No more drama

Logan wrote: "If there's not drama and negativity in my life, all my songs will be really wack and boring or something" (Eminem). One might uncharitably infer from that there is not nearly enough drama and negativity in his life.

That Marshall, what a diva.

Tragicomic! Any time I catch a glimmer of anything CCR-related, I'm like

[/QUOTE]

That's hilarious! 😃 😀 😄

I had to work for someone like that once. I kept thinking at rehearsal.."Why are you treating John Fogerty like he's Keith Emerson?" That's the night I bailed out. I went quietly. I should have said..."The Civil War called..they found your diary"

Atavachron wrote: Eminem is a genius, and he's correct that drama & negativity is integral to an artist's work.   Do you have to suffer to be a great artist?   Not necessarily, but it absolutely makes a difference.

Jacob Schoolcraft wrote: verslibre wrote: Tragicomic! Any time I catch a glimmer of anything CCR-related, I'm like {GIF} That's hilarious! 😃 😀 😄 I had to work for someone like that once. I kept thinking at rehearsal.."Why are you treating John Fogerty like he's Keith Emerson?" That's the night I bailed out. I went quietly. I should have said..."The Civil War called..they found your diary"

Atavachron wrote: Eminem is a genius, and he's correct that drama & negativity is integral to an artist's work.   Do you have to suffer to be a great artist?   Not necessarily, but it absolutely makes a difference.

People in life become fixated on pursuing advantages and its basically the side to life I don't like dealing with. There's no real need for selfish behavior and damage to others to exist. It's how musicians end up getting the sh*t end of the stick.

It doesn't always have a lot to do with music. Sometimes it reveals the worse scenario for a band because of sexual promiscuity. Peter Banks revealed the damage in store for everyone. If musicians just came with a book of instructions. Like..."Leave this one be" "This one is anti social and as a filthy rich manager I am going to accommodate he or she.

Did a bell ever ring in a record executive's head telling them that they'd make one hell of a better profit if they just left the artist alone? Let the artist do their work. It's always the same old song and dance. They have to hang in the recording studio and make suggestions and many times ..( for decades)..it just didn't work. A talented artist would turn out a contrived album because of the record company.

Think about the pressure that Capitol Records put on Brian Wilson when he was recording SMILE ...back in 66' and 67'. Some of the music was odd..I get it. Capitol had invested in the band and now it's leader wanted to hire a poet and write strange songs. "Wind Chimes' and "Wonderful" or "Surf's Up" ...the Elements Suite which was more avant in areas and instead of having appreciation for an art they worried about money. IF they had left Wilson alone or IF they had been supportive of his ideas..or enthusiastic there would have been a good possibility that SMILE would have been received the Sgt. Pepper treatment by the youth....and they could have made a million by being honest instead of dishonest.

Jimi Hendrix wanted to make Purple Haze an album side. He wanted it to be like a mini opera. The record company wouldn't allow that. The song ended up being 3 or 4 minutes. He came close to what he wanted on "1983..A MERMAN I SHALL TURN TO BE..but he even complained about Electric Ladyland revealing how he was a bit restricted in places. Why? I mean...I don't trust the reasoning behind that.

The artist works really hard at becoming skilled at writing and playing. Possibly since childhood. They create innovative music on their own. That's what the fans want. That's what fans were willing to pay for and the record companies come along and completely screw it up. And as a result...the band's second and third album sounds too much like their first. Why? Because they left things out. New ideas which would have made them sound different or unique...but because the first album had success the record company wanted them to repeat that sequence instead of being honest.

Billy Joel and Laura Nyro were able to turn out hit records without trying to repeat their first album or a certain type of formula or style. Every one of their albums being different and not some cheap contrived idea to repeat the past. What they wrote was inspired not contrived. It's sad that the music business had to be this way. John Lennon and Paul McCartney seemed to write what they felt. Songs like "I'm A Loser", "Baby's In Black", "Help", "I've Just Seen A Face", "Norwegian Wood" all became internationally popular and the record company were beyond pleased. But the fact remains that those songs were unusual for the times. They were a little Dylan and Byrds influenced..but they were very original. With the exception of personal
assistance from the magnificent George Martin... no one in the industry seemed to be pressuring the Beatles to change their music.

Edited by Jacob Schoolcraft - May 29 2024 at 15:08