[Rumori] Halcyon Days

[Susan McTigue]

>> (The industry) is always going to be going down 
>> the safe road. Thats how it is built. Its how its
>> always been. 
>
> Nope not true. In the sixties and seventies the 
> majors were very instrumental in bringing new and 
> exciting music out.

I attended a talk given by Randy Newman to music
students at Vanderbilt University a year or so ago. He
had this to say about those much-vaunted days of yore:

Moderator: Among those people in the beginning who
loved what you did, who cared that your music got out
there, among those people, did you ever have anybody,
any problems with any external editors and people
wanting you to tone (your music) down and change what
you did?

Randy: No. It's a big difference between ... you know
those "golden days" of Warner Brothers? You can hear
Tom Petty saying the radio's a cesspool now? *Now*
it's a cesspool 'cause he can't get *played* on the
radio! I mean to me, it was a cesspool back *then*! It
never has ... you know it's all business. Warner
brothers and their "golden days." It wasn't that
golden; they just let us do what we wanted. My son
went in the record business and until then almost,
which was like ten years ago, I didn't know there were
intrusive A&R departments that said "Why don't you
change this bridge … why don't you do that." No one
ever told me anything, until I started dealing with 
directors. Then they tell you everything.
---
He went on to say that other than Warner's benign
neglect, the main difference between the pop scene
then and now is that artists now aren't given a chance
to fail. If their first album tanks, they're dropped,
while back then, they were sometimes given a pass on
one or two crummy records. But he reiterates that most
of the music heavily promoted then AND now is/was
promoted not for artistic reasons, but commercial
ones. There were Britney Spears-equivalents in the
60's, too!

I don't buy any new RIAA CDs anymore, and won't again,
until they stop suing their customers and they lower
their prices. I remember when I used to pay $3.99 for
albums at Music+, and then almost overnight started
paying four times that (or more) for CDs. "The
Industry" claimed it was temporary-- to cover the cost
of their new equipment. Well that was sure some
expensive equipment!

I also don't (and never did) (illegally) download
music. If I can buy music directly from an artist
(online or in person), I will do that. I attend scores
of concerts (pop and classical) during the year. My
husband got an iPod this year and claims he'll never
have to buy another CD again, ever.

It does not make me sad to think that some musicians
have to have day jobs. I know plenty of visual artists
(and dancers, and writers) with day jobs, too. There's
still more art available for me to explore, in every
field, than I can get to. Frankly, I worry more about
orchestras folding, and classical musicians being out
of work (ie: losing their day jobs) than the
possibilty that, due to new technology, the latest
paean to unrequited love may not make FM radio, or the
Barnes and Noble. If that makes sense.

Susan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus