From: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org (sheryl-crew-digest) To: sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Subject: sheryl-crew-digest V3 #242 Reply-To: sheryl-crew@smoe.org Sender: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk sheryl-crew-digest Saturday, August 26 2000 Volume 03 : Number 242 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [sheryl-crew] Re: sheryl-crew-digest V3 #240 [King Of Fools Subject: [sheryl-crew] Re: sheryl-crew-digest V3 #240 > It's those who think of it as just a business who > are depleting the number > of good music acts in the public eye. Though a > major label will shoot a > talented band down because of lack of sales, you're > right, it is less likely > to happen in an indie label. No, it's just a fact of life in modern business practices. When mega-conglomerates like Sony and Seagrams continue to buy up smaller labels, then cut the staff, it furthers the point that it comes down to money. Recorded music today isn't an art once it gets to the shelves. It's a commodity. > "The days where a major > >label will nurture an artist are LONG gone." > > Doesn't that make you the least bit uneasy? Why would that make me uneasy? > Sheryl > was nurtured by A&M > after an album that didn't cut it - NOT because they > didn't hear a single on > the album, but because she was capable of so much > more, and they all knew > it. What makes you think it WASN'T because "the suits" didn't hear a hit? Sheryl herself has practically disowned the "missing" first album. >Countless other great bands had albums that > didn't sell great when they > started out: Zepplin, Stones, Metallica... even > "Tuesday Night Music Club" > sat on the shelves for a year before it began to > pick up! How many people > now, who will probably become as talented as her, > won't get to have their > music heard worldwide because the lack of care? Metallica was on a small label, Metal Blade. Their early albums, while not hits, sold enough to make a profit. Zeppelin and the Stones: you can't use them in the comparison. The point I was making is that the labels don't nurture new acts ANYMORE. Ahmet from Atlantic was legendary in the 60's for letting bands stretch out. Of course, he was president of the label and didn't have a board of directors to answer to. > Your view doesn't give us very much hope for music > in the future. > > EP It's not just my view, it's the way the industry is run. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 03:46:55 -0700 (PDT) From: King Of Fools Subject: [sheryl-crew] Re: sheryl-crew-digest V3 #240 > But there used to be a time when 1 and 2 million > sales a year was "enough". > Now with artists like Limp Bizkit, the teenie stuff, > etc, selling double > digit platinum, they're getting greedy. Suddenly 1 > million isn't good enough > anymore, and artists like Sheryl suffer for not > being pop-ish or trendy > enough. Exactly. Once an artist reaches a certain level of sales success, any lull in sales will affect relations with the label. If Sheryl's next album or two only goes gold, you'd better believe she'll be looking for another label. >With A&M she was given some freedom to > produce her own music, and a > lot of artistic control. On her website, last year's > tour diary she wrote the > label wouldn't even let her make a music video. Just > because it's a big > buisness doesn't make it right. Especially when > Sheryl had basicially no > choice after her label was taken over and they had > "new management", so to > speak. Again, you seem to understand it. Once successful, performers have to reach a balance in order to retain that success. Anybody want to guess how close Carlos Santana was to being dropped before Clive Davis came up with the idea of having popular guest appearances on half his album? Like him or not, Santana is a musical legend. But he was one breath away from being dropped. It's like Joe Perry once said when asked why he played on all the sappy ballads that Aerosmith has released as singles in the last decade: "I'm a rock n' roll guitarist. You've got to sell. If I wanted to be 'an artist,' I'd be playing in the coffeehouse down the street." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:09:24 -0400 From: Paul Schreiber Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Re: Independents Christina wrote: >I am curious as to who the 6 major record labels are (not being a smart ass >here)? I thought they were: BMG, Sony, EMI & Warner (soon to become one) >and Universal. hey christina! I remember your name ... :) The big six were: - - warner (elektra, atlantic) - - sony (columbia) - - polygram (A&M, island, mercury) - - BMG - - universal - - EMI The universal bought polygram, giving us five. Now we are getting close to having four -- I can't remember -- I think it's Sony and BMG who are talking. Someone correct me. Paul shad 96c / 3B CS / mac activist / eda / fumbler fan of / jewel / sophie b. / sarah slean / steve poltz / emm gryner / / x-files / buffy / dawson's creek / habs / bills / 49ers / t h i n k d i f f e r e n t. well in case you failed to notice / in case you failed to see / this is my heart bleeding before you / this is me down on my knees / - --Jewel Kilcher, "Foolish Games" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:09:19 -0400 From: Paul Schreiber Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] In which category do you think Sheryl would be Oliver wrote: >Technically, I think, Paul is correct. Sheryl is the antithesis of an >indie artist. But I think Esther's not totally wrong, either, as >Sheryl _appears_ 'independent' in the sense that, if we look at the >history of indie, 'indie' ethic was in the slipstream of 'punk' ethic >(if that ever really existed ...), which first stressed 'credibility' >more than anything else--you had to 'mean it, maaan', in contrast to >people who didn't mean it, maaan. Hmmm ... I wouldn't say Sheryl is the antithesis of an independent musician -- I just said she isn't one. Sheryl has more in common with independent musicians than many (perhaps most) major label acts in that: - - she writes her own songs - - she writes her own music - - she plays several instruments - - she occasionally plays acoustically (with Tim) On the other hand, manufactured pop acts like Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys, who have probably never played a club show in their lives, and spend more time dancing than singing, are the antithesis of independent music. The have no interest in artistry; they have no passion for music; they don't want to inspire; they don't write songs about abortion or violence or impeachment. They are entertainers, not musicians or artists. Paul shad 96c / 3B CS / mac activist / eda / fumbler fan of / jewel / sophie b. / sarah slean / steve poltz / emm gryner / / x-files / buffy / dawson's creek / habs / bills / 49ers / t h i n k d i f f e r e n t. "I'd rather see the world from another angle." -- Jewel Kilcher ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 21:36:58 +0100 From: "David Ribeiro" Subject: RE: [sheryl-crew] SC 2001 Calendar Speaking of this, does anyone have the 2000 edition scanned, and would be a lovely soul to send me those 12 pics via e-mail ? i would use them for my page and credit the person who would do that. Thanks, David - -----Mensagem original----- De: owner-sheryl-crew@smoe.org [mailto:owner-sheryl-crew@smoe.org]Em nome de Chris Ketchum Enviada: Friday, August 25, 2000 4:39 AM Para: sheryl-crew@smoe.org Assunto: [sheryl-crew] SC 2001 Calendar Go to the 2001 Calendars section and check this one out. They only show the front cover, but it looks pretty nice to me :) Scheduled release date is 9/11/00. http://eqsmusic.com/index.html Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 00:03:01 -0400 From: "Christina Clark" Subject: Re: [sheryl-crew] Re: Independents >The big six were: >- warner (elektra, atlantic) >- sony (columbia) >- polygram (A&M, island, mercury) >- BMG >- universal >- EMI > >The universal bought polygram, giving us five. Now we are getting close >to having four -- I can't remember -- I think it's Sony and BMG who are >talking. Someone correct me. It's Warner and EMI, that will be happening very soon, that conglomerate will be known as...AOL TIME WARNER TURNER EMI or whatever order. I did hear that I think it was BMG or something was bidding on Sony cause it was for sale, but I don't know if anything came of that. Christina ------------------------------ End of sheryl-crew-digest V3 #242 *********************************