Idea for 2012 - A SF Greatest Hits CD!

[wickedcripple]

I was thinking, (which normally is scary) But how about making a Best of Song Fight CD. Available on I-Tunes, and or order online. Like the best song of each year since Song Fight Started. I know we can get all of them on Archives, but this will give SF more exposure, and it would be cool and all.

Just an Idea. But I thought it was a cool idea. And the money can go towards Song fights operating expenses.

Billy Oh.
(WC)

[fluffy]

This is a suggestion that's come up a few times before but it poses several major logistical problems:

1. How do we select the best songs in a way that shows a reasonable cross-section of what Song Fight is capable of without being exclusionary?
2. These songs are copyright to their creators. Getting permission for the songs which are selected might be pretty difficult, especially for a lot of the artists who have disappeared long ago.
3. There will always be a very vocal part of the community that isn't happy that X was included over Y, for countless combinations of X and Y.

[Caravan Ray]

But how about making a Best of Song Fight CD. Available on I-Tunes, and or order online.

You can find it here:
http://itunes.apple.com/au/artist/carav ... d332450601






(somebody had to do it. May as well be me....)

[Manhattan Glutton]

Maybe it should have a theme. Song Fight: Dance Mix, Song Fight: 90s Rock, Song Fight: Complete Garbage

[JonPorobil]

This is a suggestion that's come up a few times before but it poses several major logistical problems:

1. How do we select the best songs in a way that shows a reasonable cross-section of what Song Fight is capable of without being exclusionary?

The fact that people will always complain about the editorial choices is not a very compelling reason to avoid making editorial choices.

2. These songs are copyright to their creators. Getting permission for the songs which are selected might be pretty difficult, especially for a lot of the artists who have disappeared long ago.

Then we'll only include songs from people who a.) we can contact, and b.) give their permission. Several Songfighters from the site's early years (Collin, drew, MC Frontalot, and, uh, you) are easily reachable because they still have a pretty big online presence. And of course there are many who maintain active presence on the site. Even if we select songs from among currently active (as in, at least one entry since January 2011) fighters, that still gives us access to a pretty rich archive of stuff going back to about 2002. And if it's "exclusionary" to only include songs from the community's most engaged members, then so be it, but those folks are representative of the community, because we are the community.

3. There will always be a very vocal part of the community that isn't happy that X was included over Y, for countless combinations of X and Y.

See my answer to #1. Yes, people will always complain. So what?

I'd prefer to decide based on an assessment of cost vs. benefit.
Cost: What would the Songfight community at-large need to contribute to make this happen? If we wanted to do a physical run of CDs, the pressing could get expensive really fast. If we wanted to do digital only, then the licenses to appear in the various online retailers would be reasonably cheap one-time investments, right? Whose pocket would that come out of?

Benefit: What would the Songfight community gain from having a compilation album available at major retailers? Honestly, I'm not sure how to answer this one. I guess it depends on who takes the profit (assuming there is any). I would suggest that it be split among whichever artists have songs on the album, but realistically, the profits from the album are likely to be meager enough that splitting them 15+ ways wouldn't really make a difference in anyone's pockets. So maybe the proceeds could just be paid directly to the Fightmasters, for the purposes of maintaining upkeep on the site? I know it's pretty high-traffic, and the archive keeps growing. My current understanding is that JB fronts the bill, and he's never asked for donations, nor has he ever publicly indicated that his site might be a long-term financial liability, but that doesn't mean he'd necessarily turn down the offer for potential free money towards the site's maintence, if offered. I'm curious what he thinks about this.

The other benefit, as touched upon by wickedcripple, is that it would give Songfight "more exposure."

Those of us who've been around here for a long time know that exposure can be a double-edged sword. More exposure does mean that more outsiders will come to the site and listen to our stuff, which is nice - especially for the few Songfighters who still entertain notions of "getting discovered" and either making a living from their music or supplementing their income with it. However, there have been periods in Songfight's history when we've had ample exposure, and, at the risk of sounding snobbish, I think there's a level of population above which this community's value to its members experiences diminishing returns. In other words, no one wants Songfight to be a ghost town, but when there's 40-some-odd songs per week and hundreds of users to keep track of, Songfight has difficulty maintaining its close-knit community.

It might still be a fun project, especially if the initial investment is minimal. But using it as a promotional tool for Songfight doesn't strike me as a good idea, in the long run, and I wouldn't expect to profit directly from the album. This probably rules out a physical CD and limits the project to online distribution only, but if you can keep the initial investment small enough, then why the heck not?

Is anyone here familiar with the process of getting a compilation on iTunes, Amazon, and the major music sellers? How expensive is it?

[fluffy]

Is anyone here familiar with the process of getting a compilation on iTunes, Amazon, and the major music sellers? How expensive is it?

$40

Also to sell physical CDs created on-demand on Amazon costs $5 (you have to order a proof copy to verify it)

[JonPorobil]

For instance, here's a sample list of 18 songs that might form such a collection. It's a list that spans pretty much the entire lifespan of the site. The songs are all widely-agreed upon as being high quality. The contributors are all still active participants, or at least maintain a web presence that makes them easy to contact for permission. And the list is musically diverse. It's peppered by my own bias, since there have been fairly long stretches of time in which I wasn't a participant, so this is by no means a formal nomination for a final list, just an example of one that would be easy to obtain permission for, and which would still be representative of the best that Songfight has to offer:

1.) drew - "Zero to Phantom."
2.) MC Frontalot - "Yellow Lasers"
3.) Duboce Triangle - "Tracks for Future Practice"
4.) Hoblit - "My Sister"
5.) Frankie Big Face - "Funny Enough For You"
6.) Klownhole - "Two Bucks and I'm Yours"
7.) JB + ADD - "Look Good in Black"
8.) The Idiot Kings - "So Aggravating"
9). Starfinger - "More Than Soup"
10.) Roymond - "Zombie Son"
11.) Jim Tyrell - "Hey Ruth"
12.) Jim of Seattle - "Gin or Ginseng"
13.) Ross Durand - "I'm Going Away For a While"
14.) Glenn Case - "Georgia's Hand"
15.) Octothorpe - "Walking the Border"
16.) Sockpuppet - "Sorry to Inform You"
17.) DJ Ranger Den - "Vest Factory"
18.) sonofsupercar - "Occupy My Heart"

[JonPorobil]

Is anyone here familiar with the process of getting a compilation on iTunes, Amazon, and the major music sellers? How expensive is it?

$40

Also to sell physical CDs created on-demand on Amazon costs $5 (you have to order a proof copy to verify it)

So, $45 initial investment? I bet it would dead simple to scrounge up that much, if we wanted to. Would there be upkeep costs?

[fluffy]

Nope, those fees are all one-time. There's a bit more of an ongoing hit from the distribution that way but at the kinds of sales this would generate it's probably a better way to go. TuneCore takes a lower per-sale cut but they charge a ridiculously high annual maintenance fee, and for example, foodsexsleep earned around $3 while it cost $100 to distribute - not a very good balance, there.

It makes a lot more sense to use TuneCore if you have a marketing budget and a huge fanbase. If you're just putting something out there AS a form of marketing, CDBaby+CreateSpace still makes more sense. Of course, what makes even MORE sense is to just put it on BandCamp (and maybe produce a limited edition CD version and do your own fulfillment).

For Love and Monsters, my distribution looks like this:

- I use CreateSpace for manufacturing, and ordered 100 copies up-front
- Bandcamp is my primary online distribution; if people want to buy a physical copy that way they also get a download copy in the meantime (and most people just buy one or two individual tracks anyway)
- I list the CD on CDBaby (which nobody has actually bought from there) and use their digital fulfillment stuff for iTunes/Amazon/etc. (CreateSpace also wants to do the Amazon digital, of course, but their cut is about the same and it complicates the setup to have multiple digital distributors for a single album)

My total up-front cost was around $330 (CDBaby's setup cost was a lot lower then), and that includes the printing of 100 CDs. Most of my sales just come from friends going "Hey, can I buy a copy of your CD?" and me going "Sure! pay what you want!" and they usually just hand me a $10.

(The best option for them, though, is to buy the CD physically through BandCamp, because BandCamp's file metadata is exquisitely designed in ways that I am personally far too lazy to do, and then they don't even have to rip the CD. Or better yet they could just buy the digital version and have all the materials for the physical CD and then some, because I include all the flattened print layout files in the download. Nobody ever sees this because they only buy Sorry To Inform You.)

[RangerDenni]

I think that if there were ever to be anything like this though; we would have to finish It with the Sockpuppet offering of 'Looking at the Sea' ...

It'd be kinda like our own little Abbey Road, oh yeah...

[fluffy]

But that's already the obligatory hidden track on Love and Monsters!

I'd rather it be "After Hours." :D

[RangerDenni]

But that's already the obligatory hidden track on Love and Monsters!

I'd rather it be "After Hours."

I found out about it because of Love and Monsters. It should be the last track of every CD now all the time forever.

HOWEVER....

yeah.

We should go with 'After Hours'
How many more of these Tiny Adorable Songs do you have?!?!?

[fluffy]

Just a few. I want to make more though. They're a lot of fun.

[fluffy]

Ooh I never got around to putting "Short Life" up there. I must fix that.

[JonPorobil]

But that's already the obligatory hidden track on Love and Monsters!

I'd rather it be "After Hours."

I found out about it because of Love and Monsters. It should be the last track of every CD now all the time forever.

HOWEVER....

yeah.

We should go with 'After Hours'
How many more of these Tiny Adorable Songs do you have?!?!?

Actually, didn't you find out about it because I showed it to you? ...at the end of Love and Monsters?

Denise brings up a good point, though, that my list underrepresents the "short, silly song" sub-genre that crops up from time to time here. I was tempted to include John Benjamin Band's "Firecrackers," or Marcus Kellis' "Look Good In Black," or maybe "Brown Boxes" by I Dunno, Some Guy, but I felt like those artists and time periods were all overrepresented already. But hey, it's my own list, rife with my own biases.

If we go through with this, I figure we should probably get Songfighters to nominate 50-some-odd choices, and then winnow them down via polls.

[RangerDenni]

yes. but I have the fluffy catalogue you know from at live, remember

[RangerDenni]

YAY! A list. And obviously I am going to have to have another listening day anyhow

[Billy's Little Trip]

Just a few. I want to make more though. They're a lot of fun.

You have the wrong lyrics for Short Life.

[fluffy]

That's the description, not the lyrics. If they were lyrics they'd be in a <div class="lyrics">.

[Billy's Little Trip]

I know, cha.