Better the Devil you Know?

Posted by Chris G on 24 July 2008 - 8:00pm.

Are record companies really so bad?

In various posts lately loads bile vitriol and anger has been aimed at record companies. They are decride as all that's bad about the music industry and it's a good thing file sharing is destroying them one expense account at a time.

Basically record companies are worse than arms dealers and run by venial stupid uncreative coke snorting drones.

The funny thing is the last time I went into a record shop on Berwick st you could buy a t-shirt with a record company logo on it, last year the Zep played a tribute concert to record company boss and a certain northern city's most favourite record company has had at least 3 films made about it (proper ones that get shown in cinemas and that).

You could easily say that along with BBC there have been no other orgaisations as important to Britstish music as record companies, every much lauded bearded cover star of this magazine has gained their prestiege and wealth with the help of record company (even Van Morrison).

Mick Hucknall couldn't have gone it alone if record companies hadn't spent a fortune getting him there.

So amongst the talk of faceless mutinationals and getting their just desserts are there anythings we'll miss about record companies?

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati

Nice t shirt

There's a difference between record companies and record labels. People wear t-shirts with the logos of Stax or Tamla Motown, Trojan or XL Recordings, Sub Pop or Island Records because they were set up to nuture the kind of music that person likes. But no-one is going to wander around wearing a t-shirt with EMI or Sony BMG written on it unless they work for them because they were set up simply to make money.

Wikipedia's entry on him is woefully small but my personal hero is Moe Asch who set up Folkways Recordings. He regulalry produced records he knew would make him a loss simply because he believed they would make the world a better place.

Niks | 25 July 2008 - 8:13am

a nice distinction..

but what about Motown which grew to be behemoth? Also many record "lables" treat their bands and customers just as bad as large companies regardless of their intentions. Lasty what if Folkways had a hit would you go off them when they got big?

Chris G | 25 July 2008 - 8:20am

Hucknall...

Certainly paid back whatever Elektra paid out on him. And then some...

John Waite | 25 July 2008 - 9:12am

Labels set up as corporate vehicles for music enthusiasts

like Ahmet Ertegun or Joe Boyd or whoever to enable the creation of wonders for the listening world are one thing.

Companies and their CEOs who bleat ignorantly about activities they have ignored for two decades until their expense accounts became affected are something else.

Vulpes Vulpes | 25 July 2008 - 11:24am

Independence

Hi Chris / TW,

Thanks for your post and, for your info, Van Morrison has been an independent artist for many years, with his own label - Exile Productions - and, as such, his success is down to his music and not any record company (be it Universal or anyone else).

We hope that you don't mind us butting-in to this thread with our dime's worth, but we simply wanted to correct the assumption that Van owes his success to some multi-national corporation.

Whilst writing and, for your readers’ info, up-to-the-minute news on Van’s latest album - Keep It Simple - and 2008 shows is, of course, available on www.vanmorrison.com and www.myspace.com/vanmorrison and, for a limited period, you can still see Van's exclusive BBC sessions at http://www.bbc.co.uk/musictv/vanmorrison/video/. We’re also pleased to announce that an increasing archive of exclusive film footage of Van Morrison performances has now been made available for fans on Exile’s official YouTube channel at http://www.youtube.com/user/OfficialExileFilms .

Thanks again for your plug.

Regards,

WEB SHERIFF

WEBSHERIFF | 28 July 2008 - 3:51pm