Indie bands have always done this grind on their own -- I remember all the shows at Glasslands and the lofts and bars around Brooklyn 15 or so years ago, which were in that 150-300 cap range. Or my friends' college bands back in the early 2000s. Labels definitely weren't involved with any of that, it was just a bunch of musicians in a rented van driving to cities crashing on couches. Once you start playing 1000+ cap rooms (or stadiums, in the case of a few friends), the administrative part takes more time than the music part, and I don't really know any artists that care to deal with that. You need lawyers, tour managers, PR people, etc.

It definitely doesn't take a major label like it used to, but an indie label that can support you in that work is often necessary.

These are massively different economies of scale than the labels deal with. Unless we see technological breakthroughs that make scaling easy for a DIY musician, the labels look well protected for the next generation.

You're mistaken and only thinking in terms of major labels and Beyonce. There are thousands of indie labels working at that small scale, along with countless major label "baby bands" (as they call them).

> Unless we see technological breakthroughs that make scaling easy for a DIY musician, the labels look well protected for the next generation.

The entire premise of my original comment was about how technology has made scaling easy for independent musicians. It's already happening. That's the whole conversation we're having here.