Want An (In-Depth) Understanding of Reggae Drumming?

A few years ago I had the opportunity to sit down with an exceptional Reggae drummer who was working on a cruise ship with me. He was the real deal. Born and raised in Jamaica and drumming for most of his life he could do things on the kit that made simple white guys like me very jealous.

During our quasi lesson he informed me that Reggae is something that is in your blood, just like Americans tend to be better when it comes to playing Swing music (his words not mine). He showed me a number of tips and tricks to get my island drumming more authentic, but I will admit Reggae has always eluded me.

Then two weeks ago I got an email from Hudson music telling me I could download Gil Sharone's Wicked Beats instructional DVD for only $15. I had to take the offer.

For you drummers who don't know who Gil Sharone is. Right after high school he became the drummer for the group Fishbone which opened a number of doors for the young musician. He has played with Blink 182, Dillinger Escape Plan, and his own group Stolen Babies. He is an active clinician and was even voted Modern Drummers #2 Most Up-And Coming Drummer in 2008. If you want to read his full bio visit Drummerworld here.

So enough about Gil and let's talk about Wicked Beats.

This is a great instructional DVD because it leads you through the development of Jamaican drumming. Gil walks you from the beginnings of the movement with the Nyabingi and Burru. This lesson is filmed with some of Reggae drumming greats whom explain the importance of Rastafarianism on the drumming style and how the sounds mimic that of nature. This really helped me to understand the underlying core concepts of the Reggae style of drumming.


From there Gil walks you through Ska and Rocksteady and how the beats change ever so slightly for each. Then he moves on to Reggae, Dancehall, 2 Tone Ska, and 3rd Wave Ska before ending with Dub. 


I was really impressed at how good of a teacher Gil Sharone is. He really helps the viewer understand where the important parts of the various Reggae style beats fall and how to make each one authentic. And he does it so simply that you catch on quite quickly.  Sometimes the best teachers are the ones very few know about.

Wicked Beats is a true "in-depth" DVD. Not only does Gil show you how to properly lay down various authentic sounding Reggae beats, but he also includes commentary from noted Reggae historian Roger Steffans who's history lesson helps the drummer understanding how the music has developed and evolved.

What I dig the most about Sharone's DVD is the fact that he brings in special guest such as  Lloyd Knibb of The Skatalites who offer insight into Reggae technique. These "true" Reggae greats offer amazing concepts that can give your drumming that real island flavor.

I will leave you with the trailer for Wicked Beats and encourage you to either buy the DVD or download it directly through Hudson Music on Demand.

Drumming Greats: Mick Fleetwood

As I weaved through traffic on Orange Blossom Trail with my windows down and music cranked up the other day I couldn't help but notice that I was getting some awkward looks from other motorists.

Now let me explain for a second. OBT, as we affectionately call it, is propagated by people who enjoy hip hop and Latin music, so when I pull up at a red light and Fleetwood Mac's Dreams is blaring from my VW sound system I guess I can understand the funny looks from other motorists sitting on their 22" rims. What these motorists don't realize is that I am a drummer, and Fleetwood Mac is backed by one of the greats in the drumming community – Mick Fleetwood.

OK, so I will admit that Mick wouldn't be a drummers first choice when it comes to inspiration. He isn't  a blazing jazz pioneer like Billy Cobham or Max Roach, he isn't a progressive superstar such as Neil Peart, or a modern day rock star such as Rich Redmond, but we should all give Mick Fleetwood his due and here's why:

1. You know a rhythm section is great when the band is named after the bassist and drummer.

Sure many fans associate Fleetwood's fame with the vocals of Stevie Nicks, but many do not know that the band started out as a blues group and was named after bassist John McVie and Mick Fleetwood. Hence the name Fleetwood Mac.

2. To be a drummer you have to have brass balls.

Part of being a great drummer is having confidence. Nothing says confidence like wearing a wedding dress for a Rolling Stone article, and Mick did just that.

3. Mick kept the band alive.

We all know of the chaos that is Fleetwood Mac. The marriages, the divorces, and all the drugs, but through it all Mick is responsible for keeping the group going. After a long hiatus Mick urged the group to get back together for a new album in 1997 called Dreams, which brought them back to the mainstream and put the original line-up back on stage thus reinventing the Fleetwood brand.

4. Showmanship.

Watch any Fleetwood video and you will see Mick making faces, dancing on the kit, and feeling the music. To be a great drummer you have to be "in the music", and for his entire career Mick has been inside the music.

5. The tick-tock.

This is what keeps Fleetwood Mac on my playlist. Sure some drummers can burn the double bass, others can swing like mad, and newbies can play at 200 plus beats per minute, but to get the audience to dance and your records to sell your music has to have a groove. When it comes to groove Mick and John created a tick-tock that is always in the pocket, on time, and infectious.

I urge all the young drummers out there to give Fleetwood Mac a listen. See what these musical pioneers do that has pushed them up the charts and put them on stages across the world. In this day of speed drumming competitions and programmed beats we often forget that when you put great musicians together you get a great product. When that band has a drummer who can keep solid time, create an infectious groove with the bassist, and perform with confidence and musicality you can survive the test of time.

Finally watch this video from their successful Dance video, even with the University of Southern California Marching band Mick keeps the groove alive.

A Great FREE Learning Resource for Drummers

During my practice routines I like to devote some time to playing with study materials that give you music without drums and a chart to follow. I have found Tommy Igoe's Grove Essentials series (you can find these great books here), and Steve Houghton's Ultimate Drumset Reading Anthology (you can check out this manual and more here) to be great resources.

But after daily practice with these books the purpose behind reading charts and playing along with the tracks looses it's value. I mean it's pretty useless to read through a chart when you know the songs inside and out because you have played them too much.

So I went on a search this morning to find some new play along material, and being a consumer of the new technology driven universe I wanted to download something as opposed to purchasing a CD and then waiting for said disc in the mail before I could practice.  Through an Internet search I came across Vic Firth's Education section of their website and was pleasantly surprised.

I have to thank the folks at Vic Firth because this is a great resource for both drummers looking to boost their game and music instructors seeking ways to efficiently pass down their craft. They have countless videos of the drumming community's best offering lessons, live footage, and their own theories on the instrument. You can download their copy of the 40 Essential Snare Drum Rudiments, although I would encourage you to get my book on that (shameless plug), along with a plethora of other resources. They even have an ongoing Podcast that keeps you up-to-date with performances of today's top drummers.

The gem I found was at their drum set play along section (you can get there here).  

This page offers countless songs with and without drums. These free online lessons cover a number of genres and each one includes music to help you work on your chart reading skills at the same time. They are all songs by today's top drummers so be prepared to be challenged during your practice routine when you connect with these bad boys. 

All in all this is a great free resource for drummers looking to up their game. I encourage you all to take a tour of Vic Firth's website and see how they can help you get better on the kit.

Say hello to your new 360 recording contract.

There is no need to beat a dead horse, but lets kick Mr. Ed around for a second.

The music industry has changed, and even if you don't like what's happening you may have to just suck it up and deal with it if you really want to be a musical icon. So here are a few facts.

The four major, soon to be three, record labels account for 88% of recorded music sales leaving just 12% to be split among the countless indie labels out there and popping up as you read this.

The major labels are responsible for this huge difference because they have the financial backing and resources needed to launch an artists career. I am not saying you can't live comfortably with an indie, or even start out with one and then move up to the big leagues. I am just saying that if you still dream of being the next Jay-Z, Madonna, or Taylor Swift you will need a major in your corner. Now here's the downside, or the upside if you actually pay attention.

All of the major labels, Sony/BMG, Universal, and Warner have instituted the notorious 360º Deal for their new artists. Now you may be able to get signed without handing them a piece to the whole pie, but it is very unlikely at this time. Many musicians are furious about this new practice, and some hold valid arguments, but for a second let's step away from what you have been told by your buddies and examine what a 360º Deal is.

Basically put, and I am sure you all know this, the 360º gives the record label a piece of your recording royalties, publishing, merchandising, touring income, endorsement deals, licensing, and whatever else you may make money on with your brand image. Notice how I said brand image instead of music.

In the past artists just forked over money from their physical recordings and in some instances publishing royalties to their label partners and got to keep all the other income associated with their business model. Now if you just read the 360º Deal as that you would scream and shout that you were getting the shaft. What many pundits leave out is what the label gives to you for that chunk of pie.

When you sign a 360º Deal with most major labels they then takeover all of the production and costs associated with every aspect of your brand. They help design, print, and distribute your merchandise. They help solicit your music to film, television and advertising companies. They help put together your tour. They even help you find sponsors. Without this type of deal you, as the artist, would need to fund these endeavors yourself, and many times that required asking your label for a loan to get each project off the ground. Now they do that for you, basically because the more they invest the more they stand to earn.

On top of funding all of the other income streams that can make you money the labels have the connections to get your new product and services to a much larger audience than if you went at it alone. They have connections in the film and advertising industry, the touring industry, the merchandising and distribution realm, and they have those connections all over the world.  So think of it like this you could do it yourself and potentially reach two million people in one geographical location in the states, or hand it over to a company that can reach 2 billion in China alone.

When Jay-Z signed his 360º Deal with Live Nation he got 775,434 shares, plus an option on an additional 500,000 with the exercise price of $13.73.  

You see they have the money and the connections to make you into that superstar you always dreamed about. But to hammer the point home I offer one more point.  If I was the head of A&R for Sony and had two bands that I wanted to add to our roster. One of them was more than willing to sign to a 360º Deal and the other demanded a typical contract, as a business person looking out for my bottom line who do you think I would sign first?

I am not condoning the 360º Deal or condemning it in any way. I am just tired of seeing all the negativity with very little about what the majors give to you in return. Remember in any true negotiation or business deal each party should feel as though they have given a little and got a little in return. And finally if you really dream about super stardom, private jets, sold out shows at Madison Square Garden and a gold plated shark tank in your mansion you may have no choice but to sign a 360º Deal so be prepared.

And finally, if you ever have the carrot dangled in front of your face GO OUT AND GET A REPUTABLE ATTORNEY who specializes in music business contract negotiation. The ambulance chaser you saw on TV can't help. You need a contract lawyer who can make the language work better for your career and save you millions in the process.

Here are some links to learn more about 360º Deals:
http://musicians.about.com/od/ah/g/360deals.htm
http://techcrunch.com/2008/11/08/360-music-deals-become-mandatory-as-labels-prepare-for-free-music/
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/arts/music/11leed.html?_r=1
http://lawyer4musicians.com/2009/03/22/you-spin-me-right-round-like-a-360-record-deal/

The street fight over EMI's publishing catalog.

On April 19th it was announced that Sony Music had gotten the nod from the European Union to go through with their purchase of EMI's publishing rights. You can read the full article on The Guardian's website. Warner has been fighting Sony's attempts ever since EMI defaulted on a $5.4 billion dollar loan in early 2011 and was put up for sale by CitiGroup to ease the debt. Almost immediately the big four major labels were left to but three, Sony, Warner, and Universal.

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

At that time Universal already controlled the market with roughly a 27% of the business and was able to pounce on the fire sale going after EMI's recorded music division which holds the rights to such artists as Norah Jones, The Smashing Pumpkins, Keith Urban, Brad Paisley, and some small band known as The Beatles. The purchase will boost Universal's market share up to 36% dominating Sony's at 23% and Warner at 15%. Despite this fact the war over EMI's assets hasn't revolved around their recorded music division, but rather their publishing division which, according to Rolling Stone Magazine, holds the rights to 1.3 million songs including works by Rihanna, The White Stripes, Sting, and many others.

Ever since EMI's publishing assets were put up for sale Sony and Warner have gone to war trying to secure these copyrights. Each company has attracted outside investors to help sweeten their offer until Sony was able to throw down $2.2 billion for the catalog ousting Warner from the race. But the third largest music conglomerate in the world wouldn't go down without a fight. Since then Warner has challenged the deal both in the U.S. and European court systems hoping to thwart Sony from gaining such a huge market share in the publishing business of the music making world. But why such a fight for publishing rights?

The reasoning has to do with the current trend of musical consumer buying behaviors, and how these behaviors can equate to large amounts of income for whomever owns the proper rights. Recorded music rights provide income to the persons who control the actual recordings of a work. So if you buy a CD, or you license Sting's recorded version of "Every Breath You Take" for a movie you have to fork over some dough to whomever owns the copyrights to the actual recordings you use. Publishing rights on the other hand cover many more situations. Not only would you have to pay whoever owns the recorded version of the Sting tune you plan to use, but you would also have to pay the publishing company for the underlying music and lyrics in the song. So what's the big deal if you own the recorded music you are getting a piece of the pie and if you own the publishing you get the other half? The answer lies in how we are using music today.

Take for example the popular FOX hit Glee. These teenagers, whom all appear to be in their mid twenties by the way, perform a number of popular music hits in each episode, but because they are the ones performing the hit the owners of the recorded music are paid less, if even paid at all. This is because they aren't using the original recording of the song, instead they are remixing it in their own way.  Yet despite this fact they still must pay the publishing holders the statutory rate. Now think about all the television shows, movies, and advertisements that do this. We've got American Idol, America's Got Talent, and The X Factor all presenting contestants singing their favorite hits and that's just in the U.S.. Still don't think it's a big deal? Now think about the millions of videos on YouTube of people performing these hits with their own bands or by themselves with their dogs singing harmony.

But the income stream gets much larger for publishing rights holders. In the current musical landscape touring has become a major breadwinner for bands. In these situations the only people getting monies from these performances are the performance rights organizations whom pay the publishing holders of the songs that are performed. Many of these publishing houses also own the rights to the Artists images, signatures, fragrances, and whatever else can be branded with their namesake.

So to put it in simple terms the recording music royalties will make you money on the uses of the actual recording while the publishing royalties will earn you money on those items plus any other way that the song may be used in the marketplace from other performers singing your tune, to public performances, and even a bunch of people trying to impress judges or sing about their high school angst on television. Which income stream would you rather have?

That is why there is a street brawl over EMI's publishing division. The big boys know how much money is at stake, and the company whom holds the largest stable of hits will eventually win the battle when it is time to knock it down to the big two.

The Evolution of the Single

_______________________________________________________________________________


"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."

                                                               ~Edmund Burke

_______________________________________________________________________________

In the late 19th century the gramophone disc took over phonograph cylinders as the standard in recording technology.  By 1910 the 78, 10-inch shellac record became industry standard.  Technical limitations of the disc forced recording artists to tailor their work to the medium thus creating shorter songs and only releasing one or two "singles" at a time. It wasn't until the 1960's that this format changed.

In the 1940's the FCC understood that radio broadcasters would eventually run out of spots in the then used AM bandwidth.  To counteract that they forced large scale AM stations to maintain an FM channel as well.  For years these broadcasters did nothing more than duplicate the programming on both channels then In July of 1965 the FCC made another ruling that broadcasters could not duplicate programming on both FM and AM dials in major US markets.  This sent programmers searching for a cheap way to fill dead air on their FM stations. 

Luckily for these programmers a new standard record size was emerging. A 12" disc allowed artists and labels to press more than one track into the vinyl. DJ's and radio programmers realized they could fill up hours of time on their FM stations by playing these "albums" in their entirety and the idea of Album Oriented Rock was born.

Album Oriented Rock and the new FM channel changed the way in which the business of music was done. All of the sudden new recording artists had to create and entire collection of like minded songs to include on one record.  The record deal changed too to cater to this new distribution method with new artists finding themselves signing contracts tying them to three or more albums with the label. 

Now the single didn't die completely.  It was only changed from the main source of revenue into a marketing tool to get people to purchase the entire album for a heftier price tag.  Throughout the 80's this method made the record labels millions upon millions of dollars.

Then the Internet was born and consumers quickly found a way to share their music over phone lines through companies such as Napster. The problem with the new Internet delivery method was that bandwidth was low during the early days of the medium which meant that music files needed to be compressed and sent as singles to other users. 

For years the industry fought this new delivery method as fans became pirates giving away and taking music without retribution to the artists, but that's another story. To combat this problem the industry began endorsing online music storefronts such as Apple's iTunes to distribute their medium, but by the time they finally found a way to make money in the new online world the market had changed.

Underneath all of the piracy fans had developed a new taste in the acquisition of their music. They didn't want the entire album because it took up so much of their personal time to find and then download. Instead they started downloading single tracks that appealed to them from various artists. By the time Apple took over with the iPod and iTunes the market had changed. A new generation of music consumers emerged that didn't want to pay $20 for an entire album for just one track as they had done in the past. They wanted their music instantly which meant that single files were the way to go, and through their test phases with piracy and peer-to-peer sharing they wanted to create their own musical experience through customizable playlists. The market had spoken. They wanted singles again.

Once again the music industry has changed, and once again we witness the cold hard fact that history is doomed to repeat itself.  Luckily for us this time the repetition is producing larger sales numbers then we could have imagined. Unluckily those numbers are for much smaller unit prices.

Keep this in mind.  If history is due to repeat itself then that means the album should come back around. Over recent years ISP's have increased the average level of bandwidth for the end user and they have opened up new channels of distribution through smart phones, and wireless Internet delivery systems such as 3G and 4G. When it comes to price points the labels have decided to challenge Apple's huge capitalization of the market by offering cheaper prices to other retailers such as Amazon who are offering entire albums for as low as $1.99. These small facts make it possible for the fans to afford full albums once again and download them quickly thus fulfilling their needs. 

The biggest issue the labels and artists face in eventually recapitalizing on the sale of entire albums is the quality of the material they offer to the public. For the past decade the industry has shifted back to the pre-1965 single distribution method and with that they have focused on creating only one or two strong hits at a time. To truly recapitalize on the return of the full length album market the industry will have to once again fully develop and nurture artists to their fullest rounded potential so they can once again create entire albums that appeal to their fans.

For now the single once again reigns supreme. This time it isn't on a ten inch shellac disc. It's in a five by three inch phone.

The Streaming Industrial Radio Revolution

To many historians the terms Industrial Revolution is a misnomer.  Primarily because it actually took many years for our society to evolve from an agrarian based product system to a manufacturing based delivery method.  Due to that name including the term "revolution" we tend to overlook the fact that society spent many years in the middle of an unknown changing marketplace.  Families, employees, and employers did not know that eventually the introduction of steam power, railways, and the combustion engine would fuel a more advanced and wealthier society.

The same holds true in what we are facing in today's music marketplace.  The advent of the Internet has drastically altered the music delivery system and this small ripple has created a wave of change in the business the size of a tsunami.   One of the core components to the past music business marketing plan has been crushed by this wave of change.  That component is called radio.

But I am here to tell you that radio isn't dying or dead. It is only changing and with that change has adopted a new name called "streaming."

  

There seems to be a lot of arguments about the viability of Internet based streaming services such as Spotify, Pandora, and MOG.  Industry insiders claim that these services provide little, if any, revenue for artists, labels and songwriters. They have waged war on these services claiming that they steal download sales from artists and labels.  A few artists and publishers have even pulled, or threatened to pull, their content from some of these services. Most recently Sir Paul McCartney pulled his content to reportedly force consumers to download his music from online retailers such as iTunes and Amazon where he earns a larger amount in royalties. See the article here.

While this may be a great idea for an established musical icon such as Paul McCartney it isn't a wise decision for newer artists.  These services act as a new revolutionized radio model, but unlike traditional radio artists do not need to sell the gatekeepers on the idea of including their songs on the play lists.  Any artist can upload their newest tune or album to any streaming service without having to shell out huge dough in promotion fees to wine and dine programmers to be let in.

What these services offer new artists is the opportunity to engage potential fans with their music for free.  Any fan can sign-up for a free subscription to basically any streaming company and with that subscription they can seek out an artist or album they are interested in and have a no obligation listen to the music.  There is a division in the industry as to if free services produce more download sales. Billboard reports that they do not.  See the article here.  Streaming service Last.fm reports otherwise. See their article here. Regardless of what industry insiders report these streaming services do offer something to new artists when it comes to revenue.

I myself am an active music downloader whom normally uses iTunes, but over the past few years I have become discouraged having to shell of $1.29 for a new tune or $9.99 for a new album just to find out that I didn't like the song or tracks 4, 6, 9, and 10.  It has cost me hundreds in what I consider wasted downloads.  Then last year I decided to try a streaming service on my iPhone.  I downloaded the MOG app and subscribed for their monthly $10 subscription that lets me download tunes to my device for as long as I keep paying my subscription. Since then I have explored many new artists and dozens of new albums.  Thanks to the service I realized how much I liked Adele's 21 and was happy to buy the entire album from iTunes for $10.99. More importantly I was open up to newer artists such as Trivium, Lana Del Ray, and Nada Surf among many others whom I would have avoided dropping $1.29 a track to find out if I liked them or not.  I am one streaming user whom has checked out over 150 new artists thanks to my MOG account. If their music is good and appeals to me chances are I will buy their downloads, go to their shows, and purchase some of their merchandise.  I would have never been opened up to these unknown names without my streaming account. Through the new industrialized radio I have received added benefits and the artists have received added benefits.  Isn't that a core tenement in business? Think about my Adele experience.  She got a streaming royalty from me listening to her album on MOG and a mechanical royalty when I downloaded the album. Before my MOG account she may have just got a royalty on one or two tunes, but thanks to the new radio I was able to experience her entire works without obligation and encouraged to buy her entire album. Your welcome Adele and Columbia Records.

I think it is imperative that those in the industry embrace streaming services. Even if they do not recognize them as the new radio.  They help curb piracy, open up potential fans to new artists, and add more pennies into the artists royalty accounts. To succeed this industry must not challenge Eli's cotton gin, but rather embrace its potential to change the world.