ok. What I want to know is - can you get a record deal if you aren't:

1. Alumni of the Brits School
2. Offspring of a celebrity/ex-popstar
3. Rich
4. Under 25

I'm sure we can all point out exceptions to these four criteria, but aren't they becoming the norm? And does it matter?

Like your fourth point Fred... about 10 years ago I desperately tried to get an incredibly talented lady in her 40's signed (Susan Black) with no joy at all, even though she had - has - a dead cert global No1 smash hit (Queenie).

Ageism is sadly and wrongly rife.

As for the rest, these days you may be right.

I tend to agree with Fred if we are talking about a deal with one of the majors. However, other things are happening, so acts that don't meet the four criteria mentioned should either approach the smaller labels or go it alone.

Possible answers to the questions in oreder.



1; or the correct sort of handshake

2;debatable that one, there are some pretty untalented famous offspring no-hopers.

3; Why would you want one? Just stay independent.

4; Ageism? Sadly a lot of the young A+R are unlikely to want to work with a new act twice their age. But a thing you can do for yourself is spend time actually guaging your own cross genre appeal as I get a hint that this may be one of your main worries.

fred wrote:
ok. What I want to know is - can you get a record deal if you aren't:

1. Alumni of the Brits School
2. Offspring of a celebrity/ex-popstar
3. Rich
4. Under 25

I'm sure we can all point out exceptions to these four criteria, but aren't they becoming the norm? And does it matter?
That's pretty much true and always has been.

There are exceptions but they are pretty rare.

The problem, fred, is not just the list you provide, it's whether something is marketable or not.

In all honesty would anyone of us have backed Paul Potts (without X Factor or whatever it was called)?

Having talent is only part of the equasion ... it's the marketing that decides whether something will sell or not. Being on a major TV show provides marketing (even if the result is only temporary).

Timing is also a crucial element.

Nobody may want a certain something right now, but in six months and one day (at around tea time), the act may be just what is required, even on the back of a similar or lateral projects success.

Interesting responses - thanks to all. I'm not actually looking for a record deal myself. I'm a song-writer and if a project I'm working on needed a release I'd do it myself.
The reason the debate came up was I was in the states recently and people were asking me what had happened to English music. My reply was that the above criteria was what was stifling it - plus the fact that kids can get a guitar easily nowadays with their parents encouragement, and all the lessons they need. Its not like Jimmy Page or John Lennon slavishly trying to copy 45s imported from American ships on the Liverpool docs. there's just not that kind of romance and excitement anymore.
Also, I believe technology has literally made records sound less 'human'. Compare The Supremes records to, say, Girls Aloud (who I quite like but they're not all that) - there's no contest.
People like Lennon, Clapton, Hendrix or Bob Marley were all mixed up with great histories and determination to stretch themselves as artists who were interested in the world. That's not something you could say about Coldplay or James Blunt.

Rant over!
(probably contradicted myself loads here - forgive me)

I can't say I entirely agree about the effect technology is having on recording, however, new music with real passion WILL come from the fringes and small labels + those going it alone. Lennon, Page, Marley et al all had the courage of their convictions and went against the grain. In that sense, it's business as usual.

Just seen the Arctic Monkeys acceptance speech. Hadn't realised they'd had a pop at the brits school too. Good for them! Original act is what the Uk is famous for not larry parnes/cowell/etc rubbish.

Well said Fred!