Copenhagen, Denmark-based startup Minimum Noise wants to take a crack at crowdsourcing music production, by connecting musicians around the world in an open marketplace where like-minded artists can get together to create music tracks.
Basically, users can submit a project, describe what they’re looking for and what they’re prepared to pay for it. This can be anything from vocals to a bassline or the main instrumental riff, but the bottom line is that someone from the Minimum Noise community is supposed to run with the project and add a layer to whatever exists already. Typically, this would be something the project creator(s) or any of his musically gifted friends or family members are unable to accomplish without looking online for help. Project creators can accept submissions from other community members, pay him / her if they’re happy with the results and obtain the necessary material and rights of usage.
This is rather similar to the way WeMix (co-founded by artist Ludacris and backing by angel funding), Bojam and Indomite function, but I’m not sure if it’ll work.
There’s definitely merit in the idea of musicians collaborating on the net, but I doubt music as such can be crowdsourced at all. Isn’t creating music supposed to be a personal experience (or a group experience if there’s more than one person involved of course)? And even if it’s not, what exactly would drive musicians to look online for peers to complement or perfect their work? I could be dead wrong here, but I don’t see it happening, or at least not in the volumes required to build a business on top of it.
What do you think?
I think it can work. Oftentimes I need a vocal in a particular style for example, and am not equipped to do it myself.
The bigger question is will anyone pay to have such a vocal done in a climate where you’re unlikely to be able to make much from the song itself. The answer as far as I’m concerned is…maybe.
There are also sites like CCmixter which have similar communities without the question of payment coming up.
As an electronic music producer (hear some of my stuff at http://myspace.com/adamgsinger ) I will say I’m not so keen on this idea.
I’ve collaborated with a few people via forums in the past, but the issue is I always end up wanting to do everything myself. Perhaps for people who play only one instrument, but I can’t see hip hop or dance artists really having a need here.
This could definitely work. Being a lone artist is sometimes very difficult. For instance: I write, sing, rap, produce, and engineer all my own stuff. I really wish I didn’t have to, though.
If I could avoid production and engineering somehow, I’d get a lot more songs completed. I know many artists in the same situation.
For me it’s the opposite, I love doing as much as possible, but like I said there are some things that I just can’t do, like a female vocal for instance, that have to be outsourced.
Mechanical Turk meets Run DMC… Interesting
Considering the site currently only has 3 active projects [http://www.minimumnoise.com/Projects.aspx] I don’t see it going anywhere for a while
They barely launched and you’re judging them by number of submitted projects?
I think that “cactus” has merit in his observation. While i whole heartedly believe that this will work you must first start with a crowd which they have not done and it is very difficult to do so with such a niche application.
I concur with Robin here, every marathon begins with that one first step.
I actually think this is kinda cool. Imagine the possibilities? The fusion of influences, the collaborative works.
Let’s give them sometime…
I personally think that Minimum noise is a great concept. I have actually been outsourcing my work to other artists for a minute. Minumum noise makes it a whole lot easier for me to reach people who are looking for an extra hand with their music for a price. Even though making music is a personal thing for me, you still want to make money from your talent. I have always been told that if you do something good then get paid for it. I write hooks and on minimum noise you can find someone who is looking for a hook for a track. Mostly producers are in the need for a hit song for their work. Producers aren’t writers most of the time so they find themselves needing that extra push. Minimum Noise is a hot concept and I would love to jum p on their team to help them get grow and take over the music web.
Weezer essentially did this with Maladroit.
They released their studio recordings daily and Rivers Cuomo (Weezer’s frontman) solicited feedback daily on various message boards.
As a result, the album sucked.
Rivers has become better at it though – he’s been crowdsourcing a new song on his YouTube page. http://www.yout...iverscuomoalone
Online music collaboration does work very well. (Full disclosure, I’m the founder of http://www.kompoz.com, a music collaboration site) The Minimum Noise approach to “prize” money may not scale very well though. When money is involved, the game changes (think copyright law, contracts, royalties, legal disputes, etc.).
Yes, music creation is a personal experience. It’s an intensely creative process, and therefore an expression of self. That can be both humbling and totally thrilling when presented raw as session tracks online for others to pick through and judge.
So what drives musicians online? For a Minimum Noise musician (not the buyer), it’s got to be all about session work and a quick buck. It can’t be about fame, exposure, or even residuals, because the terms and conditions clearly state that, “If you have uploaded material for a competition and you win the Project the buyer gets all ownership rights to the uploaded material. You waive the right to claim financial compensation or anything other than the prize of the competition.”
For sites like Kompoz, where it’s all about “open source” music (produced under the Creative Commons), the motivation is totally different. Kompozers are there to create (compose) new music, to perfect their mixing and production skills, to find like-minded musicians around the world, to jam, and to explore/enhance their own musical talents. Convenience is also a major motivator. Members can produce and jam in the comfort of their own home while wearing their PJs.
The MN model is interesting, and has merit. There’s surely a market for studio musicians, and finding them online is natural. But serious buyers may not like the fact that the music is so public, and that anyone can download what’s posted.
At Kompoz, we’re exploring alternative revenue models (e.g., music licensing of completed works) while shying away from models that pit musicians against each other. Instead, we focus on encouraging and promoting true collaboration among members. Any “prize” should be derived from there.
So Raf, what is the USP of Kompoz as opposed to ccmixter, bandamp et al?
I sometimes find that CC can be a barrier to effective collaboration, as many artists don’t have a full grasp of CC and are wary about posting their works to such a site; they feel it limits the commercial potential, tangible or otherwise, of their material.
You’re absolutely right — many artists do not have a full grasp of CC, and are thus nervous about posting. But that’s changing, largely in part to the success of open source software models. Reader “Jerng” posted below “Music is software too”. That’s totally correct, and there can be commercial models built around open source music, just like there are with open source software. I’m a little off topic here, but wanted to point out the potential. Back to CC — education is key. It’s one of the most common questions I receive at Kompoz. We are actually working on producing video tutorials on all aspects of collaboration, including legal issues and the wonderful benefits of the Creative Commons. Kompoz has proven that CC works for music production. We’ve produced a CD, where all of the artists share in the profits, several podcasts, incredible contests with big sponsors, and songs on iTunes. It’s a model that works.
Isn’t that great?? “World music” would get a completely new meaning …
L.
(linkback) Thrive or Fail? Minimum Noise: Web site that lets musicians collaborate on music [VOTE] – http://www.thri...rfail.com/c0ded
It should work in precisely the same manner that software development projects work. Anyone can mutate an earlier version of the code, making a newer version. The newer versions will sink or swim depending on their appeal to other members of the coding community – and eventually, certain versions will evolve to dominance. Others will be so-so, and yet others will simply fail to be adopted – like homeless virii.
Music is software too.
I love Aarhus and Kopenhagen. Great people, and cities. And, if you happen to be in Kopenhagen, remember to make a turn at Kristiania (we went in there one time while we were filming a documentary).
I am thinking that the site only has 3 projects now because it’s just been recently launched? It may actually have great potential if they approach it from a different corner, by specifically targeting the largest number of unpublished and unsigned songwriters/composers around the world.
Too bad, because since two weeks ago, we’ve been working on an almost similar project, Zemuse, http://www.zemuse.com, due to launch in March.
This may pose competition, but competition is always good. Except our business concept is little bit different than that of MinimumNoise.
The only fault I foresee is the length of their domain, MinimumNoise.com, which I am having a hard time spelling it correctly, so as probably many other users like me.
It’s basically like looking for studio musicians online from what you’ve written. I don’t see why something like this wouldn’t work except for having to go through the tracks to find what you like.
Eventually everyone is going to sue everyone for not getting a share of the profit that they had a hand in getting it produced.
can’t believe how crowded the online music collaboration space has gotten in just one year!
a couple that weren’t even mentioned:
–TuneRooms
–Indaba
–MixMatchMusic
Anything that gets music collaboration going is a good thing. I am co-founder of Abaltat http://www.abaltat.com and we have a software application that creates original soundtrack based on your video pictures. Because the user is generating the music, the composed music is royalty free.
Those dudes at Indaba have been doing this for awhile check it out:
http://www.indabamusic.com
Is this all it takes to get on tech crunch these days? A half-baked implementation of an old idea? I mean really Mike? There are a dozen or so sites out there that execute the same exact idea but already have thriving communities why this one?
please, excuse the run-on sentences below.
the music business is all about the song not the technology.
while i’ll agree that the interest, tools and bandwidth needed are more or less easily available to the mainstream here in north america to make this concept work today. being a musician / song writer and having had the opportunity to test this space out for myself over an 18 month period with a similar start-up venture as well having followed several of the other sites mentioned in this blog, i concluded over a year ago and still hold the opinion that the business model of “crowding” song writers / musicians who may or may not know each other to collaborate online in the hopes of “one-day” monetizing the investment required by way of revenues derived from managing a profitable song catalogue or publishing company (cc, rev sharing with the artist or otherwise, etc.) is not very likely i’m sorry to say.
the bottom line in all this remains the fact that discovering and marketing a new “hit” song, talent, band, etc. which btw is the only true measure of success in today’s music business and what is needed to attract a “crowd” of recorded music buyers to make this all pay for itself is too unpredictable. but to then duplicate that initial “hit”???
lastly, do not even get me started on thinking that a starving could or any successful artist would pay to be included such a service today or after the freeium and advertising models have failed to produce any results.
my 2 cents on the subject…
You’re all missing the point.
Calling this a music collaboration site is inaccurate. This site is more like 99Designs.com in that it allows a music producer to solicit parts of a project based on needs.
It’s like paying someone to sing the song you wrote; or paying someone to come up with a funky bassline. It happens all the time on the ground.
Neither the idea, it’s specific twist, nor the site design will determine if this site makes it. It will be the founders ability to build a community that will make or break this site.
It looks like a fine idea, though.
- Curtis
http://ShipItOnTheSide.com – Learn to ship profitable software as a side job.
I think it’s inevitable that the music creation process be taken online and crowdsourced. Given the wide variety of audio editing, social media, and collaboration tools available today, why not apply these online tools to give musicians the ability to make better music together online? There are millions of people making music today (more people than ever before), and because the vast majority of them aren’t on a massive recording budget, most of them could definitely benefit from having access to millions of other musicians online! And, on a philosophical level, wouldn’t it be great to see what others can do with your music and how it can evolve?
So, while online music collaboration isn’t for everybody, it should definitely appeal to the millions of unsigned, emerging, and bedroom artists around the world. The key, I think, is to make sure that there is a proper rights management system in place, that tracks how works are used, attributes authors, and ensures that the music made is commercially viable.
I’ve made some great music over at MixMatchMusic.com, which is a community where musicians can collaborate online and make money from not only their songs, but also their stems, ideas, riffs, and works in progress. Musicians can choose to actively collaborate, or they can crowdsource music “passively” by contributing to the community “sample” library and seeing how others use their work. They can even make some money off their contributions, while be notified of usage and attributed to resulting creations. Or, they can find parts that work well with what they’re doing and add them to the song they’re working on.
A particularly interesting application of music crowdsourcing is that it can give artists a new way to engage with fans by letting them interact with and experience music creation. Crowdsourcing a song can give fans an interactive, “behind-the-scenes” look at how the music is made, and can bring in fans to help create the song (much like Weezer and third eye blind have done) before its release, or to remix it after the release. MixMatchMusic’s Remix Wizard (remixwizard.mixmatchmusic.com) is a great way to do this via a customizable (and free) widget that any band can use to host a remix promotion or to otherwise crowd source the music creation process for a particular release.
Opinions for this will probably bounce back and forth between the extremes. It’s like when compact discs first hit the scene. A number of people marveled at the sound quality, while an equal number of people proclaimed it the death of music. In the late 90s, Tom Petty had his own small rebellion against the digital world by recording his “Wildflowers” album using only analog equipment.
When the Beatles released their “new” tunes to coincide with the documentary, people said they were not authentic because they just added themselves into old recordings by John Lennon. However, Paul McCartney argued that, on the later albums, that’s how Beatles songs were made anyway. They never saw John. They just came into the studio and would work with whatever he left them.
So this was probably inevitable. I don’t think it is the best thing to happen to music or the worst. It’s just part of the continuing story.
We’ve been doing this over at http://www.koblo.com for awhile now – and offering free, open source software to do it with, nonetheless.
In addition, you are looking at things from a closed-minded point of view. There is a business to be made around music collaboration on the internet. Electronic musicians already do it en masse constantly, by sharing samples and projects via the internet.
I can’t understand what Minimum noise is doing, sadly. The whole “make an offer of money” to get people interested in being part of your project is kind of strange to me. I prefer to be able to create a project and ask people to add their samples, takes, etc. on what I am doing. I don’t want to offer money for people to take pot shots at my project and maybe get me what i’m looking for. Furthermore, the implications of legality of if someone really made a beat that you “buy” from them, etc. is quite dire. I applaud them for trying to come up with a different model and give musicians a way to sell their services, but I think it has to be done differently than this.
Just my thoughts, from a guy who’s been doing this for over two years now on the net.
Can it work as a business? Yes. Is it gonna be easy. Probably not. If Minimum Noise can get enough people to the site who are willing to pay for premium services or increased exposure … that would be one way to monetize.
Easton; this is all true, but the formula that MN is using is not appealing to me at all. Kudos to them for trying it, but the scope needs to be wider.
Somewhat interesting concept, but i agree that it is clearly lacking critical mass. I imagine the tipping point for a site like this is in the hundreds of projects, and they are a long long way from there.
Nick Batt over at Sonic State suggests that the future of download music is multi-tracks:
http://www.soni...s-multi-tracks/
…and really, it seems like this could be a section on iTunes or Amazon at some point in the future.
In addition to MixMatchMusic, CCmixter and the other sites mentioned in the comments, existing sites in the same ‘collaboration’ mode include Beatport and http://www.acapellas4u.co.uk
hey this is a really great discussion. My company, WeMix, was mentioned in the original article. Obviously Ludacris and I are huge fans of online collaboration and would love to see more of it.
WeMix is not really a technology company like the other ones in the story. We take more of a record label approach to the space – we’ve built an incentive and promotion model to spark collaboration – which in turn has enabled us to rapidly build a robust song catalog.
The comments about marketing and promotion are spot on. At the end of the day you need to build a real value proposition for artists to monetize their creativity, otherwise the collaboration is just a pastime.
We’d love to partner with companies like Minimum Noise to fuel the process and help build the emerging “middle class” of musicians.
What about talent? At the end of the day good music requires good talent. A bunch of yahoos working on a song…. sounds like throwing paint at a canvas.
Can it work as a business? Yes. Is it gonna be easy. Probably not. If Minimum Noise can get enough people to the site who are willing to pay for premium services or increased exposure … that would be one way to monetize.