My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band together. We havn't
even all been together in the same room. Said friend, Jacob, happens to
have neighbors who own an indie record label ( www.lessavenged.com ).

These label characters have heard Jacob play two or three songs
accompanied by his brother and sister on cello and violin respectively.
No shows have been played, band hasn't practiced.

Less Avenged wants Jacob to sign with them for a one-cd deal that will
span one year. These are the details:

Jacob has to take care of the recording and pays for it, then delivers
the CD to Less Avenged by August 1st.
Less Avenged does promotion, merchandising, website management, and we
have to pay for CD manufacturing through them (1,000 Cds for $950).
CD sale profits split 60% to jacob, 40% to Less Avenged. And this is
after Less Avenged has "covered costs" (wait, costs of what?). I'm a
bit hazy on this last part.

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

Any comments are very appreciated, and I will definitly show them to
Jacob in my effort to reason with him!

Philip

wrote:

Jacob has to take care of the recording and pays for it, then delivers
the CD to Less Avenged by August 1st.
Less Avenged does promotion, merchandising, website management, and we
have to pay for CD manufacturing through them (1,000 Cds for $950).
CD sale profits split 60% to jacob, 40% to Less Avenged. And this is
after Less Avenged has "covered costs" (wait, costs of what?). I'm a
bit hazy on this last part.

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists?

His "costs" (since the band is paying for the recording and
manufacturing) are shipping, advertising (probalby a portion of his web
site cost) and maybe some bribes to get airplay. Figure on not selling
all 1000 CDs that you buy. Some will be given away for promotion.

The thing to ask is how will he publicize and promote the CD? If you
think that they can sell the whole lot of CDs within the year that the
contract covers and you figure you could only sell a few hundred
yourself, you're probably better off going with them. If you're going
to gigs, have some fans, have a web site, and get your music played on
local radio, you're probalby off better selling them yourself.

It's a gamble no matter how you slice it. How much can you afford to
lose (that's the uptown word for "invest in your musical career")?

wrote in message
oups.com...

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists?

It does not sound particularly bad in it's own right, but it may not be what
you are looking for.

With any deal, whether it is for a show, a manager, or a record deal, you
have to keep in mind where you are on the path. You said the band hasn't
even practiced yet, this tells me that you won't be able to get a good
recording together by the deadline, so the deal is not good for you right
now. Personally, I'd tell the label that "We don't feel we can give you a
good enough product yet, give us a few months to figure things out."

The first thing you need to do is practice your art, once the band meshes
and you have your style nailed, then do some basic recording, even if it's
just slapping your ipod into your mixer. These recordings aren't necessarily
for you to sell, they are for you to perfect your art. With luck you might
be ready to begin recording by December. At the same time you need to get
out and do gigs (record them, but more on that privately).

As for what a label usually does. Depending on the label they will more loan
you the money than pay for things, and depending on the label they are
somewhere between loan shark and Beelzebub, at least if the label is any
good. The lona is typically paid back strictly out of your share of the
proceeds until entirely finished. As to what their expenses are, among other
things they have:
CD shipping
Order taking
Logistics
Mastering
Publicity

Those are probably the biggest expenses, but they can find more.

The important things to remember with a label a
Will you get what you really want?
How much money will you make?
I seperate these because the money is what they pay you because you're
getting what you really want. Because of this you need to know how much they
will be spending on publicity for you, what their average sales per band
are, what the average band actually takes home, the ratio of management to
bands, and other things that will become important to you.

Now about Less Avenged. They appear to be what I will call a microlabel.
With a microlabel you have generally one guy who does management of the CD
sales, deals with contract negotiations for indie distribution, etc. The
1000 CDs is probably enough for that size label to sell for 3 years, so make
sure you maintain rights to sell them at your shows. With a microlabel the
quality of the label doesn't mean much because you won't be getting much
distribution regardless of quality. With most microlabels you don't want to
stick around for more than 1 CD because as your skills advance you'll want
to move to a more powerful label, unless Less Avenged moves up with you
which is a distinct possibility. The 60/40 split is not particularly good,
nor particularly bad for this level.

My recommendation is that you go label-free for a few months, see what level
your sales are at, see what you lack in your distribution chain. A
microlabel is a good choice for managing the headache of small-scale local
distribution, but don't take the medicine before the headache.
Joe

I know nothing about recording or marketing, but are you not assuming *all*
the risk here? I mean, why not make a CD on your own money, as you would
anyway, and then hit up companies for help with distribution if/when you need
it.

Why should you commit now to making a certain number of CDs, through their
company, and committing to sell with them? This just does not make sense.

Richard

wrote in news:1149110856.986773.213670
@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

So you pay to record the music and duplicate the CD's, all out of pocket.
He gets to recoup all of his expenses (no out of pocket) before you two
split the remaining funds 60/40.

irony
Sounds better than the typical recording contract to me...
/irony

The key question IMO is what can this company really do for you. Do they
have a track record? Have they successfully sold alot of CD's for other
acts? Have they placed tracks in movies and on tv & radio? I think it's a
little suspicious that they are willing to put their resources toward an act
that has never even met each other yet.

Neil R

"Carey Carlan" wrote in message
...
wrote in news:1149110856.986773.213670
@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

So you pay to record the music and duplicate the CD's, all out of pocket.
He gets to recoup all of his expenses (no out of pocket) before you two
split the remaining funds 60/40.

irony
Sounds better than the typical recording contract to me...
/irony

wrote:
My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band together. We havn't
even all been together in the same room. Said friend, Jacob, happens to
have neighbors who own an indie record label ( www.lessavenged.com ).

This means absolutely nothing. I can be an independent label simply by
having a name and the means to advertise.


These label characters have heard Jacob play two or three songs
accompanied by his brother and sister on cello and violin respectively.
No shows have been played, band hasn't practiced.

Less Avenged wants Jacob to sign with them for a one-cd deal that will
span one year. These are the details:

Jacob has to take care of the recording and pays for it, then delivers
the CD to Less Avenged by August 1st.

Rather demanding of them, to want Jacob to pay for everything AND under
a more than unreasonable deadline.

Less Avenged does promotion, merchandising, website management, and we
have to pay for CD manufacturing through them (1,000 Cds for $950).
CD sale profits split 60% to jacob, 40% to Less Avenged. And this is
after Less Avenged has "covered costs" (wait, costs of what?). I'm a
bit hazy on this last part.

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

Okay, here's where the rubber meets the road. Listen up:

You should just cut out the middle man, Less Avenged Records, and do it
all yourself. Why? Because you're being asked to foot the bloody bill
for 90% of the cost in the first place.

Here's what you do, and it won't cost you substantially more than you
would be paying for now under the "terms" of their deal...

Record your album. Send it to Disc Maker or whomever for pressing. DM
even has a Mastering suite now so you can have that taken care of for
about $500.00, a very good deal.

Create a domain name, like your band's name, and buy it for $35.00 a
year through Network Solutions or other provider. Learn HTML, which is
easy, and create your own web site. Find a host, like Globat.com, and
set up your site to sell the album. Use Paypal or other service for
financial exchange. Mail off CD's. Make money.

Use MP3.com and other sites that let you upload your music for free for
the world to hear, as one form of advertising. All you gotta do is
convert the .wav file to .mp3 format using Total Recorder
(highcriteria.com) or similar program.

Know anyone with video gear? Or you can rent it. Record a video and
upload that to your web site along with sample material from the album
for people to listen to. Get people who visit your site to sign up for
a newsletter.

Yes, it's work. But if you want to be a band and do shows and sell CD's
and tour and all that stuff, you do the work you gotta do to make that
happen.

This is just a bit simplistic, but the basics have been laid out for
you to understand how "easy" it is to promote your own band, create
your own record label for distribution, and get it out to the whole
planet.

Since you're paying for everything up front, spend a little more and
take that other 40 percent in salary to yourselves and not that smarmy
label.

--Fletch

wrote:
My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band together. We havn't
even all been together in the same room. Said friend, Jacob, happens to
have neighbors who own an indie record label ( www.lessavenged.com ).

These label characters have heard Jacob play two or three songs
accompanied by his brother and sister on cello and violin respectively.
No shows have been played, band hasn't practiced.

Less Avenged wants Jacob to sign with them for a one-cd deal that will
span one year. These are the details:

Jacob has to take care of the recording and pays for it, then delivers
the CD to Less Avenged by August 1st.
Less Avenged does promotion, merchandising, website management, and we
have to pay for CD manufacturing through them (1,000 Cds for $950).
CD sale profits split 60% to jacob, 40% to Less Avenged. And this is
after Less Avenged has "covered costs" (wait, costs of what?). I'm a
bit hazy on this last part.

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

Any comments are very appreciated, and I will definitly show them to
Jacob in my effort to reason with him!

Philip

Sounds like the old "custom record deal" to me, which I haven't heard
of since the 70's, much like vanity publishing for authors (books). I
would politely DELCINE!

3'fkta.

ptk921 wrote ...
My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band
together. We havn't even all been together in the same
room. Said friend, Jacob, happens to have neighbors
who own an indie record label ( www.lessavenged.com ).

These label characters have heard Jacob play two or three
songs accompanied by his brother and sister on cello and
violin respectively. No shows have been played, band
hasn't practiced.

Less Avenged wants Jacob to sign with them for a one-cd
deal that will span one year. These are the details:

Seems remarkably suspicious unless you left out some other
salient facts. Especially for a band that does not yet actually
exist in the real world. What is Mr. Avenged's track record
with those other bands? What genre of music would your band
play if they were "together in the same room"? I didn't see much
that would suggest that any ot the other bands were using either
celli or violins.

Jacob has to take care of the recording and pays for it,
then delivers the CD to Less Avenged by August 1st.

Why the short fuse? Seems completely out of touch with
reality for a band that has yet to even schedule the first
practice.

Less Avenged does promotion, merchandising, website
management, and we have to pay for CD manufacturing
through them (1,000 Cds for $950). CD sale profits split
60% to jacob, 40% to Less Avenged. And this is after Less
Avenged has "covered costs" (wait, costs of what?). I'm a
bit hazy on this last part.

Go to a Hollywood (or New York) restaurant and chances
are significant that you will be waited on someone who
would otherwise be independently wealthy from their share
of the movie/CD/whatever if the "costs" hadn't eaten up all
the profits. Have you seen "The Producers"? (Either the
original or the remake.) Do you think it is fiction?

Carey Carlan wrote:
wrote in news:1149110856.986773.213670
:

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

So you pay to record the music and duplicate the CD's, all out of pocket.
He gets to recoup all of his expenses (no out of pocket) before you two
split the remaining funds 60/40.

But, if the record doesn't sell, you don't have to pay the promotional
costs, the label does. So the label is taking SOME risk. How much of
a risk? That depends on how much they are putting down on the table for
promotion. You need to make sure that they are laying out at least
as much money as you are, and you need to have that in the contract.

This sounds to me like it could be better than doing everything yourself,
or it could be worse. Depends on how much money the label is putting out
up front for promotion and what they are doing with it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article , says...

Carey Carlan wrote:
wrote in news:1149110856.986773.213670
:

My major question: Does this deal seem shady or subpar in comparison
with the "normal" sort of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for recording!

So you pay to record the music and duplicate the CD's, all out of pocket.
He gets to recoup all of his expenses (no out of pocket) before you two
split the remaining funds 60/40.

But, if the record doesn't sell, you don't have to pay the promotional
costs, the label does. So the label is taking SOME risk. How much of
a risk? That depends on how much they are putting down on the table for
promotion. You need to make sure that they are laying out at least
as much money as you are, and you need to have that in the contract.

This sounds to me like it could be better than doing everything yourself,
or it could be worse. Depends on how much money the label is putting out
up front for promotion and what they are doing with it.


Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've heard,
not ones they haven't.

Chevdo wrote:

Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've heard,
not ones they haven't.

It's possible they really liked something they heard and are gambling on
that, blah, blah... g

But, what have they really done for any of their artists? What can they
really do for these folks? I think Joseph Ashwood's comments are apt.
Maybe it's a good thing, and maybe not, but it's definitely too soon to
tell.

--
ha

Signal wrote:

ptk921 emitted :

My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band together. We havn't
even all been together in the same room.

It's a farce....

There are lots of bands like that.

--
ha

Chevdo wrote:

Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've heard,
not ones they haven't.

On this we agree. In fact it sounds like there really isn't even a band
yet. But there are dreams, and that's what the music BUSINESS is all
about.

In article Dosfg.308$A8.126@clgrps12, Chevdo wrote:

Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've heard,
not ones they haven't.

These days, legit record labels don't sign anyone, they just sell their
back catalogue. But that's ANOTHER rant for a different day.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 04:59:38 +0000, hank alrich wrote:

Signal wrote:

ptk921 emitted :

My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band together. We havn't
even all been together in the same room.

It's a farce....

There are lots of bands like that.

It's an economically sound way to make money in today's music industry.

All the expensive and messy song writing, gigging and rehearsal is a thing
of the past. Just turn up at the studio, have the engineer piece together
a song from their sample collection, then let the singer shout a few words
over it.

Once the words have been pitch shifted into a tune, the record is complete.

Then, give the engineer no ****ing credit on the record, sell a couple of
hundred copies to family and friends to cover studio time and after that
it's pure profit.

Bitter? Me?

wrote

My major question: Does this deal seem shady
or subpar in comparison with the "normal" sort
of contract extended to new artists? I thought
that a record deal meant that the label pays for
recording!

While micro-labels are changing the face of the
recording industry the historical shape of the
associated legal contracts has changed less. Artists
generally do no receive any royalties until the
recording company has recovered all recording
and other expenses. The cost of recording depends
on may factors including the level of perfection
desired. For new artist they can range from $80K
to 150K for one album. The RIAA reports that
85% of album releases do not recover their costs.

In regard to royalties, new artist usually receive
7 to 12 percent of the MSRP for domestic sales.
A superstar (one who can negotiate beyond standard
boilerplate contracts) may start at 15% or more.
Never enter into a recording arrangement without
a well reviewed contract. Litigation is VERY
expensive and you stand little change of prevailing.

If you're interested in understanding more about
the process check out: This Business of Music,
the Definitive Guide to the Music Industry, 558
pages, cost about $30.

It seems to me that the artist and the label are taking equal overall
risks here. Best case scenario here would be that you do a great job
making a record (something the label can't do) and they do a great job
selling it (something you can't do).

I would negotiate to have the band pay for the recording (giving the
label observational status but no supervisory authority), and to have
the label pay for replication, marketing, etc., and to split all
profits 50/50, from the first CD sold.

If all you do is play a few gigs a year for a few people, get a MySpace
page, and sell your CD through CDBaby, you probably won't make a
profit. If you improve each of these (play regularly for hundreds or
thousands of people, have a decent website, sell through major
retailers, etc.), you stand a chance to start something. I agree that
you won't make much from this and it will probably take you 2-3 years
to sell the 1000 discs, but if you make this and then go to work on
your second record, sales of both titles will probably increase (and
marketing $$$ will be able to be spent more efficiently).

Shady? More shady than Sony/BMG, WB, Uni, etc.?

wrote:
My friend and I have just VERY recently got a band together. We havn't
even all been together in the same room. Said friend, Jacob, happens to
have neighbors who own an indie record label ( www.lessavenged.com ).

....
Philip

Powell @ wrote:

If you're interested in understanding more about
the process check out: This Business of Music,
the Definitive Guide to the Music Industry, 558
pages, cost about $30.


A much better ref for most musos is:

_The Musician's Business & Legal Guide_
Compiled and Edited by Mark Halloran
Prentice-Hall
ISBN 0-13-237322-X

--
ha

"hank alrich" wrote

If you're interested in understanding more about
the process check out: This Business of Music,
the Definitive Guide to the Music Industry, 558
pages, cost about $30.

A much better ref for most musos is:

Why? How is it different?


_The Musician's Business & Legal Guide_
Compiled and Edited by Mark Halloran
Prentice-Hall
ISBN 0-13-237322-X

Add to the short list:
Legal Aspects of the Music Industry, An Insider's
View of the legal and Practical Aspects of the
Music Business by Schulenberg, MSRP $30.

This isn't a recording contract. You're buying a promotion service
and CD manufacturing.

Check just what that $1-per-CD covers. CDs packaged and wrapped, ready
for sale? Or something else? How does that compare with the cost of
production if you bought direct?

Are you really hoping this CD makes it big? Or will it provide a
moderate but steady income on sale after gigs etc?

After the year is up, who retains ownership of the product?

On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 02:36:19 GMT, (Chevdo) wrote:

Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've heard,
not ones they haven't.

Oh, you can market anything, within reason. And "reason" has a habit
of stretching :-)

Laurence Payne wrote:
This isn't a recording contract. You're buying a promotion service
and CD manufacturing.

True. The bottom line has emerged as a question:

"How well do we trust their ability to promote?"
and
"Is this 'ability' worth 40% of cd sale profits (if there are any)"


Check just what that $1-per-CD covers. CDs packaged and wrapped, ready
for sale? Or something else? How does that compare with the cost of
production if you bought direct?


After the year is up, who retains ownership of the product?

These are some of the ponderings that have led us to step back and do
it independantly for a while. Thanks to all who have commented and
continue to comment! The lure of "being on a label" has been
triumphantly subdued by the powers of reason and logic, and a little
informational help from some friends... thanks

Philip

The deal as presented sounds a bit odd to me: First you write a
contract. Then you make and pay for the record and then if you are
lucky the company is good at selling it. During the year your hands are
tied by the contract.

As you are going to pay for the recording anyway, why not start there.
Write the songs and record them - then go around to several different
companies and see which can sell the record the best.

Only a thought.

Gunnar

In article .com,
says...


Chevdo wrote:

Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've
heard,
not ones they haven't.

On this we agree. In fact it sounds like there really isn't even a band
yet. But there are dreams, and that's what the music BUSINESS is all
about.


I'm not saying the guy putting together the band should give up, on the
contrary, I think they should see if they can make some good music, and if they
can't,maybe even practice until they can, then do something with recordings of
it...

In article , says...

In article Dosfg.308$A8.126@clgrps12, Chevdo wrote:

Umm, ok and how exactly are they going to promote a band they haven't even
heard before? This is a joke. Legit record labels sign bands they've heard,
not ones they haven't.

These days, legit record labels don't sign anyone, they just sell their
back catalogue. But that's ANOTHER rant for a different day.


Well that's a good point, I haven't heard of 'A&R guys' going to gigs for over
a decade. I think they go to South By Southwest and that's it... so I guess
aspiring bands should play a gig in Austin during South By Southwest.

"seriousfun" wrote ...
I would negotiate to have the band pay for the recording (giving the
label observational status but no supervisory authority),

Assuming that the label has no A&R expertiese to contribute?
Shouldn't that be part of what they are bringing to the party?
What if they end up with something they can't promote?

"Laurence Payne" wrote ...
This isn't a recording contract. You're buying a promotion
service and CD manufacturing.

Indeed.

Check just what that $1-per-CD covers. CDs packaged and
wrapped, ready for sale? Or something else? How does
that compare with the cost of production if you bought direct?

Even if I were sold on this promoter/label, I would certainly
shop around independently for replication/packaging if I were
paying for it. Why should the promoter/label have a stake in it?

After the year is up, who retains ownership of the product?

And a few dozen other questions which would make it valuable
to have an entertainment attorney on the artists' side. Any of the
band members have parents/relatives/friends who are attorneys?

Powell wrote:

"hank alrich" wrote

If you're interested in understanding more about
the process check out: This Business of Music,
the Definitive Guide to the Music Industry, 558
pages, cost about $30.

A much better ref for most musos is:

Why? How is it different?

It's much less a lawyer's/executive's/manager's manual and much more a
detailed look at the legal mechanics of the music business from an
inexperienced musician's perspective. Most of it is written in layman's
language and unfolds as the story of a band, what they should have done,
what they did, and the consequences thereof. It is both rich in humor
and irony and also loaded with legalities. It offers actual major label
contracts where only the names of the usurious are altered to avoid
legal repercussions. It details what the record company's language means
in human terms and demonstrates, in language appropriate for such a
contract, what a band or musician might seek instead, almost paragraph
by paragraph.

_The Musician's Business & Legal Guide_
Compiled and Edited by Mark Halloran
Prentice-Hall
ISBN 0-13-237322-X

Add to the short list:
Legal Aspects of the Music Industry, An Insider's
View of the legal and Practical Aspects of the
Music Business by Schulenberg, MSRP $30.

Thanks. I'll get a gander at that.

--
ha

I am the bass player from said "band". A significant problem that we
have that has not been mentioned yet is that our extremely talented
drummer is leaving around august to attend the Berkley school of music.
We really want to do an ep/lp with this guy before he leaves, so we do
not really have time to take our band on a few "dates". We have been
looking for a drummer for a VERY long time and we only found this guy
with the help of said record label. The reason we want to recored with
this guy is so we can get a good sounding cd out, get our name out, and
then be able to find a decent drummer fast by simply stating that we
are auditioning.

"sam" wrote in message
oups.com...

I am the bass player from said "band". A significant problem that we
have that has not been mentioned yet is that our extremely talented
drummer is leaving around august to attend the Berkley school of music.
We really want to do an ep/lp with this guy before he leaves, so we do
not really have time to take our band on a few "dates". We have been
looking for a drummer for a VERY long time and we only found this guy
with the help of said record label. The reason we want to recored with
this guy is so we can get a good sounding cd out, get our name out, and
then be able to find a decent drummer fast by simply stating that we
are auditioning.


That's a different matter entirely. Then I'd suggest you record everyone on
different tracks, treat CD #1 as a demo (except the drummer), use the drum
track for practice, and incrementally record better tracks over it to
perfect the CD. Just don't count on sales of CD #1, in fact I think 1000 is
probably 900 too many. Still not sure about the label deal . . . . .
Joe

Good point, I don't, however, know how much A&R experience any label
can contribute these days.

If the band makes the recording, they can keep it and have the rights
to it. If the label pays for it, naturally they would have more input,
and possibly a more compelling reason to effectively promote it. The
fact that the label has already helped the band by connecting them with
a drummer shows that they have interest in the project.

I still think a 50/50 deal of some sort is the best way to go in this
case.

Doug Osborne

Richard Crowley wrote:
"seriousfun" wrote ...
I would negotiate to have the band pay for the recording (giving the
label observational status but no supervisory authority),

Assuming that the label has no A&R expertiese to contribute?
Shouldn't that be part of what they are bringing to the party?
What if they end up with something they can't promote?

"sam" wrote in message
oups.com...

I am the bass player from said "band". A significant problem that we
have that has not been mentioned yet is that our extremely talented
drummer is leaving around august to attend the Berkley school of music.
We really want to do an ep/lp with this guy before he leaves, so we do
not really have time to take our band on a few "dates". We have been
looking for a drummer for a VERY long time and we only found this guy
with the help of said record label. The reason we want to recored with
this guy is so we can get a good sounding cd out, get our name out, and
then be able to find a decent drummer fast by simply stating that we
are auditioning.



POOOF!!!


Look behind door number 3



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access