Does making music quench some of your music obsession?

I have never kept up with every little development in new music because I feel like the good stuff will always rise to the top given time.

i put a record out last year and it sank w/out trace because of this attitude - which i might point out i'm guilty of too. perhaps that's karma in action.

Still nice to know i'm not alone in this, also i think our ignorance is kind of mitigated by the fact that we are at least acknowledging that there's a load of amazing stuff out there which will never pass our ears b/c the breaks didn't fall the right way for it.

I have a large enough music collection but for the last few years I've listened to relatively little music. Most of what I listen to now is made by friends, with the very occasional listens to pre-rock pop or country, or classical.

I think that part of the problem is that the people who listen to thousands of new releases a year still usually miss the good stuff. So "keeping up" doesn't really guarantee anything. And it's was a bit disingenuous of me to talk about the great stuff "rising to the top" when in reality that process can sometimes take decades.

Without naming names, there's a recent example of 2 similar bands with similar tastes/styles, one of which is filled with record nerds, the other is filled with people who again, know their shit but mostly get tips from folks like those in the first band. The record nerd band makes great music that's exciting to other record nerds but missing some crucial element, while the non-record nerd band makes exciting stuff and have reached like, next-best-thing status.

There needs to be a fine balance between educating your ears and applying yourself to write your own music, whether or not the music you hear informs or inspires.

I used to be pretty obsessive with the record listening and collecting. These days, I'm far more interested in writing and recording. My listening narrows to the stuff that really inspires me, or the stuff that acts as a catalyst to make you experiment with new directions.

I'm not sure what you mean by this -- you think it sank because people aren't interested in what's new? I don't think that's very true at all, it's just that new things that *do* succeed are usually backed by a fair amount of hype combined with timing and luck.

At times I've actually thought that our first record didn't take off for the opposite reason -- that it's superficially connected to a style that has been on the wane for the last few years and people are more interested in what's new. After all, so many people who were "in the know" seemed to think it was a good record -- club owners, bookers, occasional industry people, etc.

But the point is, it's silly to just put out a record and then assume that if it doesn't take off it's because the public has some misguided attitude about what's good and what's current. There are just too many records out there for everything to get noticed. You/we just have to keep putting out more records and keep pushing them and keep playing more shows and keep trying to put ourselves in the right places at the right times.

and i cant be constantly listening to music anyway. forget the fact that i can't at work, i just couldnt. even when i'm at home i need to have silence a lot of the time.

anyway, to get to the point, i do feel that creating music replaces some of the time i would spend listening to it. in fact, i bet that if i didnt create music I would listen to much more of it and have many many more cds.

if pitchfork gave us a 9.0 or if lester bangs rose from the dead to champion our stuff, our perceived stock would go through the roof - but would the music actually become any better? i think that by trying, creating,'failing', picking ourselves up and keeping on keeping on, all of us are in some way contributing to the cultural continuum whether we get elevated or vanish entirely.

there are TONS of records out there. too many maybe but who's to say? i feel like my dreams are being played out right now. technology means i can make stuff and have it listened to by people all over the world. that's me happy and i mean that even if we never get another review, another deal, another airplay and just end up in some dark forgotten corner of myspace.

music is and remains the greatest vehicle for human expression and ecstatic abandon. my continued participation in it so profoundly affects my sense of well being that if i jacked it in i would very quickly become a suicidal identity-less mush.

the label salivated over the masters as they came in but progressively lost interest as they realised it wasn't going to take.

having delivered an album that was 'difficult' but of high quality i was surprised to be hoiked out on my arse at such speed. my assumption was that we'd done enough to at least get a second shot. maybe we were lucky to get that first shot anyway (99.9% of musicians never do) and just blew it.

because it was released on 'that' label, does it make it any better than some kids knocking out some great tunes that will never get 'discovered'? you could argue this in circles. i still think that the opportunities to get heard are far greater now than they were 10-15 years ago. i can't honestly think of a better time to be making music in that respect. i don't think the internet is exaggerated at all. is a mega band gonna break off the internet alone? of course not. it just depends where your sights are set. my dalliances with with the music biz to date have taught me to fix them very, very low.

Honestly though, if I were you I'd be glad I at least had that one major indie label release. It will stay in their catalogue, and a trickle of people might continue to discover it over the years. Maybe it will get reissued one day. Maybe it will capture the attention of some critic. It's better than just having a bunch of self-released CDs sitting in boxes. I'd be a lot happier if I could at least say we had gotten some kind of national distribution other than iTunes and CDBaby. Maybe that's silly though -- that desire for some kind of rubber-stamp legitimacy.

The nice thing about getting put out by a "real" label is that you feel, well, at least someone cares enough about the music to put it out. But when they put out one album, barely promote it, and don't invite you back for a second album, you realize they didn't really care about it, they just thought they might make a few bucks off it.

That might be sadder than the boxes of self-published CDs in the basement.

The nice thing about getting put out by a "real" label is that you feel, well, at least someone cares enough about the music to put it out. But when they put out one album, barely promote it, and don't invite you back for a second album, you realize they didn't really care about it, they just thought they might make a few bucks off it.

you'd have to be quite naive to put your signature at the end of a document drafted by record company lawyers and have any notion of 'caring' beyond a defined bottom line. eez bizness. there is however a weird double-talk that occurs when signed artists talk to labels and vice versa. each side has their face that they present to the other which remains as friendly and positive as pie at all times even when the whole thing is going down the toilet. i've put the phone down after amicable conversations before and felt like punching the wall and i'm absolutely certain that it's the same for the people at the other end.

artists sometimes get caught up in a bizarre version of 'stockholm syndrome' where they start perceiving their record co like a child views a parent and the record co does nothing to disabuse this neurotic projection because it makes their artists more compliant and easier to manipulate. a&r staff particularly get used to putting on their 'care bear' faces when nothing could be further from the truth.

i was lucky enough to get to put out a record that would NEVER IN A MILLIONS YEARS have gotten released by a major label and i can't be unhappy about that.

That might be sadder than the boxes of self-published CDs in the basement.

The rubber stamp is overrated. what's way sadder than being drop-kicked into obscurity, watching your baby getting ignored while other acts blast past you through the machine inches from your nose because their hype is rolling way heavier than yours OR having boxes of self-released CD's propping up your bed for eternity is being an artist that puts out lousy safeplay ikea coffee table albums on a 'cred' label which because of existing profile is guaranteed to get some nice politely gushing reviews, sell a few thousand to an existing fanbase and recoup, then limp along to the next one out of pure fiscal need.

that kind of situation can dribble along for years and it just becomes a case of slowly eroding self-worth and diminishing artistic returns if there even were any in the first place.

i'd go for self-respect, great music and a stable bed any day.

peace y'all

my real name is known only to those who would seek to see artists THAT EQUAL THE GREATS like tori and katie melua kept silence for their own reason

i call the head of SONY ENTERTAINMENT TO answer why he never replies. that is because people like him hate artists.

i know people who don't hate artists. people like mariesa sabriel. who everyone talks about. who is this mariesa they say.

Sure, but I'm not actually convinced that business and caring can't go together. Then again I always seem to put business over caring.

being an artist that puts out lousy safeplay ikea coffee table albums on a 'cred' label which because of existing profile is guaranteed to get some nice politely gushing reviews, sell a few thousand to an existing fanbase and recoup, then limp along to the next one out of pure fiscal need.

Lately I've been wondering about music played in coffeeshops, the kind of music that is just sort of "there" and doesn't interfere with your reading or set any tone except, perhaps, "vaguely trendy" -- but I'm even more interested in the music that doesn't even set that tone. Ambient music, at least in the classic sense of the term, but which doesn't really try to set any specific ambience. I've always been more focused on listening rather than hearing, so how would I even start to try to make that music. And where do these coffeeshops get this music?

That's the sort of scene I think about when I think about that career path -- the music that only seems to exist in coffeeshops. (That music might not actually have that career path, though, I am just guessing here.) I think there's something awesome about it.

I'm kind of attracted to the idea that a third-party might think enough of my music that they'd think it profitable. I think this is cos I tend to view a lot of self-released material as vanity projects, even if a lot of it is just to help get some visibility in a crowded out music market. Although I do admire the dedication it takes to make a living or even just make money from doing it yourself, I'd rather have a day job and in my free time worry about making music and have someone else with better marketing skills figure out how to sell the damn thing.

I'm interested in sending a demo out to a few small labels, likely in vain, but at least just for the practice of it. Problem is I don't have a good idea of how each label works. There are the ones who advertize that they listen to every demo, but how many do they end up releasing? Not many, obviously. Are they looking for finely-tuned, polished, mastered product they can release immediately? And then there's the issue of whether or not my kind of music fits in the niche that that label has made.

I've been told that even if they like your demo as it is, a lot of labels will make you go and rerecord it regardless. Of course, for every rule there's an exception, and for every exception there's someone who likes their style...