Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miscellaneous [BG]' started by Melf, Nov 25, 2003.
Taken from Yahoo News
So Hansen has conveniently forgotten "Making the Band"?
MTV has absolutely ruined the music business by turning it into a visual medium.
Eh, uh, but... sigh.
I'm going to mention something that may be overlooked in that steaming pile: Bono complaining about over-hyped pop? Come on now.
And then there's this little tidbit:
"Despite big hits from pop queen Christina Aguilera (news) and rapper 50 Cent, the industry has been ravaged by Internet downloading and CD burning."
Why do they let people who have no clue write this stuff in the news?
At least Bono and company write their own songs. They were't always pop; pop came to them. They've also taken some pretty big risks, commercially (the wonderful, but dismal selling, "Pop" album).
I look for record labels to eventually become obselete. (bad for over-paid record execs, good for musicians) With the ability to record professional sounding albums with a low budget and the ability to promote with the internet, an artist doesn't really need a label anymore.
Hear hear! Those bozo record execs have been trying for years to do copy protection that works. They still don't get it. Even if they have the perfect technology, it'll still fail. It's always failed. Historically so. Meanwhile, we have to pay their exorbitant "research" costs that do nothing but drive up the prices of CD's. It's completely ridiculous. And you're right, in today's world, who needs 'em? Only the "stars" they created in the first place? From the musician's point of view, the Internet means low cost distribution and low cost advertising, and many home studios today are way better than even the pro studios were ten years ago. Here in the LA area there are literally hundreds of independent production companies that can put on a show. From the consumer's standpoint, it's still going to take a little further change in buying habits. The technology to transport downloads is still expensive and a little exotic. But pretty soon there's going to be a coalescence on the Internet like there was in the early days of radio, and you'll see the download business pick up again. And yes, the record companies are very smart to want to get into it. A day late and a dollar short though. Doing business on the Internet, there's no inherent advantage to selling to the record companies over any independent buyer of bandwidth. AOL users surf all over the place, just like everyone else. The realities of the market are going to force the record companies to find a new niche. They're going to have to downsize. Can't blame 'em for fighting as hard as they can, in the courts and elsewhere, but bottom line is, it just adds "even more" to the cost of our CD's!
I'm not into U2, but I was mostly making a comment about the phrase "over-hyped pop". I can't think of another band that's more over-hyped pop than U2. Well, actually, I can (three guesses!). I don't think U2 is a loathsome group, and they certainly have done positive things with their money and fame.
U2 did make it "the hard way" - the played live gigs every night in every place they could. I saw them in my home town when they were very raw and rough and they didn't even get a very good response from the crowd.
TV has allowed acts to become big and avoid ever having to slog their way through playing live gigs at small venues - this is the major problem with the "manufactured" bands.
I think you can really tell the difference with artists who have "paid their dues" and got this crucial experience of making their way by honing a live act, based solely on audience response.
TV is a double-edged sword. One the one hand, I've seen some great performances, like on Austin City Limits, Don Kirshner's Rock Concert, Paul Simon's concert in Central Park, Leon Redbone on Saturday Night Live, etc.
And then there are the TV spectacles like Britney Spears Live in Las Vegas, where she did her own dancing and posturing, but her vocals were 100% prerecorded tracks.
It used to be that big-label record execs knew good music and cared about it. They'd search out and sometimes take chances on little-known artists whom they thought should get recognition.
Nowadays it's all about the bottom line. The bean-counters are in control. The focus is on the pop superstars because that's where the big bucks lie. Too little attention is paid to quality artists who (probably) won't go platinum.
I've said this a kazillion times, but POP has also destroyed any regional culture from being exposed to another part of the country/world.
The sounds that make it onto the airwaves are so much alike. Any regional references in style or song are erased for the McDonalds consumtion type sound quality.
I don't think turning music into a visual medium is necessarily a cardinal sin, though in many cases it has distracted people from otherwise boring songs by putting in lots of glitter and sheen and shine. The crime MTV is most guilty of is hubris. Nowadays, MTV isn't just showing videos, and shows about videos, it's showing shows about MTV. Shows about "behind the scenes" antics and past MTV "bloopers" and "shocking events". It takes itself way to seriously, and the worse part is that people believe them. MTV says its an important force in the music industry and people believe them, not because they are, but because they say they are.
It seems, to me, that as a bid to maintain their self-importance, they need to be "edgy",but also populist. They do this by showing lots of flashy, cut-crazy-montage-happy videos that are backed to the brim with eye candy and lots of gyrating, scantily-clad hips and chests. What the songs lack in significance they make up for with pure money power. MTV then fosters a cult of superstar god-dom that make these video stars appear super-human and untouchable, and far superior to the average human.
MTV can't complain about manufactured pop bands because they support them and essentially force people to like them by playing their videos ever ******* hour on the hour. There are trillions of far better bands that have low-budget, but interesting videos which could be advertised on MTV. I don't know if MTV is lazy or just servile, but they've sucked for a long time now, and they should shut their trap as long as they can afford to hold two award shows a year and send their crews to the caribbean every spring break.
As for Bono and crew, do something about it!!!!! Complaining might get you candy, but nothing else.
Image removed by Moderator due to profanity and possibly inflammatory subject matter
I've been waiting for a chance to use this.
I also find that music that is "honest" seems to be timeless. I find that bands who have stayed true to themselves and their art maintain followings over long periods of time. (even if the band never reached "superstar" levels) A band that follows trends or is manufactured usually becomes the butt of career failure jokes in 10 years.
People are still listening to Zepplin, Rush, Miles Davis, The Beatles, Johnny Cash, BB King, ect. I wonder if people will be doing the same with Britney Spears, Limp Bizkit, and Good Charlotte.
20 years ago, record companies were into developing an artist. It was very common for bands to have 5 or 6 for an average recording career. Now labels want to get a band that fits the formula, get a few hit singles out of them, then kick them to the curb.
I've always been ambivalent when it comes to file-sharing, but I'm not going to sympathize with the record companies.
I know the "critics" here will argue it's a subjective thing...still, I like to think my ears are old enough to detect when a band is playing with some 'urgency'.