Re: [microsound] project names vs real names...

[chthonic streams <chthonic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> hello .microsounders,
>
> Recently I've been struggling not with my creative music efforts, 
> but with how to present them or, i guess, market them.
>
> I can intuitively feel that there are pro's and con's to presenting 
> my music under my real name vs a stage name or "band" name, but am 
> having a hard time articulating them well enough that I can figure 
> out which route I'd like to go.
>
> Stuff like this always seems to distract me from the important 
> thing, which is making good music, so I try not to think too hard 
> about it. But then I end up with cds full of music and no real idea 
> how to present them.
>
> Any ideas on this topic?

it seems to me that in the world of experimental music, whether live 
or electronic, real names prevail.  one could argue that musicians 
and listeners of this genre are pretty much unaffected by things such 
as names and may even view a project name as silly.  in fact, it 
almost seems that the more "unusual" or "unmarketable" (to western, 
and particularly american ears) a given name is, the better it sounds.

on the other hand, if your project reaches across other genres, some 
people do like to hear a name that sticks in their heads.  this is, i 
guess, the marketing side of it, because what you're doing in this 
case is branding.  you're building up a name to permanently associate 
with the music that you do.  it's really the same thing as with your 
own name, it's just that a project name may be more instantly 
recognizable, depending on what you're going after and what your name 
is.  for example, if your given name is bjork or madonna, there's not 
much reason to come up with a project name.


d.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org