gnome wrote:Nope. I don't need 100 people to tell me my shit music is good. This scheme will only waste producers time. If your music is good it will get comments if not no point faking it.
Lol, you and a few others are getting it twisted. This isn't about faking it. If your music is shit, the comments you get will say so. You won't get REAL followers that actually enjoy your music. The accounts we ran tests with were using tracks by producers who don't produce for an electronic genre.
This is about creating exposure. Pushing your name out there.
You cannot expect to create a track, upload it to YouTube or SoundCloud and expect to get millions of fans because you're track sounds good.
There is a saying in marketing, and it relates to anything. You could have the best product in the world, but if it's not being placed into the hands of the consumers it's a waste of time.
The same goes with music. You could be {INSERT BIG PRODUCERS NAME} but without exposure you're music won't get heard. If you don't want your music to be heard, than that's fine. But if you want to spread your name out there, get people talking about your music, you need exposure. exposure. exposure. exposure.
Speak to marketers that work in music and media. Speak to companies that charge you hundreds or thousands for exposure. You're not going to get it by uploading a track and hoping for the best.
What's wrong with culture these days is they think {INSERT ARTISTS NAME THAT GOT FAME FROM YOUTUBE} got famous because he uploaded a few videos and magically got millions of views.
This is the Internet. Exposure on the Internet is worth more than radio air play. Minus the royalties.
@gnome: You're assuming I'm creating software to turn shit music into popular music. You need to have a great product beforehand for this to work.