Every single day, First Floor receives dozens, sometimes hundreds, of promo emails, the vast majority of them touting new releases. Add in a similar number of daily Bandcamp notification emails, not to mention whatever upcoming records I come across through my own digging, and by the end of each week, several hundred new releases have appeared on my radar—many of them accompanied by pleas to do some sort of coverage.
What’s more, these pleas have only increased with each passing year, and in recent months, they’ve spiked upwards even more dramatically. Some of that can perhaps be chalked up to First Floor’s growth, or the fact that the newsletter’s Recommended Releases section—which publishes review-like write-ups of records we’re particularly excited about—debuted back in January. But considering that Resident Advisor has cut its reviews down to almost nothing (a grand total of four were published in the last 30 days), and Pitchfork—a more generalist publication which never really prioritized electronic and experimental music to begin with—decided to stick its reviews behind a paywall a few months back, there simply aren’t that many prominent outlets left that are still devoting serious time, resources and editorial real estate to thoughtfully writing about new records in a formalized and even semi-detailed fashion. (Aside from DJ Mag, The Quietus, A Closer Listen, The Wire—which puts very little un-paywalled content online—and a handful of other niche operations, reviews of electronic and experimental music are mostly happening in the newsletter sphere these days.)
This is not a new phenomenon, and as long as the music discourse continues to primarily unfold on Instagram (and TikTok), written reviews (which don’t translate well to visually oriented platforms) will likely continue to be an endangered species. What’s far more likely to generate online engagement—arguably the only metric that industry types truly care about these days—is when artists create elaborate promotional content (read: infomercials) or when music journalists themselves create a kind of online persona, often by posting incessantly and / or actively inserting themselves into the stories they’re writing. But reviews? A searing takedown will occasionally light up the algorithm, but unless an artist is already super hyped or otherwise has an established and highly engaged stan army behind them (hello Boards of Canada!), a measured article, or even an enthusiastic one, that analizes and contextualizes a new record is unlikely to find much traction online.
So should artists and labels even bother to chase after reviews anymore? Maybe not. (Some music professionals would surely say definitely not.) What they ought to be chasing instead could be the subject of a completely separate piece—one probably written by one of the self-proclaimed industry gurus who’ve flocked to Substack over the past few years—but given the ever-inflating volume of pitches and promos that continue to come my way, it seems that a not-insignificant amount of people are still interested in securing a good old-fashioned review.
There’s just one problem. Based on the multitude of messages that land in my inbox, many artists and labels—especially the smaller ones without the budget to hire a professional publicist—have only the faintest idea how to effectively pitch and promote their work. This too is not a new problem, and back in 2020, during the newsletter’s very first year, I published something called “How to Talk to Journalists (and Get Them to Check Out Your Music).” Exactly six years later, much of its content is still relevant, but given the uptick in albums being sent my way, I’ve decided to publish an updated guide. A mix of both big-picture observations and specific, how-to recommendations, it admittedly recycles some of my original article, but there’s a lot of new material in there as well. What’s important though is that that information is designed to help today’s artists and labels to not only present their releases to journalists more effectively, but to also give them a better understanding of the space in which they are competing for editorial attention.
UNDERSTAND THAT MUSIC JOURNALISM HAS CHANGED
Even in a world where most of us are hopelessly glued to our phones, and the average person spends far more time scrolling through Instagram and TikTok than they do reading articles of any kind, an idea persists that the music press is some sort of all-powerful cabal with the power to make or break careers. It’s questionable if that has ever been true, but these days, the notion is downright laughable. With most listeners now relying on streaming and social media platforms to discover new music, the influence of actual music publications is arguably at an all-time low, to the point where even a glowing write-up from a prestigious outlet is unlikely to seriously move the needle.
Although “writing about obscure stuff you may not have heard or even heard of” is technically still part of what many music journalists do, it’s important to remember that the outlets they work for are primarily concerned with attracting eyeballs. They too are chasing the algorithm, and as such, the work of the average music writer has become increasingly reactive in nature. They don’t break trends; they seek out artists, scenes, sounds and stories that are already popping, and then use their platforms to share what they’ve found with a larger audience, ideally with some additional context and thoughtful commentary.
That doesn’t mean these writers don’t want to hear your latest release! It does, however, mean that their capacity to potentially write about it is limited, even if they like the music on offer. Truth be told, the sheer volume of new records dropping every single day means that even finding the time to listen to something can be a challenge, particularly if that something is coming from a relatively unknown artist. The music landscape is ultra-competitive, and if you want a journalist to check out your stuff, it’s a good idea to make that stuff as easy to understand and access as possible.
PRESENTATION MATTERS
Don’t be fooled by the word “presentation.” This is not a situation where slickly styled photos and an elaborate dossier are required. (Save that stuff for the festival bookers, although even they are probably more interested in your social media follower counts.) Most journalists are drowning in pitches, and since they’re dealing with a neverending time crunch, the average email that lands in their inbox is likely going to receive only seconds of attention, if it’s opened at all.
I’m not going to get into subject line optimization strategies, but I will say this: Be concise. There’s no need to pen a giant essay or tell your whole life story. Be polite too, but know that a few informative sentences about you and your work is usually more than enough. (If your pitch extends beyond a couple of short paragraphs, you’ve almost certainly written too much.) Provide some basic facts (e.g. your artist name, where you’re based, the name of your upcoming release, the release date, the label it’s coming out on, links to your socials, etc.), and if you think that the journalist will have absolutely no idea who you are, include some simple descriptions and / or comparisons in relation to your music (e.g. “I make sci-fi techno that’s inspired by artists like Actress and Underground Resistance,” or “DJs like CCL and Helena Hauff were big influences on me, and I think my music kind of sounds like something that would work in either one of their sets.”).
MAKE THE ACTUAL MUSIC ACCESSIBLE
In theory, sharing music with journalists is supposed to be the primary objective of a pitch, but a surprising number of artists and labels treat it like a virtual afterthought. That is a mistake, and one that is easily remedied with a little bit of thoughtful preparation.
Here are some basic recommendations:
DO NOT ATTACH FILES. Journalists’ inboxes are already overflowing, and giant attachments only clog them up further. Attaching small files like an artist bio or promotional one sheet is fine, but when it comes to music, it’s much better to present it in a way that it can be easily listened to, preferably by providing links to where it can be streamed or downloaded.
When it comes to streaming options, there are a number of players one can use, including more elaborate promo delivery services like Fatdrop, Inflyte, PromoJukeBox and Label Engine that publicists and professionals use. But for those on a budget, the easiest option (and one that most journalists will nonetheless be happy with) is probably a private SoundCloud link—preferably one that contains all of the tracks on the release.
For download links, there are even more options available, including those promo delivery platforms mentioned above, but the most important thing is to choose one where the journalist can download the entire release in a single click, or two at the most. Using something like Dropbox or Google Drive is fine—but make sure that you’ve set the permissions so that the link is actually accessible—and WeTransfer also works, but if you’re going to use it, make sure that the link isn’t going to expire anytime soon. (Journalists run into expired WeTransfer links all the time, and if we have to request that the link be refreshed, it only lessens the chance that the files being sent over will actually be listened to.)
Provide multiple file formats. Some people like MP3s (please send 320 kbps ONLY), while others like WAVs or AIFFs. The best option is to provide journalists with options to download the files in the format of their choice, although if you’re going to leave something out, go ahead and skip WAVs, which are definitely the worst format.
You know what widely used platform automatically allows people to download files in their preferred format? Bandcamp. If you’re an active Bandcamp user (and if you’re an independent artist or label, you almost certainly should be), using the platform to present your music to journalists is a very smart idea. Aside from allowing the creation of advance streaming links, Bandcamp also enables users to create download codes, which can then be sent out to journalists or anyone else that you’d like to send a promo to. Moreover, once a person uses that code to download the release, their user icon is then added to the “Supported by” section of the public release page.
As cynical as it sounds, appearances matter in the music industry—even within the confines of a left-of-center platform like Bandcamp—and considering that the site makes no distinction between who actually bought a release and who was merely sent a download code, it makes sense to populate a release page with as many icons as possible. If you’re going to be sending out downloads anyways, why not do it in a why that gives your release a little extra shine?Label your files properly. This is another issue that gets solved by using Bandcamp, but on other platforms, it’s all too common for file names to be incorrect, incomplete or full of remnant information (e.g. V2.8 MASTER_final). Spend 10 minutes punching in all of the correct song titles, and also make sure to input all of the correct metadata using iTunes or a similar program. And if you’re sending out files via Dropbox or Google Drive, make sure that the name of the containing all of those files includes both the artist name and the release title. That way, when the recipient goes to open the resulting ZIP file—sometimes days, or even weeks later—they’ll actually be able to find it.
IF THE RELEASE IS ALREADY OUT, YOU’RE PROBABLY TOO LATE
In an era where surprise album drops and unannounced Bandcamp dumps have become commonplace, this idea might seem odd. But it’s important to remember that while the press might rush to review something unexpected from Aphex Twin, Beyoncé or some other high-wattage figure, they’re most likely not going to act with the same fervor when it comes to obscure and relatively unknown artists. When it comes to proper press outlets, most editorial coverage is confirmed weeks (and sometimes months) in advance, and publications generally prefer to publish that coverage right around the official release date. That practice is perhaps antiquated, but as long as the public discourse around new records continues to cluster around the release date, the press—which is desperate to tap into whatever conversations are bubbling on social media—is going to follow the crowd.
What does that mean for artists and labels in search of coverage? They need to send their music to journalists well before it’s available to the public. Lead times will vary; in some cases, albums are sent to the press as much as six months in advance, although two to three weeks can also be enough, particularly for smaller releases. Although sending your music early won’t guarantee that someone will write about it, if they do take an interest in the record, they’ll appreciate having more time to listen and digest its contents before they buckle down and begin the actual writing process.
FOLLOW UP, BUT DON’T BE ANNOYING
Not to beat a dead horse, but most journalists get sent an absurd amount of music, and also want to check out a whole bunch of other releases too. Even for those who focus on a relatively narrow band of the musical spectrum, there are hundreds of relevant new records dropping every single week, and there simply aren’t enough hours in the day to listen to them all.
Knowing that, it may be necessary for artists to follow up after sending over their music. Gentle reminders can actually be really helpful, but there’s an art to it. Few things are more annoying than an artist who submits their music and then follows up two days later. Unless there is some sort of extreme urgency to the situation (e.g. the record has a collaboration with Aphex Twin and he’s willing to do one joint interview, but it needs to be confirmed ASAP), following up too soon is likely to seem pushy—and might prompt a journalist to not listen to your music at all.
As a general rule, I’d say that artists should wait at least a week before following up, and maybe longer if the release date is still a ways off. And when you do send a follow-up email, keep it short. I’d recommend replying to the original email chain and just sending over a sentence or two along the lines of “Hey I just wanted to check and see if you’d had a chance to check this out.” There’s no need to rehash the original spiel or get into a bunch of promo speak, unless there’s been some major new development that the writer might find interesting.
FOCUS ON WRITERS, NOT PUBLICATIONS
As much as an artist might set their heart on a review in Pitchfork, Resident Advisor or some other specific publication, the editorial that appears in those outlets is written by a litany of different writers—most of them freelancers who contribute to a variety of different publications. In today’s media landscape, there are only a small handful of permanent staffers; most modern music journalists are free agents, and this trend has only intensified now that seemingly everyone has their own newsletter or podcast.
That atomization hasn’t necessarily been good for individual journalists’ economic security, or the financial health of the publications that hire and employ them, but it has at least made it easier for the listening public—or at least that section of the listening public that’s willing to go beyond mere headlines—to find and follow individual writers whose tastes and outlook aligns with their own. Artists and labels—who arguably make up a sizable portion of the remaining audience for reviews—can massively help themselves by not only keeping tabs on like-minded journalists, but by building direct relationships with them, irrespective of where their writing is being published from one day to the next.
Building those relationships can take time, but it’s not necessarily difficult. Follow them on social media. Take note of what outlets they write for, what sort of things they write about and what format their writing usually takes. Do they have a regular column? A podcast? Do they review albums? Do they only seem to interview artists? Every music writer has their own niche, and it’s to your benefit to know who does what. That way, when the time comes to approach them with your own music, you’ll be much better equipped for the task.
It may sound silly, but being able to say, “I really liked your review of X,” or “Perhaps this would fit in your column for Y,” really goes a long way. (To be clear, that doesn’t mean you need to kiss ass or send writers gushing emails about how amazing you think they are; subtle cues that you’re familiar with their work are usually more than sufficient.) Furthermore, if you do establish a rapport (even a digital one) with an individual journalist, it’ll be much easier to follow them as they move from one outlet to the next, which is all but inevitable given the unstable nature of music media.
TARGETED MAILOUTS ARE BETTER THAN SPAM
Many artists and labels—and even some publicists—seem to think that carpet-bombing as many journalists and publications as possible is the best way to approach a promo campaign. This is a mistake, especially when it comes to more niche acts and releases.
For new (and smaller) artists and labels, a focused promo mailout—even one that only goes to five or ten people—is going to be way more effective than a glorified piece of spam that goes out to hundreds (or thousands) of journalists you’ve never spoken with. If you’ve done your research ahead of time, you can put together a list of writers and editors whose work you respect and who you think might actually be interested in your music. If you don’t have their contact info, send them a polite direct message on Instagram and ask if they have an email where you could send some music. Most writers will be happy to provide one.
(Side note: DO NOT send promo links via an Instagram DM; it’s almost impossible to listen to and / or download music on there, which means the recipient then has to pull out their laptop, open Instagram and access the files on a regular web browser. Many writers aren’t going to deal with that sort of hassle, or will just forget to go back and do all of that once they’re actually in front of their computer.)
PR CAN HELP, BUT IT’S NOT A SILVER BULLET
After reading this, some artists and labels are almost certainly thinking that everything I’ve described sounds like a giant headache—and they wouldn’t be wrong about that. Pitching and promoting music is very time-consuming and difficult, which is a big part of why so many people outsource the task to professional PR firms. Keeping track of the shifting media landscape and maintaining relationships with the press is literally part of publicists’ job, and it’s true that the projects they work on are benefitted by those relationships. When writers are receiving hundreds of promo emails a day, they’re far more likely to actually read one with a familiar name attached, particularly when that name belongs to someone with a history of working with high-quality projects.
That familiarity, however, comes with a cost, and a decent promo campaign is at a minimum going to cost several hundred dollars. A more elaborate effort (i.e. one that involves more than a few email mass email blasts and includes some targeted, personalized pitching) can easily run into the thousands. Is it worth the money? That depends on who you ask and what exactly they’re looking for, but for most smaller artists and labels, the resulting boost from a PR push—even a mildly successful one—is not going to lead to an increase in streaming / sales income that covers the cost of hiring a publicist. Oftentimes, it’s perhaps more useful to view a PR campaign as a less of a release-specific effort and more of a long-term investment in building name recognition. In other words, manage your expectations.
BE REALISTIC
Even if you follow everything I’ve laid out here to the letter, there are no guarantees that even a single writer will want to cover your music, and that goes double for new or relatively unknown artists.
When you’re starting out, you’re most likely going to hear a lot of no’s—hopefully polite ones—and even more silence, but none of that necessarily means that your music isn’t any good. As I said before, journalists these days are less in the business of breaking new acts and are more focused on documenting the work of artists who’ve already generated some heat on their own. It’s not that new and niche artists and labels shouldn’t bother contacting the press at all—there’s no harm in forging relationships with music writers, even if they don’t bear fruit immediately. But as affirming as it can be to see a release written up with a proper review, it’s important to remember that there’s plenty of other work to be done too. Focus instead on connecting and networking with other artists, both online and especially in your local scene (if your city has one). Use social media to share your music (and the narratives around it) with the world. Build up energy and interest in your project on your own, and you’ll likely find that the journalists will start coming to you, instead of the other way around.
First Floor is published and overseen by Shawn Reynaldo, a freelance writer, editor, presenter and project manager. Find him on LinkedIn and Instagram—and make sure to follow First Floor on Instagram as well—or you can just drop Shawn an email to get in touch about projects, collaborations or other potential opportunities.