Sunday, August 30, 2009

Is MySpace dead?

Hey guys,

I already got my three-part musical discussion out of my system, but I wanted to share one other thing with you and open it up for your comments.

As part of the promotion for my solo album Parrot Stories, I set myself up with a new MySpace (click to view). It's the easiest way to let people hear my music - people trust it, it's part of a social network that a lot of people already have and can add themselves to easily, they can add the songs to their own MySpace players, etc.

But according to the DFTBA website, the only band that has a MySpace is Chameleon Circuit. (That's not actually true, as Alan and Tom both have MySpaces too, but the site needs to be updated I guess.)

Instead, all of the artists have links to the broadly labelled "website" -,, etc.

I've never felt the need to have one of these. I think spreading yourself too far across the internet just makes it harder to track down all the information. A .com site is seen as a solution: putting your blog, your information, downloads, music etc all in one place - but how many people have ever been to (for example)

I went there as I was writing this. There is NO music available for streaming, just links to his YouTube videos. How many people are going to sit through that if you're trying to attract the casual audience that MySpace has? If I want someone to listen to a song of mine, saying "go to and then do a search for 'Candy Floss' and skip to the halfway point" is far too long. Just give them a MySpace link.

Dave Days does have a MySpace, by the way, so why does he need a .com at all?

Anyway, since I'm in the minority of people using MySpace on DFTBA, I wonder - do we still need them, or am I missing something?

Comments welcome as always <3

EDIT: Hey guys, thanks a lot for your comments :)

A quick point to Elly - I think it's important to always use examples relevant to DFTBA, even if that means I'm criticising the methods of other artists on the label. They're welcome to criticise anything I do as well. I think it's better to acknowledge faults than just pretend everyone on the label is better than anybody else. Furthermore, I wasn't criticising Dave's methods - just asking open-ended questions which I was inviting comments to in response. I'm more than willing to admit I could be wrong, that's why I write these - less about "here's what you should do" and more "here's what I think, tell me what you think".


  1. Alex, you raise a very good point but once again I find the way you put it a little elitist. Just a little tip which you can feel free to ignore: if you want to use artists as examples of how not to do it, I really wouldn't use people from the same label as you, it seems a bit bitchy.

    More on the subject, I don't think MySpace is dead. It's the best way of listening to music that isn't on Spotify, for free. It's an excellent promotional tool, unfortunately hindered by how hideous MySpace is to navigate around. What the internet really needs is a MySpace for music, that actually becomes popular. There have been various sites with little streaming widgets like MySpace, but none of them have really taken off.

    Also, I think the reason people go for .com sites as their main link instead of MySpaces is that maybe it can seem more professional. MySpace in itself is viewed as pretty juvenile I've found, but I've yet to find somewhere better to link to for music.

  2. Well, I can't speak to the specifics of the DFTBA site, but as someone who's been in and out of bands before and after Web 2.0, I think a Myspace site serves the purpose of an easy, already built in system. Getting someone to go to your own band's website is difficult and getting music to stream for people is difficult as well. This is especially true for people who don't have a lot of time or skill to build their own site from the ground up. Myspace provides an already existing template.

    Having your own site is important I think, once you already have a small and regularly interested fanbase. It's good for news, lists of upcoming shows, photos that maybe aren't in other places, etc. Myspace or Facebook (though Facebook doesn't really have a good streaming player yet) are good for building that fanbase, since you can mine your current internet "friends" to check out your tunes. After that, it's a matter of driving that base onwards out of the social networking platforms and into your own page.

  3. Since I got bandcamp ( I don't want anything else anymore. It's all there right away: High quality streams and even higher quality downloads with the option to let user pay and/or receive their e-mail adresses. You can also embed their players anywhere else.

    I think you should still have a MySpace though, because it's been the standard for a long time, and lots of people still go there for music.

  4. Oh yeah and about an own site: I think you should have that to bundle all the information about you(r band) in one place. It's also a great way to show your personal style, because you're not hindered by an existing template.

    So I guess the conclusion is: use them all, they all serve different purposes :-) Btw, if you're going to use them all, make sure they're all designed in the same style to stay recognizable.

  5. I agree with J.B. - Bandcamp is pretty awesome.

    However, the only reason I still have a MySpace is to keep up with the bands who don't have a Bandcamp. I still think it's pretty useful, too.

  6. I don't listen to music on MySpace as a primary way to follow bands, but I'll go if the band links to their page from somewhere else. Example: I listen to a lot of music on Many artists there post links to MySpace pages or personal sites to offer more information to their listeners. I find their music on thesixtyone, and then I'll click through to their other sites.

    I agree with J.B. that MySpace is pretty standard, and it's good because it's easy to set up and part of a social network. I agree that it's best for a band to use more than one type of site, especially if the different sites will attract different groups of people.

  7. Honestly, the only thing I used Myspace for anymore is to follow bands, to listen to their musics and I check the bulletins for updates. I think a Myspace for your music is a good idea because it does provide an easy way for a fan to find your music all in one place and to get quick information.

    A .com address, while it may seem more professional, I've realized is less appealing to a fan. I admit, as a fan, I almost never visit my favorite bands/artists personal .com sites. I usually visit myspace pages or youtube pages.

  8. I've had hundreds of views on my timeagency myspace, but only 48 plays. So I'm not sure there IS a point to myspace if a free song can't even entice people to press a simple play button. (The only alternative possibility here is that everyone who has visited the page has already heard the song... which seems highly unlikely.) I can't imagine any other sites being a more popular means of contact.

  9. I have no use for myspace, I never have, the only reason I even have one is to friend bands, and now that everyone is on youtube, I feel no point in having the thing, I barely remember how to even got on the site (my login and password), apparently myspace doesn't know it's dead though, I have gotten at least 20 friend request in the past 36 hours and I have no idea why.