179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Andrei
To:
Date:
Tue, 12 Dec 2000 16:43:53 -0500
Subject:
Re: [idm] radiocativity reply and Autechre briefly
Msg-Id:
<Pine.SGI.4.21.0012121556320.23708-100000@world.std.com>
In-Reply-To:
<F192IkyPzGNsokLQ8aZ0000b512@hotmail.com>
Mbox:
idm.0012.gz
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Matthew Burrows wrote:
quoted 13 lines According to your _major label music = product_ mentality the work of The> >According to your _major label music = product_ mentality the work of The > >Beatles, Miles Davis, The Beach Boys, Louis Armstrong, Bob Dylan, The > >Clash (just to name a few seminal musical figures who recorded for major > >labels) and pretty much every important classical composer is just > >meaningless "product" while the work of 2nd and 3rd rate Autechre clones > >is pure art. > > that is nothing like what i was saying....the fact that it is 'product' does > not leave it meaningless, but it does demean it: the quality of the music is > not the key criteria for any of these groups/people, the shifting of 'units' > is, (i'm sure mr paradinas does not think of his music as a product or unit, > but his bosses at virgin sure as fuck do) to argue otherwise is to ignore > the simple economic reality of such companies
I think indie labels are just as concerned with the shifting of units as majors are and if your favorite indie IDM label had the financial backing or the demand for records that the majors do, they would press more than 1000 copies of a release. And plus people like Aphex and Autechre sell tens if not hundreds of thousands of records worldwide so is their music demeaned by this shifting of a lot of units ? I mean if you wanna be a purist, I think the moment you charge any money for a piece of art you demean it, doesn't matter what the situation is, but how the hell else are artists supposed to survive ? They're treated like shit as it is. And saying that the quality of music was not a key criteria for people like The Beatles, Dylan (well at least in the early years) and/or The Clash is absurd. Aphex himself has said that he only releases his more accessible music because he doesn't think people would be interested in his really experimental material.
quoted 4 lines the discussion was about u2, and the fact that they make pious political> the discussion was about u2, and the fact that they make pious political > comments about a situation they have greatly benefitted from (and to a > certain extent upholding),as have RATM, nirvana, sex pistols etc..i just > find it distastful and dishonest.
That's such ridiculous nonsense. U2, RATM (they ARE rather hypocritical), Nirvana, Sex Pistols, etc. or the music industry in general are responsible for or have benefited from the plight of African countries ? Maybe you can say that about Queen though. :-) Best regards, Andrei --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org