3 ms·

Alternative take - this might not actually be the worst thing for musicians, to have a low effort, steady paying gig creating music. I am reminded of the docume

Alternative take - this might not actually be the worst thing for musicians, to have a low effort, steady paying gig creating music. I am reminded of the documentary "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" about the "Funk Brothers", which was an amorphous group of jazz musicians who did all of the backing tracks for most of the 100s of Motown hits. Obviously, making ambient tracks is not quite the same as writing "Please Mr. Postman" and hearing your songs on the radio, but in the documentary the band talked about how they'd pump out songs during the day then go to a jazz club at night to make the music they REALLY wanted to make.

motorest 2y ago
> Alternative take - this might not actually be the worst thing for musicians, to have a low effort, steady paying gig creating music. I think this is a red herring to try to convince people that it's in their best interests to be force-fed content produced by major labels behind the brand {INSERT_ARTIST_NAME}. Which incidentally it's the business model from major labels. I mean, check any major labels artist. Each and every single hit song they release has countless writers and producers claiming a stake, not to mention the fact that some major labels artists don't even try to hide the fact they buy all their content from third-parties to slap their name over it. Is this the state of affairs that's being defended? Give me a procedurally-generated playlist that I can listen all day long, and skip the content I'm not interested in.
- tuna74 2y ago
  "I mean, check any major labels artist. Each and every single hit song they release has countless writers and producers claiming a stake, not to mention the fact that some major labels artists don't even try to hide the fact they buy all their content from third-parties to slap their name over it." Do you think this is a bad thing?
  - jfengel 2y ago
    It's too bad that stardom still generally requires being promoted by one of a handful of corporations. It's not impossible to get there without them, but the result is that we still end up concentrating most of the wealth on a tiny number of artists, while a vast number of equal talents go under-used and under-compensated.
  - motorest 2y ago
    > Do you think this is a bad thing? Yes obviously, if you're trying to complain about "ghost artists" by presenting these "artists" as the counterpoint when they are even faker.

motorest 2y ago

> Alternative take - this might not actually be the worst thing for musicians, to have a low effort, steady paying gig creating music. I think this is a red herring to try to convince people that it's in their best interests to be force-fed content produced by major labels behind the brand {INSERT_ARTIST_NAME}. Which incidentally it's the business model from major labels. I mean, check any major labels artist. Each and every single hit song they release has countless writers and producers claiming a stake, not to mention the fact that some major labels artists don't even try to hide the fact they buy all their content from third-parties to slap their name over it. Is this the state of affairs that's being defended? Give me a procedurally-generated playlist that I can listen all day long, and skip the content I'm not interested in.

tuna74 2y ago
"I mean, check any major labels artist. Each and every single hit song they release has countless writers and producers claiming a stake, not to mention the fact that some major labels artists don't even try to hide the fact they buy all their content from third-parties to slap their name over it." Do you think this is a bad thing?
- jfengel 2y ago
  It's too bad that stardom still generally requires being promoted by one of a handful of corporations. It's not impossible to get there without them, but the result is that we still end up concentrating most of the wealth on a tiny number of artists, while a vast number of equal talents go under-used and under-compensated.
- motorest 2y ago
  > Do you think this is a bad thing? Yes obviously, if you're trying to complain about "ghost artists" by presenting these "artists" as the counterpoint when they are even faker.