(Untitled)

[lovelikewoah]

I'm working on the first installment of my senior thesis for my pop-music and subculture senior seminar class. I decided to write it on the the different aspects of the independent music business. I've been researching indie labels and artists for the last few hours and have found out so many interesting tid-bits of information that I am compelled

Comments

[fender62p_bass]

A couple of thoughts I'd like to throw out there.....first, there was once a time when being signed to/associated with a major record label was not only a good thing but also not perceived as bad by the bulk of the record buying public. I think a couple of key things started the trend toward this growing negative sentiments toward the major labels. First was the music scene in the 70s. I won't go into a lot of detail here but suffice it to say that various circumstances (economic, sociological, etc.) made it harder for certain types of music that were developing (in part as a response to this phenomenon) to get booked for live gigs (I mainly speak of what developed into early punk) which in turn was the primary means of getting signed to a label (which most bands needed to do as recording and distribution was much less accessible than it is now). This led to places like CBGB in NYC (and this is an extremely important venue to look into if you haven't already - let me know if you want more info) becoming somewhat of a cultural phenomenon. At the same time, disco was big, and the record companies were very interested in capitalizing on it. While there were some legitimately good artists in the genre, the labels basically flooded the market with shit. This eventually led to a cultural backlash (a la Disco Sucks public bonfires of burning records). This was an early sign that the public wasn't interested in just buying whatever crap the labels were putting out. Or so we thought....then came MTV, which changed the whole game again. The emphasis on image became increasingly important, and techology in the studio was improving so much that it began to not really matter whether or not the artist could even sing or not (extreme case gone wrong: Milli Vanilli). Adding to this was the consolidation of the major labels starting in the mid-80s. Most if not all of the major labels now are owned by parent companies that aren't traditionally record labels. Meanwhile, punk remained alive and well throughout. Also note how much the major labels capitalized on the grunge scene. Now, look at our generation: if you aren't really so much into hip-hop your tastes haven't been represented by the charts for 10+ years. There has been stuff to listen to, to be sure, but not to the extent that previous generations enjoyed. So-called 'indie' labels start cropping up and the record labels take note at their rising popularity. Buying the indie labels outright might sour the deal (by alienating the very market they wish to profit from) so they do it quietly, a few shares here, a few shares there. I might also mention that 'subculture' music is hardly new....jazz started out that way, as did rock, hip-hop, rap, etc. Might be interesting to check out the early rockabilly movement of the 50s. Also, for comparison purposes, look at how the hip-hop game for the last 15 or so years is set up (esp. Dr. Dre/Death Row/Aftermath, LA Reid/Babyface/LaFace/Arista, etc.) Also, Robby's point in his last post is very interesting.