You can now 'sponsor' the Andertons Youtube channel...apparently. EDIT - Now retracted for Patreon..

What's Hot
12346

Comments

  • guitarfishbayguitarfishbay Frets: 7580

    Who is the loser in this scenario?

    I do agree with that. No one, ultimately. Although I think £4.99 /$4.99 for one channel, amongst thousands, is a little excessive when you compare it to say Netflix costs. Apparently Youtube set the bar at that price though.

    Maybe if £1 went to a music charity, it might get a different reaction.


    Yes I agree £4.99 does seem too high to start off, it's probably too steep for some people who would like to donate but find that too much. 

    I believe flexible is the way to go, let people start from $1/month but allow larger donations if people want to, similarly to how many Patreons work.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • soma1975soma1975 Frets: 1353
    I don't see what is wrong with this business model.  If anything it's pretty honest and transparent. 

    I disagree and having come from broadcast where there are all sorts or rules and laws governing infomercials and adverts  being dressed up as independent programming I think this absolutely needs hammering home with online distribution methods too. 

    To use a recent example...

    It's not transparent to champion Thomann and their products with the voice of authority and reputation of trustworthyness if you fail to mention that they just took you on an all expenses paid jolly to their HQ where they treated you brilliantly and incentivised you to make videos actively promoting their products. 

    It's not transparent to make a video to say how amazing this Walrus Booster is (that sounds completely dull and lifeless in every video I saw of it) because you got sent it in the post and told you could keep it, along with 100 other youtube bloggers. 

    If there was true transparency I'd take no issue with it. Funnily enough my fave Andertons videos are the ones where they are having a sale on something and are actively and openly trying to get you to buy it!




    My Trade Feedback Thread is here

    Been uploading old tracks I recorded ages ago and hopefully some new noodles here.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • guitarfishbayguitarfishbay Frets: 7580
    soma1975 said:
    I don't see what is wrong with this business model.  If anything it's pretty honest and transparent. 

    I disagree and having come from broadcast where there are all sorts or rules and laws governing infomercials and adverts  being dressed up as independent programming I think this absolutely needs hammering home with online distribution methods too. 

    To use a recent example...

    It's not transparent to champion Thomann and their products with the voice of authority and reputation of trustworthyness if you fail to mention that they just took you on an all expenses paid jolly to their HQ where they treated you brilliantly and incentivised you to make videos actively promoting their products. 

    It's not transparent to make a video to say how amazing this Walrus Booster is (that sounds completely dull and lifeless in every video I saw of it) because you got sent it in the post and told you could keep it, along with 100 other youtube bloggers. 

    If there was true transparency I'd take no issue with it. Funnily enough my fave Andertons videos are the ones where they are having a sale on something and are actively and openly trying to get you to buy it!

    Ok, that is a list of non transparent things, none of which I was addressing in my post.

    My argument is entirely relating to providing free content and allowing people to pay if they like. 

    I honestly believe it's almost certainly the future of the arts, unless you hit truly massive streaming numbers no streaming platform will pay out enough on views alone.  Additional funding is necessary, and allowing donations is about as direct as you can get.

    I believe Andertons should be free to utilise this income stream if they want.  They may be adverts but to some they are purely entertainment and they're never going to buy anything, so why not let them donate if they choose to.  Many people watch the videos and buy elsewhere anyway just due to availability, the content they create arguably indirectly benefits their competitors at times.

    Furthermore I don't believe truly independent gear reviews are a viable business option anyway.

    The amount of cash you'd need to have the turnover of gear to compete on even a weekly level couldn't be regenerated from YouTube ad revenue alone.  So that means the options are:

    - Self funding at a loss (which isn't really a business)
    - Patreon/PayPal/YouTube channel donations (but you'd already need a critical mass of viewers for this to work)
    - Involving manufactures (which would be less independent but seemingly is more achievable)
    - Monetised views (though it's hard to find exact figures, $1/1thousand views would mean it's not viable anyway for most gear channels who post infrequent videos to relatively small viewer numbers)

    It would seem most channels need to mix these income streams until it's possible to do the channel without self funding, and after that point only very large channels could exist on donations and views alone. 

    The chances of doing it on views alone are I'd expect pretty much zero when it comes to niche things like guitar equipment reviews.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Musicman20Musicman20 Frets: 858
    soma1975 said:
    I don't see what is wrong with this business model.  If anything it's pretty honest and transparent.

    It's not transparent to champion Thomann and their products with the voice of authority and reputation of trustworthyness if you fail to mention that they just took you on an all expenses paid jolly to their HQ where they treated you brilliantly and incentivised you to make videos actively promoting their products. 

    It's not transparent to make a video to say how amazing this Walrus Booster is (that sounds completely dull and lifeless in every video I saw of it) because you got sent it in the post and told you could keep it, along with 100 other youtube bloggers. 

    If there was true transparency I'd take no issue with it. Funnily enough my fave Andertons videos are the ones where they are having a sale on something and are actively and openly trying to get you to buy it!




    An interesting take on it...I'd never thought of it that way!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • guitarfishbayguitarfishbay Frets: 7580
    soma1975 said:
    I don't see what is wrong with this business model.  If anything it's pretty honest and transparent.

    It's not transparent to champion Thomann and their products with the voice of authority and reputation of trustworthyness if you fail to mention that they just took you on an all expenses paid jolly to their HQ where they treated you brilliantly and incentivised you to make videos actively promoting their products. 

    It's not transparent to make a video to say how amazing this Walrus Booster is (that sounds completely dull and lifeless in every video I saw of it) because you got sent it in the post and told you could keep it, along with 100 other youtube bloggers. 

    If there was true transparency I'd take no issue with it. Funnily enough my fave Andertons videos are the ones where they are having a sale on something and are actively and openly trying to get you to buy it!




    An interesting take on it...I'd never thought of it that way!

    I think people are supposed to say if it's a sponsored video.

    https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/154235?hl=en-GB

    "What do we mean when we talk about paid product placements and endorsements?

    Paid product placements may be described as pieces of content that are created for a third party in exchange for compensation, and/or where that third party's brand, message or product is integrated directly into the content.

    Endorsements may be described as pieces of content created for an advertiser or marketer that contain a message that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs or experiences of the content creator or endorser.

    Please be aware that laws that apply to you may define paid product placements and endorsements differently. Creators and brands are responsible for understanding and fully complying with legal obligations to disclose Paid Promotion in their content according to their jurisdiction, including when and how to disclose and to whom to disclose."

    Yes. As has always been the case, you must notify YouTube by ticking the 'video contains paid promotion' box under 'Content declaration' in your Advanced Settings, using these instructions:
    1. On a computer, sign in to YouTube.
    2. Go to your Video Manager by clicking your account icon > Creator Studio > Video Manager.
    3. Next to the video, select Edit.
    4. Under the video, select the Advanced Settings tab. 
    5. Go to the 'Content declaration' section and tick the box for This video contains paid promotion such as paid product placement, sponsorships or endorsement.

    For information on why you need to notify YouTube, refer to the 'What happens when I tick the 'Content declaration' box?' section."

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • TA22GTTA22GT Frets: 358
    For myself it's hard to know where a line is crossed between advertising your business and wanting to be a celebrity through your business. They are far from alone. It's just about how I can personally accept it.

    I am aware of Anderton's because I have bought many items from them. If I Google a pedal to buy, invariably they come up in a box advertising that pedal along with others. They usually have good prices and also provide a high standard of service. No complaints there.
     
    Then again, so do other smaller companies I deal with and if their price is in the same ballpark I will often buy from the smaller company, and pay a bit more, to keep them alive because my perception is that because of Andertons full page adverts and very high profile on Youtube that they must be doing alright.  I didn't realise they are struggling just as much as the smaller companies I support.

    There are lot's of other "reviewers" of gear that I watch that have more in depth reviews of a product and I don't feel that they are trying to sell me it "because we have it in stock on our website" . 

    It's all freedom of choice as to whether you pay or don't pay so there is no right or wrong. I think a lot of people will support them because they are fans of the people doing it just as they buy albums from their favourite band.

    It all comes down to how you personally perceive things.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • guitarfishbayguitarfishbay Frets: 7580
    Though if I understand this correctly, it would mean telling your viewers would be required depending on where you post it?  So it would need to be a UK change to force it in law?  

    You may need to. Different jurisdictions have various requirements for creators and brands involved in Paid Promotion. 
    Where your content does include Paid Promotion, some jurisdictions and brand partners require you to inform viewers about any commercial relationship that might have influenced or contributed to your content – be that editorially or financially. It's your responsibility to check and comply with laws and regulations around Paid Promotion content that apply to you. See additional resources below."

    ---

    I don't want to spend all day researching this, but I do agree that it should be declared if there's a commercial interest in the video.  I have seen many channels stating when it is paid promotion, though I don't know where it is law and where it isn't.  But I would agree that it should be declared.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HaychHaych Frets: 1030
    edited June 2018
    Like I’ve said before, nobody is obliged to agree with my POV. 

    However, that said, regarding the whole house thing, my personal thought process would have gone something like this:

    So I’m gonna buy a house to do the whole YouTube thing. So overheads are going to be massive. Is it affordable? Can I prove a business case for it? Does it work on a business plan?

    If any of the answers to those questions are no, then you need to ask yourself the validity of going ahead with it. 

    Aha! I hear you say, but what if the business plan included said subscription/sponsor service via YouTube?

    Then its a risky business plan as how can you forecast what your subscription uptake will be, and the fact that you’ve factored your subscribers into your business plan paying for the effing house is a bit of a wtf from my perspective. 

    Still, for all my waffle the guy has much more business acumen than me so my opinion is worth zip. But while other businesses are looking to cut costs and reduce overheads, from my point of view, Anderton’s seem to have a nonchalant attitude if the purchase of a house is necessary to churn out a few YouTube vids. 

    Maybe there’s some good tax breaks to be had, I don’t know?

    Again, just my own view, nobody is obliged to agree. 

    Yes, but presumably you only posted your point of view because you were happy to discuss it, which is all we are doing?

    All the stuff about overheads etc. is Lee's problem and his alone.  If he wants to open another income stream with a "premium" tier then he can, nobody is obligated to pay it.

    EVERY business takes advantage of tax breaks, is that bad?

    I thought your earlier post was interesting because you had a problem with "sponsored", so is your issue partly that the business move is sort of phrased as a friendly "come help us cover our costs like a trooper" rather than anything about the decision to use the youtube "sponsorship" mechanism in itself?

    Yes by all means discuss away. On the whole I find theFB a decent place and it’s frequenters a good bunch, so more than happy to discuss, even if I am a tool sometimes.

    And yes, take advantage of whatever tax breaks are available if that’s what you want to do. Is it always ethical? I don’t know enough to answer that question, maybe Gary Barlow or Russell Brand could help me out?

    If you're asking what my issue is I guess it would be hard to define. If I had to put it into words I’d say it’s a feeling rather than a thought that doesn’t sit right with my own values, nothing more, nothing less. But yeah, I guess maybe it is the way it's been done rather than the decision to do it that sits wrong.

    I wouldn't define myself as a true capitalist and some business decisions I personally find don't sit right with my own set of values.  I’m not saying that’s how I feel in this case, I’m also not saying I don’t feel that way - or is that bassackwards, I'm sure you know what I mean though.

    And when all is said and done, I might just change my opinion.  There's a lot of good reason in the to and fro of this thread and given a day or two to mull things over I might think "well actually you know what, it's ok, not really such a big deal after all".

    Wherever there is a human being, there is an opportunity for a kindness.

    Tom Anderson Drop Top Classic for sale here.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • CirrusCirrus Frets: 4502
    I’ve also just seen a recent ‘Instagram’ musician who is, and I’ll be polite, average but getting better, be sponsored by a big company. 

    No real band, no years of practice and writing songs, no slogging it at gigs etc. 

    But, the lady has struck gold. She will no doubt improve, but, and I hate to say it, the ‘like’ brigade is mainly men. The less I say the better, but I think you can see what I mean. Presentation over pure talent. A disappointing way music has gone.
    In a shocking twist, someone on the Fretboard uses a thread to complain about a woman who's more successful than he is in a post barely related to the topic at hand.  :# :3
    Captain Horizon (my old band);
    Very (!) Occasional Blog
    3reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • soma1975soma1975 Frets: 1353
    edited June 2018
    Ok, that is a list of non transparent things, none of which I was addressing in my post.

    My argument is entirely relating to providing free content and allowing people to pay if they like. 

    I honestly believe it's almost certainly the future of the arts, unless you hit truly massive streaming numbers no streaming platform will pay out enough on views alone.  Additional funding is necessary, and allowing donations is about as direct as you can get.

    I believe Andertons should be free to utilise this income stream if they want.  They may be adverts but to some they are purely entertainment and they're never going to buy anything, so why not let them donate if they choose to.  Many people watch the videos and buy elsewhere anyway just due to availability, the content they create arguably indirectly benefits their competitors at times.

    Furthermore I don't believe truly independent gear reviews are a viable business option anyway.

    The amount of cash you'd need to have the turnover of gear to compete on even a weekly level couldn't be regenerated from YouTube ad revenue alone.  So that means the options are:

    - Self funding at a loss (which isn't really a business)
    - Patreon/PayPal/YouTube channel donations (but you'd already need a critical mass of viewers for this to work)
    - Involving manufactures (which would be less independent but seemingly is more achievable)
    - Monetised views (though it's hard to find exact figures, $1/1thousand views would mean it's not viable anyway for most gear channels who post infrequent videos to relatively small viewer numbers)

    It would seem most channels need to mix these income streams until it's possible to do the channel without self funding, and after that point only very large channels could exist on donations and views alone. 

    The chances of doing it on views alone are I'd expect pretty much zero when it comes to niche things like guitar equipment reviews.

    I wasn't directly addressing you/Andertons because they are simply one example of many and there are multiple lines being crossed. They should be and ARE free to chase sponsorship if they wish. I am free to tell them to get fucked and that I'm not paying for adverts. 


    As to the rest of it:

    Not everyone/anyone should be able to earn a living out of having a youtube channel. Just like not everyone/anyone should be able to earn a living out of playing the guitar.

    Not everyone/anyone should look at having a youtube channel as a way to make money.

    If you want to be a paid pedal/guitar/amp demonstrator a la Pete Thorn, Mike Hermans, King Johnny DeMarco then that is brilliant. I love those guys. 

    If you want to do bedroom demo of pedals in exchange for free stuff then more power to you. As long as I know that I'll watch your video. The tell tale sign here as of 2017-18 for these type of videos is 21 year old guy in a bedsit with a 6 x Suhrs playing into multiple Friedmans. 

    If you want to be a 'reviewer' then you need to have a basic sense of trustworthyness/ethics. And if you want to genuinely earn money by being a reviewer then you better have a great business model in place. 


    I earn a lot of my money making stuff for people which ultimately ends up on Youtube but it's never through YT monetisation. Because people I do work for understand the power of the medium is to direct you to people/products/things/places where they can sell you shit. 

    Allowing donations is great and in theory you'd think would lead to  a meritocracy. But if you are promoting the shit out of the multiple channels you now run and you are blanket smothering all the categories of videos with your stuff so nobody else gets a look-in and you have relatively unlimited resources to do so compared to others in this field, tons of potentially great content makers will fall by the wayside practically unseen, let alone unsponsored. There must be a way to make it better, but why would Google bother to do so?   
    My Trade Feedback Thread is here

    Been uploading old tracks I recorded ages ago and hopefully some new noodles here.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Musicman20Musicman20 Frets: 858
    edited June 2018
    Cirrus said:
    I’ve also just seen a recent ‘Instagram’ musician who is, and I’ll be polite, average but getting better, be sponsored by a big company. 

    No real band, no years of practice and writing songs, no slogging it at gigs etc. 

    But, the lady has struck gold. She will no doubt improve, but, and I hate to say it, the ‘like’ brigade is mainly men. The less I say the better, but I think you can see what I mean. Presentation over pure talent. A disappointing way music has gone.
    In a shocking twist, someone on the Fretboard uses a thread to complain about a woman who's more successful than he is in a post barely related to the topic at hand.  3


    Nice approach. No need to snipe dude. It was purely a post relating to the modern ways of social media, which in turn is not that far from Youtube. In addition, Instagram 'likes' have no relation to real-life success. Your or I could be highly successful people in our own careers...who knows.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • WhitecatWhitecat Frets: 2616
    edited June 2018
    soma1975 said:
    vale said:
    soma1975 said:
    Youtube pretty much only works because it is 'free to air'. I believe people have a concern about this being the thin end of the wedge and if there is tiered youtube service for those with money and those without then that raises some issues.

    I agree with the poster who said Andertons would be far better off scaling back instead of trying to saturate and corner the market and ask for sponsorship, but that's just my opinion. 

    i think the problem is that they are in a nowhere land of trying to define (on the hoof) who they are & what they are trying to do, and to & for whom, and all the while they are flailing around the clock is ticking & the costs are piling up (a microcosm for this whole country atm, but another thread...).

    they used to be a demo channel for a shop. then they tried to be a comedy skit channel (top gear with guitars), now there's a forum & merch.

    my fav youtube channels are either the 'one person in a bedroom talking to camera' kind. they are really the heart & soul & core of what i think makes that medium great. so don't need acces to big resources.
    & then there's educational stuff to do with my science & space interests (conferences & explainers of theories & discoveries). either institutions publishing material or free access tv companies (PBS etc) with little youtube spin offs. so already have acces to big resources.

    the idea of a 'kind of but not' tv company run by 'kind of but not' employees tacked onto a big shop that 'kind of is & yet isn't' benefitting from the whole venture... sounds 'kind of' half-baked.
    Absolutely, and while everyone is talking up Andertons' production values that is only in relation to the guy in his bedroom using his iphone. They are not a TV company and aside from the fact it is a subject we are all interested in, it's not made even to QVC standards and so if they were serious they'd need to invest in people to really help shape the content and have a proper director and camera team. 


    This is an important point - I've seen the job adverts they post for the content producers. They pay £18k a year... which is pretty derisory for that skillset considering how much content they make. You can imagine the turnover is pretty high - they probably get recent graduates who will take literally anything, but once you've made a few of their films, if you get reasonably good at what you're doing you can double your income and work half as much by going freelance. The difference on your showreel between having 1 Andertons film credit and 1,000 is meaningless too since they're all basically the same schtick.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • FreebirdFreebird Frets: 2481
    edited June 2018
    Let's say Andertons have increased their turnover from £8m to £40m due to the exposure from their YouTube channel, then they have IMO fully justified it's existance as an advertising expense, with the associated tax benefits. The subject of their videos is mostly gear related and they have free access to all of these items, so the main expenses are the new property, recording equipment and talent. The question is has there been any overreach regarding any of these items? Every business has to do marketing/advertising. All internet based companies need to provide images, videos, sound clips, etc., as a means of engaging the customer. Thomann in particular make an effort to provide good product photography and sound samples, with a decent customer's product review system, all provided as a business expense.

    Just to lay my cards on the table, I admire and respect those who write, perform, record and produce original music of a high standard. I tend to avoid people who are trying sell something, and if I visit a guitar shop I consider the guitar tech to be the only person worth talking too! Regarding sales advice, you would be better served by any of the numerous musician related forums. So therefore it probably comes as no surprise that I am not a big fan of these salesmen and/or product placement internet personalities. Give me Peter Hook showing how he plays a certain bass line, or Justin Guitar teaching me something useful anyday of the week, even on Tuesdays!
    “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 8reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Musicman20Musicman20 Frets: 858
    Freebird said:
    Let's say Andertons have increased their turnover from £8m to £40m due to the exposure from their YouTube channel, then they have IMO fully justified it's existance as an advertising expense, with the associated tax benefits. The subject of their videos is mostly gear related and they have free access to all of these items, so the main expenses are property, recording equipment and talent. The question is has there been any overreach regarding any of these? Every business has to do marketing/advertising. All internet based companies need to provide images, videos, sound clips, etc., as a means of engaging the customer. Thomann in particular make an effort to provide good product photography and sound samples, with a decent customer's product review system, all provided as a business expense.

    Just to lay my cards on the table, I respect and admire those who write, perform, record and produce quality original music. I tend to avoid people who are trying sell something, and if I visit a guitar shop I consider the guitar tech to be the only person worth talking too! Regarding sales advice, you would be better served by any of the numerous musician related forums. So therefore it probably comes as no surprise that I am not a big fan of these salesmen and/or product placement internet personalities. Give me Peter Hook showing how he plays a certain bass line, or Justin Guitar teaching me sometning useful anyday, even on Tuesdays!
    Aye! My view is the same. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • darthed1981darthed1981 Frets: 3656
    Haych said:

    Yes by all means discuss away. On the whole I find theFB a decent place and it’s frequenters a good bunch, so more than happy to discuss, even if I am a tool sometimes.

    And yes, take advantage of whatever tax breaks are available if that’s what you want to do. Is it always ethical? I don’t know enough to answer that question, maybe Gary Barlow or Russell Brand could help me out?

    If you're asking what my issue is I guess it would be hard to define. If I had to put it into words I’d say it’s a feeling rather than a thought that doesn’t sit right with my own values, nothing more, nothing less. But yeah, I guess maybe it is the way it's been done rather than the decision to do it that sits wrong.

    I wouldn't define myself as a true capitalist and some business decisions I personally find don't sit right with my own set of values.  I’m not saying that’s how I feel in this case, I’m also not saying I don’t feel that way - or is that bassackwards, I'm sure you know what I mean though.

    And when all is said and done, I might just change my opinion.  There's a lot of good reason in the to and fro of this thread and given a day or two to mull things over I might think "well actually you know what, it's ok, not really such a big deal after all".

    Well that all seems fair enough! :)
    Warning: this post may contain overtly affectionate references to the irreplaceable Mary Spender, and if you are reading this, Hi Mary!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Who the bloody hell would have the cheek to ask for money to make things on the internet for as little as $1 a month?

    www.patreon.com/guitarnerds
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Musicman20Musicman20 Frets: 858
    Apparently they’ve retracted the sponsorship as it hasn’t been taken well by their customers. I think they are looking into Patreon.

    Fair play! If they have lessons etc via Patreon I have zero issue with that. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Frets: 8133

    If Lee Anderton wants to reduce the costs of his YouTube presence he should bin off the bass videos, no-one wants to hear someone plinking and plunking bass solos for 10 minutes. There are only 2 basses worth having and that's the Fender Precision and Rickenbacker 4003 end of, period. We don't need a YouTube channel for that. =)

    Same with the drums vids, we all know that all drum kit's are the same.


    5reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • BridgehouseBridgehouse Frets: 18706

    If Lee Anderton wants to reduce the costs of his YouTube presence he should bin off the bass videos, no-one wants to hear someone plinking and plunking bass solos for 10 minutes. There are only 2 basses worth having and that's the Fender Precision and Rickenbacker 4003 end of, period. We don't need a YouTube channel for that. =)

    Same with the drums vids, we all know that all drum kit's are the same.

    Finally I get to do a @richardhomer Only this time it’s not ironic:

    Drivel.
    2reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Frets: 8133
    I thought you'd like it.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • BridgehouseBridgehouse Frets: 18706
    I thought you'd like it.
    :D
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • guitarfishbayguitarfishbay Frets: 7580

    If Lee Anderton wants to reduce the costs of his YouTube presence he should bin off the bass videos, no-one wants to hear someone plinking and plunking bass solos for 10 minutes. There are only 2 basses worth having and that's the Fender Precision and Rickenbacker 4003 end of, period. We don't need a YouTube channel for that. =)

    Same with the drums vids, we all know that all drum kit's are the same.

    Boooooo.



    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Musicman20Musicman20 Frets: 858
    I love bass but I don’t like two bassists noodling. Not my thing even though bass is my number one instrument
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • BridgehouseBridgehouse Frets: 18706
    I love bass but I don’t like two bassists noodling. Not my thing even though bass is my number one instrument
    I’m a firm believer in bass being better demo’d in context rather than on it’s own.

    Yes, it can be a solo instrument, but for the majority of playing it isn’t. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 5314
    I love bass but I don’t like two bassists noodling. Not my thing even though bass is my number one instrument
    I’m a firm believer in bass being better demo’d in context rather than on it’s own.

    Yes, it can be a solo instrument, but for the majority of playing it isn’t. 

    Agree with both of these.  I'm primarily a guitarist but do play bass sometimes.  If I'm after a bass demo, I want to hear how it sounds playing 8th notes, not someone slapping and noodling.  The Andertons bass demos are worse than most.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • richardhomerrichardhomer Frets: 20382
    Finally I get to do a @richardhomer Only this time it’s not ironic:

    Drivel.
    Terry Morgan/Sticker
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • thegummythegummy Frets: 2384
    edited June 2018

    I'm not a 'blues' player as such, but one of the guys I like, who genuinely seems to be very knowledgable, is 'intheblues'.

    He has built a fanbase, and I've never donated money, but it seems more like this is his career along with his band, and he never seems to go on about money...and just comes across very genuine.


    I liked that guy from the video you linked so watched another. I do still like him but the fact he's been loaned a guitar from a shop to review means he's not going to say anything too bad about it or the company would stop giving him stuff (what company would if it was only going to reduce sales?) so it's the same problem as any reviewer online or magazine.

    I think the only chance of a review channel being honest is if it was some rich guy buying the gear himself and doing it purely for his own enjoyment.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • DefaultMDefaultM Frets: 2469
    I don't think I blame Andertons for doing this. If someone said to a business "you know that thing you've been doing? Would you like it to not cost as much anymore?" How many of them are going to say no thanks? They'd at least trial it.

    People can send their money to whoever they want, but why anyone would send it to them is a mystery to me.

    The videos are basically glorified adverts, and now you can donate your money so that you can continue watching adverts? Erm... Ok I suppose. If that's how you want to spend your money then go for it. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • FretwiredFretwired Frets: 20454
    Lee's a marketing genius .. one piece of click bait (sponsor my YouTube posts) and people can't stop talking about Andertons.

    Think I'll pop over to the website and buy something to help Lee out .. things much be tough.
    Frexited
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • DrJazzTapDrJazzTap Frets: 1127
    You don't have to pay.. I don't see the issue.
    I would love to change my username, but I fully understand the T&C's (it was an old band nickname). So please feel free to call me Dave.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.