Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProfessorGAC

(64,995 posts)
1. I Dunno Rock
Tue Dec 2, 2014, 11:49 AM
Dec 2014

There are some good points in your add, but at the same time, the record companies have been an impediment for decades.

If they don't control, but simply bankroll, they certainly deserve a return on investment. However, it is well documented that they take a huge percentage to cover the costs of the "misses" when they are the reason for the "misses".

The companies then mitigated their risk further by making it harder and harder for new acts to get a hearing. Hence the rise of Indie.

Finally, they consolidated all activities into a far greater proliferation of packaged acts. More than ever before. (I admit they've always been around, but today they get nearly all the promotional push. What else explains Katy Perry?)

So, while i buy your "what about the new members" and "why so much for the lawyers" statements, i am for a paradigm that makes the record companies nervous.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Musicians»(Not from the Onion) Got ...»Reply #1