The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
What is the current way to distribute music and get paid?
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2221
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
Go ahead a block.

No, music is not "a product" for music makers. It might be if you own a record store and stock shelves of random music products and you don't really give a **** what you stock as all you care about is moving as much product as you can.

When classical super fan X or Coldplay super fan Y buys a new release, they don't go to their friends, "wow.. hey, check out the shiny CD I bought or the blackness of the laquer of the LP I just bought". To them they bought something that is highly personal and emotional. What drives music fandom (and this includes other forms of cultural and art fandoms) is peoples emotional attachment to the actual content.

Beatles fans are attached emotionally to the Beatles. Eddie Van Halen fans are attached emotionally to Van Halen records (probably the golden late 70s and early 80s stuff more so than latter day works). And I think to a large extend, the artists are emotionally attached to the records they created. Probably the marketing and sales people at their record labels may not be as much. I don't know. Their way, I firmly believe a music product is a very different sort of item than buying a new Apple Macbook. You can easliy brag about how fast the M1 processor is or the graphics -- but its a whole different thing to bragging about how U2's Joshua Tree is the greatest album ever released and how it meant so much to you. No will gives a **** unless they happen to be a U2 super fan of equal caliber that liked that release. Either way, its not just a product that was released in the late 80s to them. It changed their life and has meaning to them.
Emotional attachment to a product, doesn't change the fact that its a product.

Seriously, do you think consumers have no attachment to Apple products?
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2222
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
Emotional attachment to a product, doesn't change the fact that its a product.

Seriously, do you think consumers have no attachment to Apple products?
I think your stance sort of leads back to .. if you look upon your own music as just a product and not a work of art, how do you expect to convince others? When I use the term work of art, I don't mean Salvador Dali and paintings. I mean the way people extract meaning from music. In order for it to be unique and distinct and mean something, someone has to connect with it and extract some sort of meaning out of of it that is meaningful to them. This process has to start with you the creator and you have to believe it's distinct and unique and separate from what others are releasing and deserves it's own spotlight. It's another stanger's job to go telling you, "yeah, you know, you are not original. you kind of sound like so and so blah blah.. "

;-)
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2223
Lives for gear
 
jbuonacc's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
So Techno must be an interesting genre. How do you extract meaning from the the music if its separated from the social event and social experience? Is it even possible to become a "well know" Techno music maker if there are no social live events and you only rely on people listening to the music to garner meaning from it. My guess is, the meaning in techno music is highly tied to social activities and events such as concerts and clubs and socializing with others who like the same music. My guess is, the coolness of blasting techno on headphones and dancing by yourself in a one bedroom condo does not create famous techno producers and other techno fans. ...
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2224
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
I think your stance sort of leads back to .. if you look upon your own music as just a product and not a work of art, how do you expect to convince others? When I use the term work of art, I don't mean Salvador Dali and paintings. I mean the way people extract meaning from music. In order for it to be unique and distinct and mean something, someone has to connect with it and extract some sort of meaning out of of it that is meaningful to them. This process has to start with you the creator and you have to believe it's distinct and unique and separate from what others are releasing and deserves it's own spotlight. It's another stanger's job to go telling you, "yeah, you know, you are not original. you kind of sound like so and so blah blah.. "

;-)
People extract meaning from plenty of products. Doesn't stop them from being products.

The moment you say "This process has to start with xyz" you go wrong.

It doesn't have to go as your opinion says it does.

Have you ever had a publishing deal? Have you seen the requests for songs where they describe the type of song they are looking for ?

Motown was a process oriented environment where they created products. Are you telling me they didn't see music as a product? Are you telling me this stopped people from having a human connection to the songs?

When you're investing money in a business, you are investing in products. A song is a product no matter how much you attempt to say that it isn't. From a business standpoint IMO, it's exactly as I described it.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2225
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
People extract meaning from plenty of products. Doesn't stop them from being products.

The moment you say "This process has to start with xyz" you go wrong.

It doesn't have to go as your opinion says it does.

Have you ever had a publishing deal? Have you seen the requests for songs where they describe the type of song they are looking for ?

Motown was a process oriented environment where they created products. Are you telling me they didn't see music as a product? Are you telling me this stopped people from having a human connection to the songs?

When you're investing money in a business, you are investing in products. A song is a product no matter how much you attempt to say that it isn't. From a business standpoint IMO, it's exactly as I described it.
That's an interesting stance. So you believe the high point of the music industry was the factory template of Motown and Brill Building pop sound? I don't think I agree with you. I personally think it progressed and advanced a few decades later when the writers and artists were creating their own vision. The truly great artistic achievements in music that have stood the test of time are stuff like Pink Floyd and Radiohead records..

So, is this your goal in life, to become Lamont Dozier one day? Is there even proof that 1% of the people on this forum even know who he is or even are anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamont_Dozier

Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2226
Lives for gear
 
s wave's Avatar
I was thinking about the modern film industry versus the music industry this morning and the ways the 'products' are controlled gated and revenued. What are the values of creations that 'grab' the public and the masses vs say security footage and security footage recording. Yes they can all have value and do. BUT there is different values and not all are worth money or in demand. When products are not commodities - it does come down to how much people are willing to go out of their way to consume it. And just like all of history; the money makers are the rare ones that literally go off the charts (and there is NO replacement for actually controlling the products monetization or profits) Yea the system today is being very unkind to many. AND a Spotify Chart has basically replaced the Billboard chart. The big difference is that the ones CONTROLLING the new powerful chart are are the ones directly regulating the the revenue (and reaping rewards for placement) [the equivalency of old may be Billboard owning the big 7 record companies?]. If a somebody or think tank can address this... then there may be some breakthroughs? After all, in it's essence, it ONLY takes one miniscule idea to topple todays model and market. And creative minds are better than most? Time to really leave ones ego at the door get thinking and exchange intelligent ideas and NEVER forget the idea of focusing on the most STUPID ideas... these are the ones that usually work creating future shock.
Attached Thumbnails
What is the current way to distribute music and get paid?-infinity-curve-.png  
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2227
Lives for gear
 
AfterViewer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
These days, considering an annual fifteen billion dollar industry that has shrunk to a five billion dollar business, there are just too many sharks in the water to sustain a market share feeding frenzy for all comers. Not enough chum. Best to look for another food source, turning on each other is not the best option.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2228
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by s wave ➡️
I was thinking about the modern film industry versus the music industry this morning and the ways the 'products' are controlled gated and revenued. What are the values of creations that 'grab' the public and the masses vs say security footage and security footage recording. Yes they can all have value and do. BUT there is different values and not all are worth money or in demand. When products are not commodities - it does come down to how much people are willing to go out of their way to consume it. And just like all of history; the money makers are the rare ones that literally go off the charts (and there is NO replacement for actually controlling the products monetization or profits) Yea the system today is being very unkind to many. AND a Spotify Chart has basically replaced the Billboard chart. The big difference is that the ones CONTROLLING the new powerful chart are are the ones directly regulating the the revenue (and reaping rewards for placement) [the equivalency of old may be Billboard owning the big 7 record companies?]. If a somebody or think tank can address this... then there may be some breakthroughs? After all, in it's essence, it ONLY takes one miniscule idea to topple todays model and market. And creative minds are better than most? Time to really leave ones ego at the door get thinking and exchange intelligent ideas and NEVER forget the idea of focusing on the most STUPID ideas... these are the ones that usually work creating future shock.
is it even worse in movies industry because movies are more transnational. you may not really get into the relevance of a crazy weirdo czech punk rock band that sings in czech.. but you may really get into a weirdo czech movie that has subtitles.
Attached Thumbnails
What is the current way to distribute music and get paid?-1-media-charts.jpg  
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2229
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
That's an interesting stance. So you believe the high point of the music industry was the factory template of Motown and Brill Building pop sound? I don't think I agree with you. I personally think it progressed and advanced a few decades later when the writers and artists were creating their own vision. The truly great artistic achievements in music that have stood the test of time are stuff like Pink Floyd and Radiohead records..

So, is this your goal in life, to become Lamont Dozier one day? Is there even proof that 1% of the people on this forum even know who he is or even are anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamont_Dozier

Remember back in our early exchange, when you put up some white guys playing for a white audience and said "this is what music is"?

Remember when I said that didn't speak to my experience?

What I told you then and now is that your view isn't "the view," it's just yours.
You cant tell me what "has to happen."
You don't get to define anything for me.
You dont' get to tell me what my "problem in life" is
You don't get to tell me "grow up"
And you don't get to decide what is/isn't music for me.

You are free to state your view.


With that said: So, you think Pink Floyd and Radiohead are "truly great artistic achievements in music", but
Stevie, Marvin and the rest of Motown weren't, and you have some issue with Lamont Dozier?


I didn't mention a goal in life to be Lamont Dozier. (Though I think he's done great work). I didn't tell you that I thought Motown was the high point of the music industry. I've said nothing to lead you to these conclusions. You're disagreeing with a viewpoint that you've assigned to me.

But if you want to discuss music "standing the test of time". You would have a hard time telling me that Radio Head or Pink Floyd is a greater example of that than Motown's music. You'd have a difficult time telling me that Marvin or Stevie didn't "create their artistic vision".

I'd say the same for Bob Marley, Al Green, and JB.


I think we have cultural differences that have been apparent throughout our exchange. That's ok with me. You're free to like what you choose. But when you start telling me that B Gordy's business wasn't truly great and the music doesn't stand the test of time, simply because it's not your cup of tea, I have to remind you, though your opinion is truly your opinion, that doesn't make it truth.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2230
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
Remember back in our early exchange, when you put up some white guys playing for a white audience and said "this is what music is"?

Remember when I said that didn't speak to my experience?

What I told you then and now is that your view isn't "the view," it's just yours.
You cant tell me what "has to happen."
You don't get to define anything for me.
You dont' get to tell me what my "problem in life" is
You don't get to tell me "grow up"
And you don't get to decide what is/isn't music for me.

You are free to state your view.


With that said: So, you think Pink Floyd and Radiohead are "truly great artistic achievements in music", but
Stevie, Marvin and the rest of Motown weren't, and you have some issue with Lamont Dozier?


I didn't mention a goal in life to be Lamont Dozier. (Though I think he's done great work). I didn't tell you that I thought Motown was the high point of the music industry. I've said nothing to lead you to these conclusions. You're disagreeing with a viewpoint that you've assigned to me.

But if you want to discuss music "standing the test of time". You would have a hard time telling me that Radio Head or Pink Floyd is a greater example of that than Motown's music. You'd have a difficult time telling me that Marvin or Stevie didn't "create their artistic vision".

I'd say the same for Bob Marley, Al Green, and JB.


I think we have cultural differences that have been apparent throughout our exchange. That's ok with me. You're free to like what you choose. But when you start telling me that B Gordy's business wasn't truly great and the music doesn't stand the test of time, simply because it's not your cup of tea, I have to remind you, though your opinion is truly your opinion, that doesn't make it truth.
My interpretation of your earlier post was that you think Motown was a better system that produced better music somehow -- which I don't agree with. To me, from what I have read, it was a factory like system where writers and session players, and to a large extent, the artists themselves, were employed like laborers to create a profit for a label owner that owned them and the studio they created their works in. The actual people that created those songs were paid pithy rates and many went on to starve in old age. I get a feeling Sean Combs treated artist at Bad Boy Records 1000x better than Berry Gordy ever did.

If we were to keep it within context of some of those Motown artists. Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye and even Michael Jackson & Jacksons went on to create their greatest works outside of that factory like system. Stevie Wonder in particular has at least 3 to 4 records under his belt that will remain unbeatable as artistic achievements in songwriting, recording, performance and production.

btw.. the picture of that country bar was not about race -- it was about what constitutes the purpose and relevance of a musician. I could have posted a pic of a black gospel congregation and it would prove the the same thing. you bashing away at an AKAI trying to come up with a cool new new beat is not the same thing as a singer or keyboardist in a gospel choir that performs for a local community every week. their purpose and role is directly linked to the community they live it. what they do preserves the culture and the community and betters peoples lives in a direct tangible way that can be witnessed and measured. they deserve to get paid because they perform a service and function in a community. you banging away on you AKAI hoping to strike gold and get rich benefits no one but yourself and your lofty dreams and you do not deserve to get paid for your efforts.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2231
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
My interpretation of your earlier post was that you think Motown was a better system that produced better music somehow -- which I don't agree with. To me, from what I have read, it was a factory like system where writers and session players, and to a large extent, the artists themselves, were employed like laborers to create a profit for a label owner that owned them and the studio they created their works in. The actual people that created those songs were paid pithy rates and many went on to starve in old age. I get a feeling Sean Combs treated artist at Bad Boy Records 1000x better than Berry Gordy ever did.

If we were to keep it within context of some of those Motown artists. Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye and even Michael Jackson & Jacksons went on to create their greatest works outside of that factory like system. Stevie Wonder in particular has at least 3 to 4 records under his belt that will remain unbeatable as artistic achievements in songwriting, recording, performance and production.

btw.. the picture of that country bar was not about race -- it was about what constitutes the purpose and relevance of a musician. I could have posted a pic of a black gospel congregation and it would prove the the same thing. you bashing away at an AKAI trying to come up with a cool new new beat is not the same thing as a singer or keyboardist in a gospel choir that performs for a local community every week. their purpose and role is directly linked to the community they live it. what they do preserves the culture and the community and betters peoples lives in a direct tangible way that can be witnessed and measured. they deserve to get paid because they perform a service and function in a community. you banging away on you AKAI hoping to strike gold and get rich benefits no one but yourself and your lofty dreams and you do not deserve to get paid for your efforts.
I've stated this, but you don't seem to be getting it. The race of the people wasn't the issue. I merely observed what you presented. Yes you could have presented a gospel choir, but you didn't. I spoke to what you presented That wasn't the issue.

The issue is you feeling like what you state is the way/standard and anything outside of that should be measured not only as lesser, but also to not have "cultural value". You can feel whatever you choose about who deserves to get paid. However, I think your thoughts have little bearing on who actually does get paid.

I think Motown turned out some great music. I never stated it was a "better" way than any other. Now you've moved the goal posts to who treated artists better.

Your Akai comparison is so loaded with issues that I should refuse to touch it.

You keep reading your interpretation into what I'm not saying and assigning it to me.

Now you're saying music has to "benefit" others for one to deserve to get paid. It has to be made in commune with a local community for it to have value.

Again, your definition isn't "THE" definition.



So, a guy composing by himself doesn't deserve to get paid?

By that logic, Prince didn't deserve to get paid? Rick James, Marvin and many others who completed songs alone didnt deserve to get paid?

Is that it, or is it just when you throw in your Akai stereotype?

What you're saying is insane. You don't have to perform for a local audience for a song to have value to people. Suppose I make a song in New Orleans and it touches people's lives in South Africa, or China, are you telling me that it's some how void of value because it doesn't meet your standard of tangible measurable benefit?

Suppose I write a song today and people like it long after I'm dead. Does it lack value because it doesn't meet your standard?


Again, your definition of what has artistic value is only YOURs. Your definition isn't "the" definition.
You are not "the" standard or authority in my world.

There's a big world filled with people who are different from you.

Last edited by IM WHO YOU THINK; 4 weeks ago at 10:42 PM..
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2232
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
So, a guy composing by himself doesn't deserve to get paid?
IIRC, we started discussing this way back because there are a whole bunch of people on here whining that they aren't getting paid like they feel like they should. The discussion then turned to, "well, you are just releasing music on your own and dumping it on the market .. why should anyone pay you a lot of money for it? you are doing it of your own free will and on your own free time. It was not a work for hire. So why should someone pay you for it?" and off we went from there.

Quote:
By that logic, Prince didn't deserve to get paid? Rick James, Marvin and many others who completed songs alone didnt deserve to get paid?
So, now you are comparing yourself to some of the greatest and most famous American entertainers in the history of popular music. These aren't just behind the scenes songwriters and engineers. Once you have played 10,000 shows and are able to entertain an entire stadium full of people for 2+ hours, then you can talk.

Quote:
Is that it, or is it just when you throw in your Akai stereotype?

What you're saying is insane. You don't have to perform for a local audience for a song to have value to people. Suppose I make a song in New Orleans and it touches people's lives in South Africa, or China, are you telling me that it's some how void of value because it doesn't meet your standard of tangible measurable benefit?

Suppose I write a song today and people like it long after I'm dead. Does it lack value because it doesn't meet your standard?

Again, your definition of what has artistic value is only YOURs. Your definition isn't "the" definition.
You are not "the" standard or authority in my world.

There's a big world filled with people who are different from you.
You lost me. I have no idea where you are going with this now. But yeah, you are off you rocker.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #2233
Lives for gear
 
Bignatius's Avatar
imo everyone here should work to subvert and ultimately end Spotify and its ilk, sooner than later.

They sold everyone out and rewrote the rules without anyone electing them or them asking us.

They're manipulating the market, not just participating in it... they've had a successful coup of an entire industry, nearly. It's bad for everyone.

Brazen, too. Big Tech are straight enemies of the people / society on an unprecedented level, and I have 25yrs in the industry myself.

The sooner that junk gets reset a bit the better.

.gov needs to breakup these (effective) (essentially) technocratic monopolies, stat.

Fetch me the Pitchforks, Pitch, and Feathers.

Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2234
Lives for gear
 
AfterViewer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
You better go after Amazon and Netflix while you're at it for the same crimes against Humanity.

Last edited by AfterViewer; 4 weeks ago at 11:32 PM..
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2235
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
That's an interesting stance. So you believe the high point of the music industry was the factory template of Motown and Brill Building pop sound? I don't think I agree with you. I personally think it progressed and advanced a few decades later when the writers and artists were creating their own vision.
Wow, there were plenty of individual artists innovating and creating lasting classics from those two communities.
You have a very warped view of music and the music industry.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2236
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
IIRC, we started discussing this way back because there are a whole bunch of people on here whining that they aren't getting paid like they feel like they should. The discussion then turned to, "well, you are just releasing music on your own and dumping it on the market .. why should anyone pay you a lot of money for it? you are doing it of your own free will and on your own free time. It was not a work for hire. So why should someone pay you for it?" and off we went from there.
Nooo, that is YOUR warped view of the thread, it is not what the thread is about or has been conducted.
It is not about ME or MY bank account. I use my own experience to illustrate certain aspects of the debate, but that's where it ends. You continue to wrongly characterise the thread as people 'whining that they aren't being paid enough'.

My point is that I've had my time in the spotlight and done quite well. I, like other professional musicians' am a consumer as much as you are. I see young artists struggling to stay full time in music at the same time as making interesting music. Yes, you can make commercial pop, target Tik-Tok and Spotify and do quite well.
I'm concerned about the left field, the innovators.
If we do not sustain that side of the music industry we ALL lose out - as music fans.
It is NOT about ME, it isn't about MY INCOME.

To answer your question - why should someone pay for it?
So we don't have to endure auto-tuned songs with soft porn videos for the next 10-20 years.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2237
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
IIRC, we started discussing this way back because there are a whole bunch of people on here whining that they aren't getting paid like they feel like they should. The discussion then turned to, "well, you are just releasing music on your own and dumping it on the market .. why should anyone pay you a lot of money for it? you are doing it of your own free will and on your own free time. It was not a work for hire. So why should someone pay you for it?" and off we went from there.



So, now you are comparing yourself to some of the greatest and most famous American entertainers in the history of popular music. These aren't just behind the scenes songwriters and engineers. Once you have played 10,000 shows and are able to entertain an entire stadium full of people for 2+ hours, then you can talk.



You lost me. I have no idea where you are going with this now. But yeah, you are off you rocker.

Let's just not talk at all. This is too stupid to warrant a response
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2238
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
I'm concerned about the left field, the innovators.
If we do not sustain that side of the music industry we ALL lose out - as music fans.
It is NOT about ME, it isn't about MY INCOME.

To answer your question - why should someone pay for it?
So we don't have to endure auto-tuned songs with soft porn videos for the next 10-20 years.
What are you talking about??!! The "left field" meaning the artists and musicians that are not actively going after getting placed on Spotify Global Top 50 lists are in a golden era of music from what I can see and it is enabled by platforms like Spotify and bandcamp. You can source out and follow any niche genre artists and chose to be notified the moment they release a new track and buy their release on the spot. It has never been better for a niche artist and it's miles better than the old days of sending out for and importing obscure LPs from other countries where there wasn't a redistributor in your region and you wound up getting access to the release 6 to 12 months after it got released.

But the trick is, the artist needs to know how to and actively promote and connect with the audience that is not in their region because the reality is there is too too music out there being made by a lot of left field type artists and there is not enough money to buy being every single left field release that gets released every single day all year around.

One of the more recent examples of a fairly obscure artist whos releases I pick up becuase of the good production.. and under the old system there is not figging way I would have been able to instantly pickup a release from a band from Melborune in my region.

https://kllosounds.bandcamp.com/album/maybe-we-could
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2239
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
Wow, there were plenty of individual artists innovating and creating lasting classics from those two communities.
You have a very warped view of music and the music industry.
Nope.. the discussion was those artists started making their greatest works once they were out of the factory like environment where the focus was on turning around quick top 10 singles and once they were in an environment where they had greater artistic control.

Man.. lots of really warped memories on this forum. Using Prince as an example is insane. He was first and foremost a live entertainer and performer -- and that's what carried him and his career for the better part of his career. He was not a "hit making machine" and very far from it. Good luck finding many hit singles after he left Warner Bros .. and lost access to the marketing department there. But he stayed very much afloat because he was a great musician and more importantly one of the greatest live performers in American history. He could have made one crappy dud after another and it would not have made a difference in the world in he career because him and his management knew they could very easily put gasoline into the truck and start up the live touring machine and sell out every place they played. How self indulgent or disconnected from popular music trends his latest release happened to be had no bearing on it. They were two totally separate businesses and enterprises.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2240
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
Nope.. the discussion was those artists started making their greatest works once they were out of the factory like environment where the focus was on turning around quick top 10 singles and once they were in an environment where they had greater artistic control.
Like Goffin and King who wrote countless classic songs while working at The Brill?
Sorry you are wrong.

Quote:
Man.. lots of really warped memories on this forum. Using Prince as an example is insane. He was first and foremost a live entertainer and performer -- and that's what carried him and his career for the better part of his career. He was not a "hit making machine" and very far from it.
Utter nonsense.
He had a hit with Controversy, then 1999 and Little Red Corvette. At that point he'd hardly played in Europe.
He hit it biggest with the movie Purple Rain. That was his breakthrough moment, nothing to do with touring. He wrote countless hits for people like The Bangles, Sheila E and Sinead O'Connor.
You couldn't have picked a more 'hit making machine' if you'd tried.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2241
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
And I saw Prince live a couple of times at the height of his late 80's popularity.
It was a disappointment if you were looking for a great band. much of the show was playback, with an emphasis very much on a spectacular 'show' , dance routines etc.
Not that they weren't awesome bands, it's just the way Prince liked to perform his popular songs.
The real show was usually in a small club after hours, playing jams and covers, which many fewer people ever got to see.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2242
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
Like Goffin and King who wrote countless classic songs while working at The Brill?
Sorry you are wrong.
I am a big 70s music fan, but I personally don't like any of that Neil Diamond , James Taylor stuff. There was a lot more interesting and cooler stuff going on in music back then than that adult contemporary stuff. I would take the experimental ramblings of Zappa or weirdo Joe Walsh releases over anything Leo Sayer or James Taylor released any day.


Quote:
Utter nonsense.
He had a hit with Controversy, then 1999 and Little Red Corvette. At that point he'd hardly played in Europe.
He hit it biggest with the movie Purple Rain. That was his breakthrough moment, nothing to do with touring. He wrote countless hits for people like The Bangles, Sheila E and Sinead O'Connor.
You couldn't have picked a more 'hit making machine' if you'd tried.
Prince's strong point was his capacity as a live performer. Up until the 1999 record he was predominately a black artist operating on the black charts. He was small potatoes compared to the likes of EW&F, Commodores, Jacksons et la. He wasn't R&B, he wasn't funk, he wasn't gospel, he was his own little brand of mish mash of American radio music they listened to in Minneapolis.. a cross breed of white rock and black music. I was a big fan, still am, but to be honest, his musical legacy is rather thinly spread. His music releases do not have the relevance of black artists in such as Curtis Mayfield or Issac Hayes not does he have the relevance of a white artist like Springsteen or Johnny Cash.. not does he have the universal reverence of the records of Ray Charles, Aretha Franklin or Miles Davis. Prince is basically going to go down in history as one of the greatest live performers who ever lived.

I liked all those early pre-1999 records better than anything he did later, but it was a far cry from the powerhouse that were Lionel Richie and Kool and the Gang who basically permanently fused the gap between white and black music in America.

Prince catapulted to fame in the early 80s mostly due to the fact that it was an era of highly experimental stuff going on with sounds and electronics and artist image. It was really only 3 or 4 years between the 1999 record and by 1985 he made Around the World and Parade and lost 50% of the fans he acquired. I would guesstimate that by 1995 and the Gold Experience album he lost relevancy as a major artist. Pop music changed, rock music changed, black music changed and he was releasing self indulgent records. (Please educate me and name me those famous well know tracks from Rainbow Children and Xpectation that people were hmming to in the early 00s?!!) He was a highly sought after live performer that was predominately operating in the black music realm. He made a huge creative comeback with Musicology (which was in 2004!!) but what was really making him relevant was his touring and live performances. He sort of became Springsteen -- highly sought after concert attraction but not really making any new records that had any relevance in the music that was happening at the time. Only hard core fans like them. (I recall many a NPG super duper extended 4 CD release in $1 clearance bargain bins)... Towards the end of his life by the time of Art Official and Plectrum .. is was for hard core fans but really a self indulgent mess. I didn't like any of the Plectrum stuff.

Best of day to you.


btw.. if you ever get a chance to get access to a copy of Ricky Vincents book. Not mamy copies were made but the authoritative source of what was really happening in the genre while Cher was dancing around with the Jacksons on national television.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/137463.Funk
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2243
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
I am a big 70s music fan, but I personally don't like any of that Neil Diamond , James Taylor stuff. There was a lot more interesting and cooler stuff going on in music back then than that adult contemporary stuff. I would take the experimental ramblings of Zappa or weirdo Joe Walsh releases over anything Leo Sayer or James Taylor released any day.




Prince's strong point was his capacity as a live performer. Up until 1999 he was predominately a black artist operating on the black charts. He was small potatoes compared to the likes of EW&F, Commodores, Jacksons et la. He wasn't R&B, he wasn't funk, he wasn't gospel, he was his own little brand of mish mash of American radio music they listened to in Minneapolis.. a cross breed of white rock and black music. I was a big fan, still am, but to be honest, his musical legacy is rather thinly spread. His music releases do not have the relevance of black artists in such as Curtis Mayfield or Issac Hayes not does he have the relevance of a white artist like Springsteen or Johnny Cash.. not does he have the universal reverence of the records of Ray Charles, Aretha Franklin or Miles Davis. Prince is basically going to go down in history as one of the greatest live performers who ever lived.

I liked all those early pre-1999 records better than anything he did later, but it was a far cry from the powerhouse that were Lionel Richie and Kool and the Gang who basically permanently fused the gap between white and black music in America.

Prince catapulted to fame in the early 80s mostly due to the fact that it was an era of highly experimental stuff going on with sounds and electronics and artist image. It was really only 3 or 4 years between the 1999 record and by 1985 he made Around the World and Parade and lost 50% of the fans he acquired. I would guesstimate that by 1995 and the Gold Experience album he lost relevancy as a major artist. Pop music changed, rock music changed, black music changed and he was releasing self indulgent records. (Please educate me and name me those famous well know tracks from Rainbow Children and Xpectation that people were hmming to in the early 00s?!!) He was a highly sought after live performer that was predominately operating in the black music realm. He made a huge creative comeback with Musicology (which was in 2004!!) but what was really making him relevant was his touring and live performances. He sort of became Springsteen -- highly sought after concert attraction but not really making any new records that had any relevance in the music that was happening at the time. Only hard core fans like them. (I recall many a NPG super duper extended 4 CD release in $1 clearance bargain bins)... Towards the end of his life by the time of Art Official and Plectrum .. is was for hard core fans but really a self indulgent mess. I didn't like any of the Plectrum stuff.

Best of day to you.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2244
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2245
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
As usual you seem to confuse what you like (personally) with what is important (musically, globally).

Goffin and King:
Natural Woman
Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow
The LocoMotion
Pleasant Valley Sunday
Up On The Roof
It Might As Well Rain Until September.
These are ALL absolute classics.

Most people in the UK and Europe had never heard of Prince before Purple Rain.
He is ABSOLUTELY most known as an incredible song writer and producer, whether you like it or not.
I know people who worked with hm. The Warner Years were mostly his best because Warner's refused to put out everything Prince recorded, forcing him to edit himself and pick the best for each album. That's why he eventually fell out with Warners, and why a lot of his later albums were patchy.

All his records endure - while a lot pf people never saw him live.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2246
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
He was a highly sought after live performer
You are an odd guy.
You are accurately describing Mccartney.
He hasn't really released a record that was classic or had any global relevance since the mid-80's (at best). And yet for 30+ years he has been playing sell out football stadium shows every single year.
Is that because he's primarily known as a great live performer?
No, EVERYONE on the planet knows he was one half of the greatest song writing teams popular music has ever known.
In 100 years time, no one will remember his 1990-2019 live shows, but millions of people will still be buying and playing Sgt Pepper and The White Album.
Same with Prince - Sign Of The Times is an absolute classic record, whereas the Sign Of The Times World Tour - not so much. I saw it. Nice dance routines.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2247
Lives for gear
 
IM WHO YOU THINK's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
Nope.. the discussion was those artists started making their greatest works once they were out of the factory like environment where the focus was on turning around quick top 10 singles and once they were in an environment where they had greater artistic control.

Man.. lots of really warped memories on this forum. Using Prince as an example is insane. He was first and foremost a live entertainer and performer -- and that's what carried him and his career for the better part of his career. He was not a "hit making machine" and very far from it. Good luck finding many hit singles after he left Warner Bros .. and lost access to the marketing department there. But he stayed very much afloat because he was a great musician and more importantly one of the greatest live performers in American history. He could have made one crappy dud after another and it would not have made a difference in the world in he career because him and his management knew they could very easily put gasoline into the truck and start up the live touring machine and sell out every place they played. How self indulgent or disconnected from popular music trends his latest release happened to be had no bearing on it. They were two totally separate businesses and enterprises.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
As usual you seem to confuse what you like (personally) with what is important (musically, globally).

Goffin and King:
Natural Woman
Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow
The LocoMotion
Pleasant Valley Sunday
Up On The Roof
It Might As Well Rain Until September.
These are ALL absolute classics.

Most people in the UK and Europe had never heard of Prince before Purple Rain.
He is ABSOLUTELY most known as an incredible song writer and producer, whether you like it or not.
I know people who worked with hm. The Warner Years were mostly his best because Warner's refused to put out everything Prince recorded, forcing him to edit himself and pick the best for each album. That's why he eventually fell out with Warners, and why a lot of his later albums were patchy.

All his records endure - while a lot pf people never saw him live.

39 Studio albums.
5 Live albums,
9 Compilation albums,
17 video albums
3 posthumous albums.

>100 Million records sold world wide, including 48.9 million certified in teh US and >10 million in the UK.

Rolling Stone ranked him at #27 on the list of the 100 greatest artists of all time

And here we are discussing his "relevance" as more than a live performer


And, maybe one day we'll know if those Motown records "stand the test of time."
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2248
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
You are an odd guy.
You are accurately describing Mccartney.
He hasn't really released a record that was classic or had any global relevance since the mid-80's (at best). And yet for 30+ years he has been playing sell out football stadium shows every single year.
Is that because he's primarily known as a great live performer?
No, EVERYONE on the planet knows he was one half of the greatest song writing teams popular music has ever known.
In 100 years time, no one will remember his 1990-2019 live shows, but millions of people will still be buying and playing Sgt Pepper and The White Album.
Same with Prince - Sign Of The Times is an absolute classic record, whereas the Sign Of The Times World Tour - not so much. I saw it. Nice dance routines.
Well, I don't know how old you are. I was buying back catalog rereleases of Princes music in 85 to 86. Controversy and Dirty Mind .. and I recall people looking at them all freaked out as it was the era of U2, Peter Gabriel and Paul Simon reign. Listening to them was also a weirder reaction by others. It was music that neither fit into any genre then or before.

I really don't think anyone will be buying or listening to Prince NPG releases much in 100 years time. Once the Prince estate milks them in LP format for all its worth. It's going to be like listening to back catalog releases of Parliament Funkadelic records. For hard core fans only.

And yes, the Sign of the times is a classic record. But its really a mish mash of other failed projects at the time. Had not Warner's marketing been behind it it would have been just another Crystal Ball or Emancipation with no real hits on it.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2249
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
39 Studio albums.
5 Live albums,
9 Compilation albums,
17 video albums
3 posthumous albums.

>100 Million records sold world wide, including 48.9 million certified in teh US and >10 million in the UK.

Rolling Stone ranked him at #27 on the list of the 100 greatest artists of all time

And here we are discussing his "relevance" as more than a live performer


And, maybe one day we'll know if those Motown records "stand the test of time."
Sorry to break it to you, but in 100 years people will still be dissecting Songs in The Key of Life.. not so sure about Prince's NPG output. And I am speaking as a fan of both artists.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wZ3...7xq8Hb&index=5
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #2250
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
You are an odd guy.
You are accurately describing Mccartney.
He hasn't really released a record that was classic or had any global relevance since the mid-80's (at best). And yet for 30+ years he has been playing sell out football stadium shows every single year.
Is that because he's primarily known as a great live performer?
No, EVERYONE on the planet knows he was one half of the greatest song writing teams popular music has ever known.
In 100 years time, no one will remember his 1990-2019 live shows, but millions of people will still be buying and playing Sgt Pepper and The White Album.
Same with Prince - Sign Of The Times is an absolute classic record, whereas the Sign Of The Times World Tour - not so much. I saw it. Nice dance routines.
No comment. i am not a big McCartney fan or that familiar with all his solo records. But I hear he made really good records. I personally liked George Harrison's releases better.
📝 Reply
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump