Page 3 of 4
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 6:27 pm
by mfb
sowhat wrote:Doesn't "business" suggest "making money"? Short-term strategy (squeeze as much juice as possible right now, as fast as possible, then throw the peel away) vs long-term strategy (squeeze juice bit by bit and give water, sun time & some rest so that the fruit could produce more and during a longer period of time)?
Well, unfortunately the "making money" part is the HIGHEST priority, as it equates to "growth", in the minds of most shareholders ... in part due to the seduction of the verbal diarrhoea relating to riches-to-be-made hyped by the short-term CEO's of most of our modern day companies including those that own "recording factories", and in part due to the greed of the shareholders themselves. The "artists" and their "art" are just an inconvenience.
If you want good examples of this, just turn your radio on to a top-40 station or your TV to a music-video show ...

Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:14 pm
by melibreits
mfb wrote:
Well, unfortunately the "making money" part is the HIGHEST priority, as it equates to "growth", in the minds of most shareholders ... in part due to the seduction of the verbal diarrhoea relating to riches-to-be-made hyped by the short-term CEO's of most of our modern day companies including those that own "recording factories", and in part due to the greed of the shareholders themselves. The "artists" and their "art" are just an inconvenience.
If you want good examples of this, just turn your radio on to a top-40 station or your TV to a music-video show ...

Ain't that the truth! I gave up on listening to pop radio years ago, as I couldn't stand hearing the same **** songs played over and over again ad nauseum.... It seems apparent to me that a lot of money had to change hands somewhere for some of the "popular" artists to get radio play, or even a recording contract.... And then there are the cases where it seems apparent that the "artist" simply must have slept their way to the top (I'm thinking Brittney Spears, for example).... I find it perplexing at times, when I hear the awful music that seems to get tons of radio play, while people with a lot of real musical talent and great songwriting skills go unnoticed by the mainstream.... I'm sure it all largely depends on who they can get to listen to their music....
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:47 pm
by blueflamerick
melibreits wrote:And then there are the cases where it seems apparent that the "artist" simply must have slept their way to the top (I'm thinking Brittney Spears, for example)....
I sure hope Britney didn't sleep her way to the top, especially since she was still a minor when she it it big.
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:23 pm
by tennis_nick
blueflamerick wrote:melibreits wrote:And then there are the cases where it seems apparent that the "artist" simply must have slept their way to the top (I'm thinking Brittney Spears, for example)....
I sure hope Britney didn't sleep her way to the top, especially since she was still a minor when she it it big.
I think we just stumbled onto a lawsuit!
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:25 pm
by melibreits
Okay.... Maybe I'm just a bit jaded, LOL!
But she certainly isn't a real musician. However, she can sing and dance and she's pretty--or at least she used to be.... She just got some lucky breaks. I still think a lot of money must have changed hands somewhere along the way...
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:18 pm
by studiotwosession
Way before Ms. Spears, there was Mandonna, who admitted she has never sung a lick during any of her tours (in which she has also danced miserably.) Had it not been for accountants calling creative shots, and video being oversold as a force in the business, a career like hers could have never been. But the age in which marginal or even less "talents," are praised for merely making money (see P. Diddy anyone) is nearly over. Record sales are down 36 percent in the past 8 years, and there's no end in sight. RIAA members are in revolt. MTV rarely shows a video, etc.
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:58 pm
by mfb
"
Mandonna"

Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:15 pm
by melibreits
Madonna....

Yep, she's a prime example of what I was talking about!
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:15 pm
by winston
Now we are navigating towards a the sleezy side of the music business. It's a place where things happen for one ultimate purpose (money) and it's not the reason that many artists really want to hear when they are trying their hardest to produce a hit CD. Unfortunately money is not always a bi-product of art as it should be, it is too often the primary and perhaps the only focus for many major record labels that are repelete with A&R departments and all the usual trappings of success.
Madonna did not sing when on tour? That's news to me, I must admit. Please point me to where I can read this expose of her exploits.
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:08 am
by studiotwosession
I could swear in the past few years she admitted she never sang a lick on tour and this made sense as one time she did try to sing live on SNL and the results were far less than satisfactory, proving that she never really did sing live. Had she, she'd at least have had semi decent vocal chops. She was terrible. I did see that. I've also seen bits of her act live, and the singing sounds way to spot on to be the same person who was less than mediocre on SNL years later. I don't think she's singing here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG7oG6cYl6k
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:32 am
by antipodean
studiotwosession wrote:I could swear in the past few years she admitted she never sang a lick on tour and this made sense as one time she did try to sing live on SNL and the results were far less than satisfactory, proving that she never really did sing live. Had she, she'd at least have had semi decent vocal chops. She was terrible. I did see that. I've also seen bits of her act live, and the singing sounds way to spot on to be the same person who was less than mediocre on SNL years later. I don't think she's singing here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG7oG6cYl6k
See this 2004 story by George Varga. The implication is that Madge does not sing live:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib ... varga.html
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:19 am
by studiotwosession
From that story: "Eager to help out, Madonna's actor friend, Rupert Everett, came to her defense, in a manner. "Madonna sings everything she can sing," Rupert told reporters in England. "But, if she goes into a dance routine, she's got to dance; you can't breathe and dance and sing at the same time."
Now, when is Madonna NOT dancing live? (Though I'm sure a lot of folks who know a thing or two about dancing would say what she does is NOT dancing, either. But that's a different story.) She is about as live in concert as she is in a music video.
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:15 pm
by winston
Interesting information there guys. It begs the question though: Assuming that there is an element of truth to the stories, why has she had not been drummed out of the music business like Milli Vanilli were?
Your thoughts?
Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:35 pm
by sowhat
Madonna is rock'n'roll?!

Re: Rock 'n Roll - Part Business and Part Art
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:54 pm
by winston
sowhat wrote:Madonna is rock'n'roll?!

Not really. This is called thread drift. Let's hope its not terminal.
