[joesmo]

I really do not understand why artists sell their work to record labels anymore. Back in the days, they would in theory get some marketing and promotion out of it in addition to the all-important distribution. Now that distribution is practically free and the most successful artists promote themselves (through touring and other means) what is the point of working with record labels? Being a musician myself, it is perplexing to me.

Without the record label, the artist can negotiate way better deals and doesn't have to pay over 90% to record labels that just don't care about them. Does Spotify not negotiate with individual artists? I wouldn't be surprised and that would explain a lot of this. Still, there are many other ways of distribution and promotion that artists could seek out with the 90%+ of the earnings they're no longer giving up.

As far as I can tell, it no longer matters to most artists' financial standing if listeners are obtaining their music legally or by piracy since the bottom line is essentially the same (asymptotical to zero) for all but the most successful musicians.

[bdcravens]

Up front money and access. Studio time is expensive. Imagine working every day at your crappy job, saving up enough time to put together some tracks, struggling with getting people to your YouTube channel or getting your songs a single play on the radio at 3am. Someone comes along with a $50K advance check, or you can continue to struggle and possibly one day control your destiny.

Imagine Eminem had remained independent, and never signed with Interscope (parent of Aftermath). He'd have a following, but not be the hundred millionaire. Look at Tech N9ne - got in the music game the same time as Eminem, has his own label, and is reasonably successful. However, he doesn't get the same venues, only last year got on national television, and struggles to get the big name collaborations. (His latest album was hyped to have a collaboration with Eminem after a couple years of trying, and if you listen to it, it's obvious that it was an afterthought for Eminem, definitely not his A-game)

[joesmo]

This is certainly the way it used to be, but nowadays any musician can buy enough equipment to get started in any genre even if they're making very little money. With a few hundred and definitely a couple thousand dollars, anyone with the will to do it can put together a "bedroom studio" that will rival any record label in production quality. There is little to no value in an artist taking $50k in debt (as unlikely as the scenario is to be in the first place) for production. So that only leaves marketing and promotion, which allegedly the labels do, but in reality, they only do it for their highest grossing artists, if that. Or the artist could save up one or two thousand, buy their own equipment, produce whatever tracks they want, and get just about as much promotion and marketing from the labels as if they were signed (asymptotical to zero). So my question does indeed still stand. As far as your Eminem example, Eminem came out in the late 90's when self-production was not quite affordable yet and was just starting to reach quality on par with professional studios. He's also one of the most extremely talented rappers so comparing him to someone that isn't on his level easily explains the discrepancy between the two.