The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
tv commercials using indie music Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 17th November 2009
  #61
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
No Hank, I totally got it.
You know that it's not all a bad thing but you still don't accept it. I totally understand.

And Memphis it seems to me the whole idea of this thread has become not just about...
Ah heck, you're right. Let's just all wait for the return of your New York Utopia of people helping each other out.
Oh wait, that still happens today.
I imagine so.
Quote:
You mean despite the fact some people make money from selling their music to advertisers? Hey sometimes because of that! Like maybe because of an artists new found popularity they can take some friends of there's on the road. And then their friends can sell CD's too. And then their friends have the money to record again.
I'm afraid you just don't get it.
That's as far as you're willing to think because the money changed hands once or twice?
Quote:
And how can you not see the point of me mentioning the success of the two other forum members? They are successful. That's my point.
I stipulate, that's part of the equation, that is the point.
Quote:
Everyone is always trying find the bad guy. First it was the record labels and terrible royalties. Then it was the promoters and back-handers with ticketing agencies. Now it's the advertisers.
I'm looking in the mirror for my bad guy and I'm suggesting we all do. Maybe you don't want to gather evidence against yourself for yourself and for your community. Maybe for you there is no bigger picture than you.
Quote:
It's the business. Find your way through (not you personally but everyone trying to make a living) and do what you can do to do it.
Being obliged, I can't participate in what's going on now.
Quote:
You think I don't know it's going to change?
No, I figure it's a fact you can't ignore.
Quote:
I've been making my living through music for 20 years and I still, on a day by day basis, wonder what I need to do to pay my next bill. OK maybe not my NEXT bill but you know what I mean.
It's about being dynamic and staying on top of the flow
And yes, I slept on a few floors on my way...
R.
I understand, I've done all that too. I blame me for any of my problems and my successes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
I think she's went on to sell 1,000,000 albums and do a song on Sesame Street.
Sesame street? What? What a colossal SELL OUT! Bert and Ernie represent the man in puppet form!
Quote:
Oh you were being ironic?
R.
Old 17th November 2009
  #62
Gear Maniac
 
EqnoixStudios's Avatar
 

With the market being as bad as it is, bands have been forced to become jiggle writers. I doubt when they wrote the songs they intended for them to be used for branding a product. Shame really.
Old 17th November 2009
  #63
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
I didn't think of this before and this really is pure coincidence but the truth...

Just this evening I was at a friends record label (he's the owner) that said they could now afford to start recording another friends second album because of a sync that came through.

Record sales didn't recoup the total spend on the first album. And I don't mean the bands royalties didn't recoup, I mean total albums sales.

R.
Well, there's a good point, but, how big is the label?
a medium size label can get placements in films. I will stipulate that not all music made is good for films and for them commercials ain't a bad route, not all music is created as art.
When it gluts though, measures must be taken. This is not some new phenomenon, this is as old as commerce.
Old 17th November 2009
  #64
Lives for gear
 
Ol' Betsey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by memphisindie View Post
I'm looking in the mirror for my bad guy and I'm suggesting we all do. Maybe you don't want to gather evidence against yourself for yourself and for your community. Maybe for you there is no bigger picture than you.
I understand, I've done all that too. I blame me for any of my problems and my successes.
Why must you BLAME yourself for your successes?

It seems to me that maybe you have some unresolved issues with your past experiences (Looking in the mirror for your bad guy...) and that maybe you feel somehow better when implying that you alone are on some sort of path to self-realization and the rest of us are living in selfish ignorant bliss.

It's almost dogmatic.

That's cool though. It's all good.

I'm happy when my friends can do what makes them happy too.

Self-centered? Yes I suppose.



R.
Old 17th November 2009
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Ol' Betsey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by memphisindie View Post
Well, there's a good point, but, how big is the label?
They're a small indie label but in your eyes that's beside the point, right?

R.
Old 17th November 2009
  #66
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

I'm totally with you Hankdrummer, I despise commercials and the whole idea of deliberately creating disatisfaction in people just to make big multi-nationals even bigger. Despite my views I allowed a song of ours to be used in a TV ad as at the time we didn't have a record deal, and I agreed only on the condition we put all the money back into the band, (I didn't even buy myself a drink out of it.) Career-wise it did do us a lot of good, but I refuse to kid myself, I betrayed all my principals and sucked corporate cock. What amazed me most though, was that not one single person at the time or since has told me what we did was bad or in any way a sell-out. A lot of people even said it was cool because it was for a beer company, which to me was the worst part of it (should we really be trying to persuade people to drink more alcohol?) I fully expect to burn in hell.
Old 17th November 2009
  #67
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
Why must you BLAME yourself for your successes?
It seems to me that maybe you have some unresolved issues with your past experiences (Looking in the mirror for your bad guy...) and that maybe you feel somehow better when implying that you alone are on some sort of path to self-realization and the rest of us are living in selfish ignorant bliss.
It's almost dogmatic.
That's cool though. It's all good.
I'm happy when my friends can do what makes them happy too.
Self-centered? Yes I suppose.

R.
Sounds to me like you'd be fired as a psychologist. Acknowledging your own responsibility in all the matters in your life is classic healthy behavior, assuming responsibility for problems, so that you can do something about them other than complain, is how fully functioning adults act.
Your world can only exist at the expense of others. Maybe to the exclusion of all others who don't see eye to eye with you. I understand that.
Seems like you want a semantic argument but they are worthless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
They're a small indie label but in your eyes that's beside the point, right?
R.
Don't make up stuff in your mind and attribute it to me, it's a waste of time. I've seen people be removed for that.
FYI, It's not beside the point.
If you think I'm flaming you, I apologize, that is not the intent. It's not personal. It's a conversation, you can ignore it, you can try it on, you can avoid it, you can own it or you can say it doesn't fit, but, gathering evidence against it is worthless for you, you'll get more mileage gathering evidence that YOU are wrong, and you can take it off and go right back to the way you think right after that. I promise, It won't change you to try it on. You might learn something new.
I've already tried on your conversation, maybe you missed my last post.
Staking out a position will generate ill will, you will learn nothing new, like every conversation. Not staking one out, you might find out something you never thought of. One thing I have learned about posting on this or any forum over the years is that people post two scenarios as if they are the only two, mutually exclusive and no other possibilities could possibly exist ever, and that just doesn't reflect reality.
It isn't about me and it isn't about you, it's about everybody, not just your friends.

I'm not going to get one more gig whichever way this swings no matter which direction you pick. Really, It CAN'T be less personal.
Old 17th November 2009
  #68
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP11 View Post
I don't hear Beatles in ads (unless it's promoting Beatles)...

I do hear remakes of Beatle songs...
that's the expensive part. Clearing publishing is the hard bit since it requires the clearance of the Beatles themselves. Clearing recording - Mr Macca and Mr. Starkey and the estates of Lennon and Harrison have no say in this matter.

The ONLY reason covers are being used is because it's cheaper. Pay mega bucks to the publishing and pay a bunch of session musicians to record a "version".
Old 17th November 2009
  #69
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
that's the expensive part. Clearing publishing is the hard bit since it requires the clearance of the Beatles themselves. Clearing recording - Mr Macca and Mr. Starkey and the estates of Lennon and Harrison have no say in this matter.

The ONLY reason covers are being used is because it's cheaper. Pay mega bucks to the publishing and pay a bunch of session musicians to record a "version".
Right...but I think The Beatles general policy is not to use songs for ads, no matter the price...they, of course, can afford to have such a policy...
Old 17th November 2009
  #70
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

As an "indie" artist that has had TV placement, I must say that it was very helpful with paying my bills for the year. Yes, I said year.

What's wrong with indie bands like me paying rent?? You like us better broke??

It also helped me afford to pay a very accomplished, talented engineer to work on my newest album (my buddy Joe Wohlmuth) instead of resorting to recording it myself. Don't you want indie bands to be able to afford to pay you for your services? Or would you rather have more hip hop come through your door that's just going to end up being a ring tone anyway? (No offense to hip hop)
Old 17th November 2009
  #71
Lives for gear
 
Ol' Betsey's Avatar
Memphis I don't think you're flaming me.

But I do disagree that it's not about semantics because, to be honest, I find your language incredibly judgmental unless I'm misunderstanding something?

Anyway, it's all cool.

Let's just agree to disagree on the subject of music in advertising, OK?

Oh and that sleeping on floors is a fundamental milestone in a rockstars diary to stardom. Or non-stardom.

I mean most EVERY guy (and girl) in a band has at least one "Remember that ****hole we stayed at in (insert town, country)" story to tell when reminiscing about the good ol' days when all they have to look forward to is the bad ol' days ahead.



R.
Old 17th November 2009
  #72
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayRadioPlay View Post
What's wrong with indie bands like me paying rent?? You like us better broke??

It also helped me afford to pay a very accomplished, talented engineer to work on my newest album (my buddy Joe Wohlmuth) instead of resorting to recording it myself. Don't you want indie bands to be able to afford to pay you for your services? Or would you rather have more hip hop come through your door that's just going to end up being a ring tone anyway? (No offense to hip hop)
YES, well, no, not really. The hip hop is going to come through the door even if the world ends tomorrow, don't worry about that.
I'd rather you didn't pay it with TV placement, BUT, hey man, it's not going to happen like that. Is it? In fact, it already happened so it's a moot point anyway. I'm glad you got your rent paid for a year.
Link to tune?
Old 17th November 2009
  #73
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
Memphis I don't think you're flaming me.

But I do disagree that it's not about semantics because, to be honest, I find your language incredibly judgmental unless I'm misunderstanding something?
Thankk goodness, yes, you are reading something into it that I don't intend and that could very well be the way I worded what I worded (if that works to say "worded" twice like that).
Quote:
Anyway, it's all cool.
Let's just agree to disagree on the subject of music in advertising, OK?
Oh and that sleeping on floors is a fundamental milestone in a rockstars diary to stardom. Or non-stardom.
I've done it, I have stories that would curl your hair, assuming it's not curly. 1 word: fleas. I'll say no more on that.
Quote:
I mean most EVERY guy (and girl) in a band has at least one "Remember that ****hole we stayed at in (insert town, country)" story to tell when reminiscing about the good ol' days when all they have to look forward to is the bad ol' days ahead.



R.
Yep.
Old 17th November 2009
  #74
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayRadioPlay View Post
You like us better broke??
Yes...it's art man, you're supposed to be miserable....
Old 17th November 2009
  #75
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayRadioPlay View Post
As an "indie" artist that has had TV placement, I must say that it was very helpful with paying my bills for the year. Yes, I said year.

What's wrong with indie bands like me paying rent?? You like us better broke??

It also helped me afford to pay a very accomplished, talented engineer to work on my newest album (my buddy Joe Wohlmuth) instead of resorting to recording it myself. Don't you want indie bands to be able to afford to pay you for your services? Or would you rather have more hip hop come through your door that's just going to end up being a ring tone anyway? (No offense to hip hop)
Was it the "Hot Pockets" ad?
Old 17th November 2009
  #76
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by memphisindie View Post
YES, well, no, not really. The hip hop is going to come through the door even if the world ends tomorrow, don't worry about that.
I'd rather you didn't pay it with TV placement, BUT, hey man, it's not going to happen like that. Is it? In fact, it already happened so it's a moot point anyway. I'm glad you got your rent paid for a year.
Link to tune?
Haha. You're right. Nothing stops the hip hop coming through the door. Not even Zeus himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP11 View Post
Yes...it's art man, you're supposed to be miserable....
Haha. The music business makes me miserable enough as it is. I'd rather be miserable and have a full fridge
Old 17th November 2009
  #77
Led
Lives for gear
 
Led's Avatar
When I was signed to a major here one of our singles was licensed for a network station ID. We had retained control of our publishing and allowed the label's publishing arm to do a specific license deal. They took 10% and the rest came straight to us, bypassing the recouplables account for the album. So while we owed the production side of the label around 50K the publishing arm of the same company were writing us cheques for nearly as much.
Something to think about in regards to retaining control of your publishing. It is the only place left for muso's to make money. Although in the not too distant future I predict we will see coprorate sponsorship enter the mix.
Old 17th November 2009
  #78
Gear Addict
 
NoizyNinja's Avatar
 

Mozart, Beethoven, Bach. All were commissioned by the royalty and others who could afford to pay them to compose music. Sometimes what they wrote was influenced by who was paying. I guess they were all sell-outs too on some sort of level.


I think the concept of not selling out from the 60's to present was the exception not the norm of musician/composer history. It served it's purpose while it lasted but it's over now. You either accept the realities to survive/thrive or hang on to some ideal and risk disappearing into obscurity.
Old 17th November 2009
  #79
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoizyNinja View Post
Mozart, Beethoven, Bach. All were commissioned by the royalty and others who could afford to pay them to compose music. Sometimes what they wrote was influenced by who was paying. I guess they were all sell-outs too on some sort of level.


I think the concept of not selling out from the 60's to present was the exception not the norm of musician/composer history. It served it's purpose while it lasted but it's over now. You either accept the realities to survive/thrive or hang on to some ideal and risk disappearing into obscurity.
Its not a mutually exclusive thing, both ways will continue to exist, maybe it shouldn't be over YET, maybe here's still some life in it. Maybe it should be built in as a standard practice for all time, I bet mozart would argue in favor of that, maybe should have always been built into the process. Maybe sometimes in a work for hire they should have some sway depending on the terms, but, not as standard practice.
Maybe there is no mutually exclusive idea that ever actually existed, now, can we move on without positing that there is any mutual exclusivity to our ideas, please?
Maybe it's not so much an ideal than it is a concrete method of restoring the balance or keeping it in check, and maybe it works, maybe that's why it seems that it should always have it's place.
Old 17th November 2009
  #80
Lives for gear
 
Guitar Zero's Avatar
Very interesting read, this thread. Memphisindie, I'm trying like crazy to understand in practical terms what it is you are recommending for the poor indie artist.

What does this indie musician "community" look like?

For Example: I just saw Antje Duvekot play at the Sister's Folk Festival in Sisters, Oregon. She mentioned the fact that Bank of America paid her $100,000 to use her song in their ad campaign. Among other things, it allowed her to travel to Oregon to perform, and I'm sure it helped pay for recording her latest album.

If I read you correctly, she should have stayed on the east coast and played the local coffee shops and small venues, and continued to fight the good fight. But what is the good fight? I really want to know, because I have a son who is an indie artist, and wants to make a living writing, recording and performing his songs.

If someone came along and offered him a large sum of money to use one of his songs, he should say no, and continue performing in anonymity? Until what?

Not trying to put words in your mouth, but I think I understand you saying that by saying no, he would be staying true to some nebulous indie musician's code of honor. What higher purpose is then served? Is poverty his reward? Or does the code dictate that we not think in terms of reward? Seems to me if you're going to tour, you're more likely to have an audience if people have actually heard of you, and heard your music. Do we not strive to create good music for the enjoyment of the public? What am I missing?

Just thinking out loud about things, and wondering what I would tell him if such a situation should arise... not that he would ask me for advice.

I have a clay dish I made in the third grade. It's mine. I designed it, created it, and even put my initials on the bottom of it. If someone came along and offered me $1000 for it, would I be smart to take it, or a sell-out? I don't know.
Old 17th November 2009
  #81
Gear Addict
 
NoizyNinja's Avatar
 

I think the way things used to be in the hey-day of labels really spoiled a select few while also creating this mystique of the 'artist' beholden to no one.

In reality only a handful of artists were able to do this and they are legends. The reality of the record label system was that the majority of artists (unsigned) were never heard from except on a local level. Aside from gig money there were no other revenue sources. You either got signed and played the labels game or nothing. The labels held the complete distribution network in their hands so there was no need to ho out their 'artists' hence 'artistic integrity'. If they needed to get money by ho-ing out their artists they would which is where we are now. How come the labels, which created and upheld this mystique of artistic integrity, fell in line as soon as their distribution network dissolved?

Here's the thing though. BOA loved this song enough to pay $100,000 the way the artist intended the song to be and it's still her's. If a label gave the artist $100,000 for the song she would probably never be able to use it again as they would purchase the recording/publishing.

Plenty of artists sold out to labels back in the heyday. Kicked band members out after they were signed at the behest of an A&R guy, changed their sound, etc... It's more about your integrity as you navigate through opportunities rather than idealistic absolutes.
Old 17th November 2009
  #82
Gear Addict
 
NoizyNinja's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hankdrummer View Post
while i understand it is a great opportunity for the label to get money and for the band to get know, what really surprises me is how kids these days really don't see anything somewhat wrong or depressing about that.

Two Weeks by Grizzly Bear, was just used in a car commercial

YouTube - Grizzly Bear - Two Weeks (music video in HD) Veckatimest out now

i was mad when i saw the commercial ... but reading the youtube comments it seems i'm the only one to be depressed

(here's the ad) YouTube - Peugeot / Grizzly Bear

maybe i'm too old ... but people went mad when Dc Martens used Kurt Cobain's image to promote their shoes recently ... it seems like he's the only exception.

thoughts ?

Didn't Cobain use Doc Martins to promote his image???
Old 17th November 2009
  #83
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
Like maybe because of an artists new found popularity they can take some friends of there's on the road. And then their friends can sell CD's too. And then their friends have the money to record again.
when i received my first big check i gave my near-new 22" LCD monitor to my cousin, who wants to start a t-shirt company.

seems like he's just surfing facebook with it, but anyway, i was happy to do it

Quote:
Originally Posted by EqnoixStudios View Post
With the market being as bad as it is, bands have been forced to become jiggle writers. I doubt when they wrote the songs they intended for them to be used for branding a product. Shame really.
that specific song, "Two Weeks", from their Veckatimest album, is quite different from the rest of their work. when i first heard it i thought "this song is just here for the next Apple commercial". that piano at the beginning is exactly the kind of stuff Apple ad makers love these days.

anyway. i love Yellow House, their second record. there are incredible songs on this record. Grizzly Bear is the new Radiohead to me.

let's put some music in this thread



Old 17th November 2009
  #84
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP11 View Post
Right...but I think The Beatles general policy is not to use songs for ads, no matter the price...they, of course, can afford to have such a policy...
i think that used to be the case - but things seems to be changing!!
Old 17th November 2009
  #85
Lives for gear
 
memphisindie's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guitar Zero View Post
Very interesting read, this thread. Memphisindie, I'm trying like crazy to understand in practical terms what it is you are recommending for the poor indie artist.
More foresight, and if that takes one more member on an artists team, it will benefit them more than if they didn't have a person thinking like that. Common sense, uncommon practice. That person's job will be to generate more value by making better choices about the future of an artist and their material. This value will be quantifiable via sales and longevity of the career and catalogue under their care. It will benefit the entire community immediately creating an open space and less access/less overexposure/ which we all know will ruin a career in no time flat. This will leave the customer wanting more, and labels will spend money where it will do the most long term good instead of the immediate good at the artists expense, disguised as "helping them break".
"Sometimes" (almost always) bands act like cheap hookers and sell themselves short and shorten their carer in the process. This doesn't just affect that artist, it affects the entire industry. The more there are artists that do this the more they are accidentally building a detrimental ethical condition that runs industry-wide among other artists who look to them as examples, it creates a "zeitgeist" of hooker-ism within the artist community.
Quote:
What does this indie musician "community" look like?
Better, more healthy, maybe even a bit more wealthy for longer, maybe with some medical care an insurance when they get old.
Quote:
For Example: I just saw Antje Duvekot play at the Sister's Folk Festival in Sisters, Oregon. She mentioned the fact that Bank of America paid her $100,000 to use her song in their ad campaign. Among other things, it allowed her to travel to Oregon to perform, and I'm sure it helped pay for recording her latest album.
In the short term, it seems like a good decision.
Quote:
If I read you correctly, she should have stayed on the east coast and played the local coffee shops and small venues, and continued to fight the good fight. But what is the good fight? I really want to know, because I have a son who is an indie artist, and wants to make a living writing, recording and performing his songs.
Nope, I'm not dictating what is right for any artist, that's an individual reality for each artist on an individual level, but, if there was an overarching paradigm that could be agreed upon that serves us all, a pair of glasses we could all see through, different than the ones we have now that brought us to scarcity of resources, we should try them on. Doesn't mean they'll fit, but, you'll get a view of something you haven't been able to see that will serve you. Thinking I'm dictating is just more of that fruitless mutually exclusive thinking hat isn't serving this conversation.
I have three kids that want to write and perform. I don't want to clean it up before they get there if they do, I want it to work for them IF they have something worth listening to.
Quote:
If someone came along and offered him a large sum of money to use one of his songs, he should say no, and continue performing in anonymity? Until what?
There are thousands of cognizant decisions, choices along the way, negotiations can be made by someone with better thought processes in this area to make that artist be represented better.
Quote:
Not trying to put words in your mouth, but I think I understand you saying that by saying no, he would be staying true to some nebulous indie musician's code of honor. What higher purpose is then served? Is poverty his reward? Or does the code dictate that we not think in terms of reward? Seems to me if you're going to tour, you're more likely to have an audience if people have actually heard of you, and heard your music. Do we not strive to create good music for the enjoyment of the public? What am I missing?
Sometimes it isn't what you do but the way that you do it. You are trying to stuff words in a box of familiar ideas, and that won't serve this conversation, this has to be fre to be something else before this can continue.
Quote:
Just thinking out loud about things, and wondering what I would tell him if such a situation should arise... not that he would ask me for advice.
OK, think about it and get back. Think outside the box of familiar thought and ideas.
Quote:
I have a clay dish I made in the third grade. It's mine. I designed it, created it, and even put my initials on the bottom of it. If someone came along and offered me $1000 for it, would I be smart to take it, or a sell-out? I don't know.
Great, now, what if no one does? What if your clay dish has no value other than to you and your mother, what if it is in fact an abomination of art, a totally crude and not well done ugly thing? Does that mean it should be inflicted on the general public? Does that mean you have a right to put that out and we MUST buy it withoout choice, does that mean if you can find ANY buyer for it, say, a child molester, that you should sell it to that guy for pennies? What might that promote if all the kids start selling their art to child molesters?
See, there are more things under the sun than you have thought about and i can think up more if you like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoizyNinja View Post
I think the way things used to be in the hey-day of labels really spoiled a select few while also creating this mystique of the 'artist' beholden to no one.
Absolutely agree.
Quote:
In reality only a handful of artists were able to do this and they are legends.
I've worked with quite a few of them and there is a reason beyond exclusivity as to why they are legends, MASSIVE TALENT that didn't happen "by accident", however, without the exclusivity it would not happen.

Quote:
The reality of the record label system was that the majority of artists (unsigned) were never heard from except on a local level. Aside from gig money there were no other revenue sources. You either got signed and played the labels game or nothing. The labels held the complete distribution network in their hands so there was no need to ho out their 'artists' hence 'artistic integrity'. If they needed to get money by ho-ing out their artists they would which is where we are now. How come the labels, which created and upheld this mystique of artistic integrity, fell in line as soon as their distribution network dissolved?
GOOD POINT. You nailed it. They controlled a lot through a manipulated distribution chain.
Quote:
Here's the thing though. BOA loved this song enough to pay $100,000 the way the artist intended the song to be and it's still her's. If a label gave the artist $100,000 for the song she would probably never be able to use it again as they would purchase the recording/publishing.
To what ends?
Quote:
Plenty of artists sold out to labels back in the heyday. Kicked band members out after they were signed at the behest of an A&R guy, changed their sound, etc... It's more about your integrity as you navigate through opportunities rather than idealistic absolutes.
A lot of them got dropped too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoizyNinja View Post
Didn't Cobain use Doc Martins to promote his image???
He used them to cap off his feetsmell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
i think that used to be the case - but things seems to be changing!!
Maybe, but, by controlling the way their songs were handled, with a LOT more respect for their own admittedly trite material, they have preserved their careers, even if they were all still alive, they would all have a stellar career whether they wrote another hit or not. THAT is a big chunk of this lesson. At least, that's one big thing I've learned out of it.
Old 17th November 2009
  #86
Lives for gear
 
Ol' Betsey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by memphisindie View Post
does that mean if you can find ANY buyer for it, say, a child molester, that you should sell it to that guy for pennies? What might that promote if all the kids start selling their art to child molesters?
Whoa. Hang on there a minute!

He then asked if he should sell a little clay pot he made when he was in the 3rd grade and wondered if he, in your eyes, would be selling out.

Memphis I like your dogged determination to fight for what you believe in but your line of argument is totally illogical and, in choosing the language you use, absurdly sensationalist.

We've gone from an artist selling music to an advertiser to a hypothetical scenario of someone selling something ELSE they handmade to you asking if we should sell our art to child abusers and therefore implying they (advertisers and the general clay pot buying public) are one and the same.

And this is said to a guy, a father, that wondered what advice he should give to his son!

That's not only way outta line Memphis but, quite frankly, just plain silly.

R.
Old 17th November 2009
  #87
Lives for gear
 

Artistic integrity is a matter of personal opinion. Personally I will not accept to change the content of my music to please a label or an A&R. But I would (and did) accept my music (untouched) to be used for an advert (and a product) I have found acceptable artistically and ethically.
Old 17th November 2009
  #88
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey View Post
Memphis I like your dogged determination to fight for what you believe in but your line of argument is totally illogical and, in choosing the language you use, absurdly sensationalist.
expect a 2 pages long reply from this
Old 17th November 2009
  #89
Lives for gear
 
Ol' Betsey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hankdrummer View Post
expect a 2 pages long reply from this
Oh I do indeed!

Something tells me Memphis would be great to have beers with... Stories to fill the night and opinions that end in a fight!

R.
Old 17th November 2009
  #90
Lives for gear
 

To summarise...

tv commercials using indie music

Good for the people who make the music

Bad for the indie bed-wetters
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz 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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
ianvargo / Music For Picture
23
mrhenry76 / So much gear, so little time
13
007 / Music For Picture
5
PDC / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
0
Chris Kress / So much gear, so little time
9

Forum Jump
Forum Jump