[FrankBlack]

While I agree with your points in the technical sense, I think there is a more overarching concept that is the "hard part": There are too many people who want to "make it" in the music business ("make it" means different things to different people: by "make it" I mean make a living). I am sure if I changed the term to "performing arts" it would still be valid. While it is hard to get your music into people's face (which then gets into their ears and then into their hearts and then into their wallets) all the music business does is craft celebrities, images and trends in order to make a profit. In general (I know there are exceptions) the labels don't give a rat's ass about art and music; all they want it the money. They survive because of the money. You are very, very correct when you say there are untold numbers of talented musicians (emphasis on both "talented" and "musicians") in the world. But the fact they are talented shouldn't guarantee them the right to make a living from their craft. The market is just too saturated. In the end, it ends up being a business if you need to make money. This is the point at which one either gets a lucky break or sometimes compromises to become more of a celebrity or image rather than just a musician. I wish every artist could make a living from their craft. Sadly, someone has to grow their food, fix their vans and shuffle their paperwork. I think the best strategy for would-be pro musicians at this point is to self-produce, self-market and self-motivate. Sure, there may be a loss of quality by not using pro services or labels, but if they tour heavily and get a relatively small, yet faithful fan base they just might be able to make a living. I know many, many musicians who do this successfully.