Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: gossip
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Martin K |
And yet, I still remember, being sent a CD which went to all shareholders, proudly proclaiming the albums of Pink Floyd on their label, and also sending a snippet of some tracks.
Will the shareholders be happy, with an example of the companies works, which clearly proclaims in loud lettering, we havent signed or developed anything this year but, we will keep looking , so please send us your money and thank you for your continued support? |
|
JK2006 |
nm |
|
In The Know |
I think you miss the point - pop is not supposed to "last" - it's temporary and disposable ! |
|
DJones |
The Times They Are A-Changing.
Nowadays everything changes much faster. Trends come and go in weeks (or maybe months).
So maybe it's impossible to develop an act, even if a record company has the patience and money.
The problem with the majors is, they don't want 10 acts which eac sells a million cds, they prefer 1 act which sells 10 million. |
|
Martin K |
I agree with both the above points, but the gap between the early hit singles (Emily and Arnold), were a far cry from what was being developed , by the time The Dark Side of the Moon emerged. This took record company patience and confidence.
There is some very bitty material on the way to this classic album, but this too, sells as a result of its success.
It is possible, that Radioheads developement advances have been good, and they will stand the test of time, but I cannot think of a pop act, currently going, that we will still be listening to in thirty years time, as notably, we have been debating prog acts.
Ok, I have one! And that is anything written by Guy Chambers.
Which brings up back to the start of the debate......
Is it lack of talent, or lack of investment? |
|
|
|
