On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 14:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Tako Oda wrote:
>
> I think the opposite is true. These companies define our tastes
> and genres
> to a certain extent and destroy diversity. They have everything to
> gain
> from pigeon-holing artists, and weeding out anything different.
> A&R people
> are notorious for trying to carbon-copy past successes to increase
> profits
> rather than actively search out original talent. They make it easy
> for a
> few easily categorizable artists to be accessed, and get the
> majority of
> consumer money - only a fraction of it goes to the artists
> themselves.
James here......
Here here ! This is why I like the idea of artists being able to sell
directly to consumers. I worked for a major retailer as a buyer and we
bought what we were told to buy by the manufacture, as they would be more
likely to take it back if it did not sell. The manufactures were the ones
deciding what the fashion trends would be next season. The same thing in
music, more of the same.
james
---------------------------------------------------------
This message sent using EMUmail -- http://www.emumail.com
---------------------------------------------------------
Jumping through hoops to get E-mail on the road?
You've got two choices: Join the circus, or use MollyMail.
Molly Mail -- http://www.mollymail.com
|
|  |
