at least tracks will be available long after the vinyl runs are sold out. Probably the best would be for a 12" release and subsequent digital release (or possibily launch both simultaniously). There fore everyone is happy. Labels seem to be getting on this more now which is good for both artists and punters.

Quality is the only issue with MP3 sales. That is up to labels to make sure quality control is retained....professional mastering and accurate ID tags should be the standard here...especially as the manufacting costs are almost nothing....To add in to this I think that artowrk should be done for each digital release al la Kursed......

With sites like Bleep, Digital tunes and Addictech providing fantastic download shops I think that we will be greatful for MP3 releases especially in 10 years when people have sold their decks to pay for their kid's schooling and their records are being stored up in the loft to make way for their wife's expanding shoe collection

brutal traxx · Post by **brutal traxx** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:02 am

Yeah, for the record (huh!) I favour vinyl and all labels are vinyl and digital. But I still cut dub plates and I also use cds.

chunkie · Post by **chunkie** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:07 am

threnody wrote: I don't understand why people have beef with digi format.... For me the best songs of last year were only released digitally.... Dysfunktion/Shonx - Canton being my number 1!

Quality is the only issue with MP3 sales. That is up to labels to make sure quality control is retained....professional mastering and accurate ID tags should be the standard here...especially as the manufacting costs are almost nothing....To add in to this I think that artowrk should be done for each digital release al la Kursed......

With sites like Bleep, Digital tunes and Addictech providing fantastic download shops I think that we will be greatful for MP3 releases especially in 10 years when people have sold their decks to pay for their kid's schooling and their records are being stored up in the loft to make way for their wife's expanding shoe collection

bang on the buzzer!

i've only started buying digital releases in the last two months but have to say its brilliant - the ease and flexibility of purchases being a major factor as i live in the countryside

i know a couple of people about to start digital labels and on the above proviso of quality (and hopefully some artwork) i say best of luck !

ramadanman · Post by **ramadanman** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:13 am

if you're going to do a digital only release, the least you can do is get the tunes professionally mastered

djshiva · Post by **djshiva** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:53 am

ramadanman wrote:if you're going to do a digital only release, the least you can do is get the tunes professionally mastered

agreed. i was working on my own digital label, but have shelved it for the time being simply because i lost my job and don't have the cash for the professional mastering at the moment.

if you are gonna do it, do it right. i think we can all agree on that point fo sho.

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:03 am

ramadanman wrote:if you're going to do a digital only release, the least you can do is get the tunes professionally mastered

Just out of interest, how much is professional mastering?

ramadanman · Post by **ramadanman** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:20 am

£60 / hour @ Transition last time i went. Did 2 tunes in an hour

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:29 am

ramadanman wrote:£60 / hour @ Transition last time i went. Did 2 tunes in an hour

Cheers, for some reason I was thinking it was £200 a track, that's actually pretty reasonable.

pete_bubonic · Post by **pete_bubonic** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:35 am

This is interesting, a topic of conversation that is important to me currently.

I have a few tunes that I personally believe are releasable, but I don't really know who to send the beats to and those I have sent them to have all good feedback with that classic line 'it's not the sound/style we're pushing'. Which is fair enough, that's what you get for being a bit left of centre.

However I believe strongly in having a good level of quality control, by which I mean having good respected labels give your music the go ahead. 1/ It restores my confidence that I have gone completely off the wall and made something dumb or bizarre (which is more than possible) but also 2/ If more experienced label owners believe in your music then it is more likely to actually be worth putting out (ie: won't simply contribute to all the waste lack lustre bargain bin crap out there already) and finally 3/ You spend not just money on vinyl but the promotion of the track, it gets reviewed in magazines, it's gets promo'd, there's hype, it raises the artist's profile.

Will Wascal recommended going down the digital tunes route as he does and does well out of it, there are obviously a massive proportion of people who don't give a fuck about vinyl anymore. And I'm more likely to be able to make a bit of money out of a digital sale than a vinyl one (this isn't that important but nice all the same).

SO yeah, I'm still on the fence.

high rankin · Post by **high rankin** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:38 am

As long as the quality control is as high as for a vinyl label then there is no problem.

I have heard some real poop that has made its way to vinyl.

citizen · Post by **citizen** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:48 am

ramadanman wrote:£60 / hour @ Transition last time i went. Did 2 tunes in an hour

Presumably, the better your production, the less time is spent fine tuning it at the mastering stage, yes?

(Sorry if that is an obvious thing - I am not a producer)

And just how much can you polish a turd?

The quality of Digital only labels?

The quality of Digital only labels?

Who is online