Major Or Indie Deal?

[Tha Psycho Hustla]

Major Or Indie Deal?

[Trauma-san]

Here's the truth.  You can argue with it, but it's the fucking truth.  Most people don't have the talent to be successful as an independant artist.  A major label can make even a talentless artist a star.  So a major label is always, always, always better for an unknown act because to be successful as an independent artist when nobody knows you, you'd have to make it on talent alone... and most people aren't that talented.  It would take a talent on the level of Prince to get to the point where it made more sense financially.

Now, if you truly aren't that worried about the financial aspect, first, I don't believe you... and second, I guess an indy label would be better.

[M Dogg™]

My guess, in about 10 years everyone will be Indy because the net will bankrupted the majors.

[jeromechickenbone]

My guess, in about 10 years everyone will be Indy because the net will bankrupted the majors.

The net didn't bankrupt the majors.  The majors tried to shove contrived no talent ass clowns down our collective throats.  They fucked themselves, and our oligopolistic media - MTV / BET / VH1 all owned by Viacom, Clear Channel owning 2000 radio stations across the country.

I laugh when I hear people say the net killed the music industry.  I guarantee you porn is downloaded 1000's of times more, and they aren't having any issues.

[M Dogg™]

My guess, in about 10 years everyone will be Indy because the net will bankrupted the majors.

The net didn't bankrupt the majors.  The majors tried to shove contrived no talent ass clowns down our collective throats.  They fucked themselves, and our oligopolistic media - MTV / BET / VH1 all owned by Viacom, Clear Channel owning 2000 radio stations across the country.

I laugh when I hear people say the net killed the music industry.  I guarantee you porn is downloaded 1000's of times more, and they aren't having any issues.

porn learned to deal with the net very early on. The industry never fathomed it would have to. So the major's fucked themselves not knowing how to run now that the net is here.

And a no government type like you complaining about Clear Channel and Viacom... who are you.. Teddy Roosevelt? Damn progressives thinking they can hide behind a Ron Paul for president banner.

[Tha Psycho Hustla]

but da net fucks up sales and everything.net is good for promotion nothing else.

[Tay]

The net did affect it but records are still selling, not as much hip-hop and rap. Another thing is how many artists there are, it's so tough to get promotion and get noticed. Personally, I'd release independent and take a major if they offered good money, but be ready to leave the label if they didn't want to release an album or promote me. If I put so much time, money and effort into a project, it's going to be released, not sit on the shelves because a record executive.

[Elevz]

Here goes the same old discussion again. I don't believe the net fucks up sales.

I was just browsing through Bob Dylan's wiki page. Dude sold mad records in the sixties, nicely in the seventies but downhill from there. Only as soon the net went big, he started selling big time again. It seems like we have a picture of the past in our minds, as if everyone was buying up huge piles of records back then, until the internet came along. Let's be real; the internet offers a lot of opportunities for people to get heard, to such an extent that they'll end up being better off from all the bootlegging. For every fan that doesn't buy the music because he's already downloaded it for free, there's two new people who otherwise wouldn't have heard the artist's music.

And let's face it: if the record industry really were in a bad state, why do you think all these artists would be getting more attention than ever before? Why do you think random celebreties bring out records, if there's no money in it?

I must say though, the topic is rather vague to me. Major or indie deal, for what? For if you hypothetically were an artist? For somebody else with a lot of star potential?

I'd get me a good indie deal. Creative control, that's what you need if you're really in it for the music. Good music will sell itself, and there'll be a market for it. A good indie label would know how to reach for that market. Plus, without all the pressure of having to go three time platinum to break even, I guess life as an artist would be better.

[Javier]

Radiohead was basically giving out their album for free for the last three months of the year, yet when the actual CD came out it was still number 1

[7even]

They are just shifting the blame. It happens all the time. Young outcasts get shotguns and kill people in their school, it's videogames causing it. Same shit. Lately in Germany there's this discussion because foreigners beat up people for no reason all the time. So some politicans with no nuts go ahead and want to soften the tv program. How retarded is that? It happens all the time. People are shifting the blame towards something that is less akward to ciriticize, or that has less of a lobby to counter.

It also never ceases to amaze me how sloppy record companies can be when it comes to retails. I mean, obviously, one does not have to buy the CD because of the music as such. So what to do about that? Maybe doing a better job with the physical stuff of the CD. Like, better bootlegs, lyrics in the bootleg, ringtones, better artwork, maybe even lying about having some crazy audio-ray sound quality on it. Whatever, really. But it seems like the whole record industry simply laid back being lazy and all and keeps crying about the internet killing them. Doing trash CD covers and bootleggs, making contrived music with no inspiration, rapping about crimes and then going ahead to cry about people "stealing" their music. It is so pathetic.

[Trauma-san]

You've got to be ignorant to suggest that a good label deal for Bob Dylan would work for anybody.  Bob Dylan is a legend.  He's likely one of the most talented musicians that ever lived, at least from a songwriting standpoint.... there isn't a rapper alive with the clout that Bob Dylan has, he doesn't even need to promote his albums, his fans will seek them out, find where they are available, and then buy two copies so they can save one.  So of course an indy deal works better for Dylan, he gets more per c.d. and will likely sell just as many or more on an indy label.... especially considering that most of his fans are sympathetic hippies who hate the man and would love to stick it to Sony by only buying Dylan's independent releases. 

Plain facts are that rap and hip hop are bootlegged the most out of all the genres of music, so if we're talking about hiphop and rap and an established artist, the net definately hurts.  If it's a new act, the net helps because it's free promotion which is what they need the most. 

I gotta say too to 7even that I agree about the shit about rapping about commiting crimes than bitching that somebody 'stole' their music, LOL! What a fucking joke. 

[Elevz]

They are just shifting the blame. It happens all the time. Young outcasts get shotguns and kill people in their school, it's videogames causing it. Same shit. Lately in Germany there's this discussion because foreigners beat up people for no reason all the time. So some politicans with no nuts go ahead and want to soften the tv program. How retarded is that? It happens all the time. People are shifting the blame towards something that is less akward ciriticizing, or that has less of a lobby to counter.

I don't know about the German situation, but watching tv surely can make people more violent. Thing is, for some foreigners randomly beating up people, to be blamed on their tv watching behavior, that's simply absurd. TV may have had its part in a process, but to blame the outcome on the tv shows...

It's kinda easy though for politicians to just shout something like that, act like you're the one to solve the problem because you know how to do it, and up goes your popularity. Long live the democracy in an ignorant world.

[Elevz]

You've got to be ignorant to suggest that a good label deal for Bob Dylan would work for anybody.  Bob Dylan is a legend.  He's likely one of the most talented musicians that ever lived, at least from a songwriting standpoint.... there isn't a rapper alive with the clout that Bob Dylan has, he doesn't even need to promote his albums, his fans will seek them out, find where they are available, and then buy two copies so they can save one.  So of course an indy deal works better for Dylan, he gets more per c.d. and will likely sell just as many or more on an indy label.... especially considering that most of his fans are sympathetic hippies who hate the man and would love to stick it to Sony by only buying Dylan's independent releases.

That's not what I said anyway, but sure. So them hippies refused to buy Dylan's records while he was on a major, but now that he's gone indie he's all of a sudden going platinum again because the hippies of the '60s forty years later decided to make a statement, hundreds of thousands at a time, without someone initiating the action? How reasonable do you think that sounds?

[Trauma-san]

You've got to be ignorant to suggest that a good label deal for Bob Dylan would work for anybody.  Bob Dylan is a legend.  He's likely one of the most talented musicians that ever lived, at least from a songwriting standpoint.... there isn't a rapper alive with the clout that Bob Dylan has, he doesn't even need to promote his albums, his fans will seek them out, find where they are available, and then buy two copies so they can save one.  So of course an indy deal works better for Dylan, he gets more per c.d. and will likely sell just as many or more on an indy label.... especially considering that most of his fans are sympathetic hippies who hate the man and would love to stick it to Sony by only buying Dylan's independent releases.

That's not what I said anyway, but sure. So them hippies refused to buy Dylan's records while he was on a major, but now that he's gone indie he's all of a sudden going platinum again because the hippies of the '60s forty years later decided to make a statement, hundreds of thousands at a time, without someone initiating the action? How reasonable do you think that sounds?

You mischaracterized what I said.  I said that's part of the issue, and I'm not talking about people in their 60's, I'm talking about people in their 20's who would bootleg a major label release but think they're helping Bob by buying it if it's independent.  Hippies don't have to be 60.  I beat the shit out of 20 year old hippies all the time.... which leads me to my next question.  You're not a hippie, are you? 

[Tha Psycho Hustla]

I beat the shit out of 20 year old hippies all the time.... which leads me to my next question.  You're not a hippie, are you?

lol.