piergiorgio

independent artists?
oh my goodness, then I’m independent too????!!!
I had no idea I was an independent because of my double job (hehehehe)
but I definitely feel dependent every Monday morning.

I’m not absolutist at all; I’m not in other things, let alone in music. In fact, at point three, I put 3 - the record producer in question is a saint (ehehehhe) there are still some around, hidden in the muck of the con artists and frauds.

Talking about point 1 (but are we in agreement on the others?) let's say that if I write songs, I write them to share them with someone, and everything that follows (the reason I write them, driven by the desire to communicate, invent, create, etc., etc., opens up an immense psychological discussion that is better left undiscussed here) otherwise I would sing them in my living room when no one is there. And above all, I will never make records............ or will I? I'm talking about "records" and "concerts," I don't think I'm generalizing.
As for the record label that presses albums for culture and not for money, well, if you find one, there are only three possibilities:
1. The record label in question is a dreamer poet.
2. The record label in question is going bankrupt but hasn't realized it yet.
3. The record label in question is a saint.
I don't exclude any possibility in any case of life, not even the one where a label, more than producing an album of an artist, wants to squeeze money out of them by threatening printing costs, advertising, etc. (it's an infinite sadness, but it often happens in the musical underbelly).
One last thing: for me, making a living off one's music (which doesn't exclusively mean earning from album sales) means being able to buy bread with the money earned from it. Doing like they do in France, where a bunch of musicians live on state subsidies, doing a few small concerts doesn’t seem fair to me.
Am I wrong perhaps? Tell me yes............... tell me there’s a magical world where it’s not like this.
By the way, Punisher, sure, in the early days of popular music, when the major labels hadn’t yet noticed how much money could be made with music, kids like the Beatles, Rolling Stones, etc., gifted us with beautiful pages experimenting and playing with music. Now I don’t think that can happen anymore; I would be happy to be wrong and would be the first to shout miracle.
Well, that said, I would end here, what do you think?

Lukin, of course I truly think the things I've written, and I'm not the only one who thinks them (unfortunately). I wish I could be a jerk, like you say... but... I don't know if you've ever experienced it... try to have a meeting with a record executive who appreciates your art and wants to promote it, and then you'll see if the conversation turns to art or to dirty money and percentages.

one must not forget that
1 - records and concerts are made for money, let's put aside discussions about art, purity of principles, or things like that.
2 - impending contractual deadlines could be the reason for a failed album
3 - being commercial and having a countless number of fans cannot be considered a flaw
4 - being unknown or niche has never been an inherent merit
5 - only the losers who write crappy songs cry against the world for not being understood and often mock billionaire artists while secretly envying them.
6 - or not ?!?...............who knows?!
Punisher, you are always very objective, I really liked the review.

Socrates, you are right, your observation is truly very interesting.
Perhaps only those who have been to Hell can appreciate the beauties of Paradise?
(and therefore try to make others experience its joys?).
Hmm!? What do you think?

I have always had some doubts, and I'll share a few here.
- When a chef is famous for a particular recipe, is he ever asked to change it, to experiment with new versions?......... I don’t think so. Artists are always asked and expected to change and grow, I wonder why.
- What is music for? And how should it be used? There are those who use it to express feelings, those who use it for political propaganda, those who play tough, those who use it to relax, those who use it to transmit joy, etc. etc. Why should those who make cheerful music be considered any less valid than those who recount their sufferings and misfortunes?
Music for its own sake seems to lack depth, to lack quality; it seems that only those who suffer, those who do politics, irony, satire, or convey so-called "messages" have the honor of having their music classified as "cultured," "good," etc. etc.
If it’s true that music is a language for communication, perhaps good music is that which manages to convey sensations, and not good music is that which conveys nothing at all? If Enya sells so many records, does that mean she makes good (communicative) music?

Andrea, I didn't know about the existence of this album, being a "sick" Paul fan myself. Where did you find it? And tell me, would you "trade" it?

Black, thank you for being here on Debaser,
thank you so much, also for these words about Pet Sounds.

wife-slap, a very close pair