IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
Topic History of: An explanation for the decline of music quality Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author
Message
K
In The Know wrote: Labels ae not interested in investing in new actsThis is the only thing you have said that even comes close to relating to what is being discussed here, but even this isn't fact. Thanks for your input.
In The Know
Was ALL so predictable once downloading came in.
EVERYONE had his own label !
No quality control (and certainly no marketing !)
You can't tell the dross from the trees these days ... so a massive decline in sales and interest (No one I know can tell you what is in the charts anymore - whereas once, everyone knew what was No 1 !)
Labels ae not interested in investing in new acts - their profit will disappear before they have recouped their investment.
All they want now is back catalogue ... and mass, quick sale (via Supermarkets?) of TV advertised product (where all the sales have gone - before the pirates get in)
K
Labels work as units these days, they will not only have bands/artists on their labels but they will also have producers/songwriters signed to their publishing companies (same goes for management companies).
You'll notice that most bands and artists these days have co-written their songs with others and quite often these are the ones signed to the same group.
As the article rightly points out, breaking a new artist/band is an expensive and time-consuming process, so if you manage to break one then it makes more sense to monopolise on what you've achieved. If they can't write another hit, bring in the people that can.
I don't see it as a decline in music quality at all, more a streamlining of the industry and in my mind, a far more sensible way to work.
JK2006
The big corporations won't waste cash anymore promoting/marketing one offs these days - they want "lucrative" artistes.