Should the word “unsigned” be banned?

The term “unsigned” has historically been used by the music business as an almost derogatory remark to denote artists and bands who haven’t yet signed to a label, be the label independent or major. Almost as if to say that the band isn’t “good enough” to be offered a record deal or that since they haven’t signed a deal, they have not yet reached “success”. There are a number of things wrong with this.

Firstly, there are many great bands and artists without record deals playing superb music on local scenes and circuits around the world. Playing smaller and more intimate gigs, they are the lifeblood of local scenes and perform a important cultural role. Moreover, the internet has served to make a lot more music open to discover by a lot more people, and we realise there is a wealth of talent out there untapped by record labels. Being signed to a label is by no means a necessary measure of an artist’s talent or their capacity to create great music.

Secondly, there are a number significant benefits to the independence associated with being unsigned, and it is possible to enjoy a successful career in music without signing to a Record Label.

This success may be a little more modest, enjoying a dedicated fan base, playing live gigs all the time, doing a few tours and enjoying a good income from online sales and merchandise – but at the end of the day, many artists simply want to make a living and develop their music. For those who seek mega stardom, the above is a good beginning to achieving this. One reason for it being easier to create a sustainable career in music is money. Capital, one thing which endowed major Record Labels with a certain power, is becoming less important both as key factors in entering the market (both securing means of recording music, and its promotion).

For these reasons, the term unsigned, used in a way to denote failure of lack of “success” is outdated, and it might be a good idea to ban it altogether. One of the promises of the new music industry is the very independence which artists enjoy. Independence in how they record and distribute their music, and the independence derived from not necessarily needing a huge sum of money to promote their music.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One Response to “Should the word “unsigned” be banned?”

  1. Topics about Music » Should the word unsigned be banned? Says:

    [...] Moms amp; Dads: A Parenting Blog | Sun-Sentinel Blogs created an interesting post today on Should the word unsigned be banned?Here’s a short outline The term “unsigned” has historically been used by the music business as an almost derogatory remark to denote artists and bands who haven’t yet signed to a label, be the label independent or major. Almost as if to say that the band isn’t “good enough” to be offered a record deal or that since they haven’t signed a deal, they have not yet reached “success”. There are a number of things wrong with this. Firstly, there are many great bands and artists without record deals playing superb music on [...]

Leave a Reply