Jump to content
AnneNR

Gene Simmons: "Rock Is Finally Dead"

Recommended Posts

You have gone on to a different topic - big business. Large businesses and industries in the U.S. overall have vast tax loopholes which allow them to contribute less to a country taken for granted. That's a different topic too. ;)

Artists (incl. Eric) would agree they are essentially a business, but should be closer to the top of the money pyramid.

Whether rock is dead is a matter of reference. Though there are some artists out there I'm hopeful can rise above the fray, the R&R I love is from the past. I don't mind because I'm down with old school. :heartpump:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two are inter-related, though. Big business IS what is hurting rock'n'roll, songwriters, artists, etc. The money isn't trickling down like it should; it's rising to the top and staying there.

A $29 million bonus for Pandora's head honcho vs. $39 to an artist/songwriter for a mega hit couldn't be a better example of that — or how it's broken.

Cheryl

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James   

I think the points here, again, are correct, but I'd ask to please keep some perspective. 

Why do you think a hypothetical dude with talent and a guitar in 1968,  who knows nothing but how to write, sing, play music....how do you think this dude was able to share his music with the world and make a nice little fortune doing it?

Answer:  because another entity ("big" business) partnered up with him and did the heavy lifting (financing, marketing, accounting etc).  Without big business we would never have heard a Beatles tune, or a Woodie Guthrie tune, or Richard Rogers...............

I don't worship big business.  In fact I hate a lot about it too...I hate what Clear Channel etc has done to American radio.  And there is a lot more I don't like about what big biz does.  But overall you guys are living a good economic life and you guys live in the most robust economy the world has ever known because entrepreneurs were free to dream and work toward their dream.  And those entrepreneurs who were successful in providing a good product while using up the least amount of the Earth's resources,...these guys grew their companies so they could provide the good stuff they created to more and more people.  IE:  they became big corporations who also have provided good jobs to 1000s and good investment returns to their shareholders.

Corporations are not evil, overall they are the opposite.

Perspective.

James

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LC   

You know, I wrote something yesterday that needs a qualifier.... In the bit where I was calling the anti-Rosanne blogger's comment "sexist," I said: 

Of course it's sexist; it implies a lot more than if he had just said she was "Johnny Cash's kid." He might have just called her "naive" or "inexperienced" but he instead used "little girl" in a condescending way.

I should have said (addition in red): 

Of course it's sexist; it implies a lot more than if he had just said she was "Johnny Cash's kid." He might have just called her "naive" or "inexperienced" —which also would have been incorrectbut he instead used "little girl" in a condescending way.

Just thought I'd point that out.... Otherwise, it sounds like I was calling Rosanne naive! And she's certainly not inexperienced. (See my thread "Speaking of Rosanne Cash..."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LC   

James, I agree that without the support and push of record companies, the dude with the guitar and creative songs wouldn't have had his music spread to the masses. Back in the day — before artists could literally come from nowhere and go viral via YouTube — corporate backing was the only way to go.

BUT... let's face it. For every Beatles and Beach Boys, there were countless acts who didn't get such great promotion, and who signed deals totally weighted in the record company's favor. The Beatles were lucky to have Brian Epstein making sure they got a fair cut but many others didn't. Badfinger is a good example of a band that got pretty well abused contractually (and sent some of the members into suicidal depression fueled further by drug abuse).

Eric can speak to this better than I can, because his group (Raspberries, as you know :) ) is another that didn't get a "sweetheart" of a deal originally (or ever, I guess). Big success would give the top artists leverage down the road, but in starting out, it seems like they had to "sign on the dotted line" at the record company's terms just to get a deal. If they didn't demand more, they probably wouldn't get it.

Yes, corporations can be good. But they can also hold up their own acts, right? In a perfect world, the record company makes out and the artists get paid fairly. After all, without the music the artists create, what do the big music corporations have to sell? 

And again, I understand where record companies are coming from. Traditionally, they'd sign artists to deals at as low a price as they could get them. It's no different in any other field. Like with books: If you approach a book company with a great and salable book idea, they will try to get you to accept as low of an advance as possible, even if they love it. Believe me, I've been there (on both sides). The trick is to figure out how much leverage you may or may not have. And in this day and age, the footing can be tough....

Ultimately, I think Rosanne's bottom line is the right one: Set up a system that works for the companies AND the artists, not one that benefits only the companies. Instead of the big cheese cashing his $29 million check (I still choke on that) and artists like Rosanne and Eric getting $38 or $104 checks, make the split more equitable. Agree? 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James   

...ok Señor LC, and we can also agree that the Stevie Nicks photo on the Rumours album was a thumbs up..  ;)   Side note:   when I was 18 and making my weekly stroll through the record store I'd always check out the Buckingham/Nicks album cover. Best cover of alltime. I'm glad the big record companies got THAT one to my local record store.

Yes, I was (and still am) a dog.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James, I agree — to a point. Even pre-Pandora and pre-YouTube, big business was taking advantage of talent. (C.A.M.-U.S.A. Inc., this is your cue: take a bow!)

Without Brian Epstein, The Beatles likely would have fallen to a same fate. Look at the disarray after Epstein's death. And let's be honest — even he saw John, Paul, George and Ringo (and Pete, earlier) as a cash cow.

It seems like technology makes it easier to take advantage of talent today — and it seems to have taken business ethics with it. Capitol and C.A.M.-U.S.A. may have grudgingly let go of a teeny tiny sliver of the pie, but they DID let go. Thirty-nine dollars is the smallest of the crumbs.

(Disclosure: I'm one of technology's biggest fans. Let's face it, we wouldn't be having this discussion without it. :) )

Cheryl

P.S. (Edited): I just went back up and read LC's post. He said it way more eloquently than I.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as far as corporations being evil, well ... I don't think they started out that way.

Look at Walmart. I think Sam Walton was a brilliant man with an acumen for business and good heart that included his employees and customers. Unfortunately, his heirs only see his life's work as a way to get richer. And richer. And richer. The employees, once partners in Sam's success, now are only means to make money for the family.

That's only one example.

Cheryl

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LC   

James, YES on that Buckingham Nicks cover. It's the most perfect shot of Stevie.... Classic. 

You know, think of the music plight in terms of sports. NFL team owners make zillions, but they have to pony up to the talent, which is why players make a million, two, three, four, five, and much more (for the creme de la creme). Sure, some are underpaid, but there's a minimum salary (which I think is a few hundred thousand), so no one is working for slave wages or for free.

And, of course, the NFL converts game footage into other products (licensing, video games, highlight DVDs) so it can make even more money off their investment. But they're paying those salaries so players' hard work is compensated.... 

Musicians, on the other hand, don't have a minimum salary. From what I understand, some can even take a loss when they record an album. Again, real musicians can speak to that better than I can. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James   

RE: Wal-Mart

Again, perspective. Wal-Mart, through its massive advances in logistics and sourcing product, it can sell high quality product at very low prices. Because of these advances and the low prices it sells its merchandise for it has put trillions of dollars into the pockets of We the humble. There is no better friend to the low-moderate income people than Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart saves low income people money that these low income people can use to spend on other things. Wal-Mart puts money in these low income people's pockets. They also provide jobs to their employees that their employees choose freely because the Wal-Mart package is a better package than any other company is willing to provide them. This is just true. 

Wal-Mart, a demon?

To the degree Wal-Mart could (and maybe should) pay more to its employees, I am on board with that. But I am not on board with demonizing this company. I high-five this company for what it has done to improve the lives of we humble types around the world.

 It´s ok (IMHO) to speak out against low wages and to push companies to pay more and if there are abuses, to shine a light on these abuses to create consequences. These advocacies are not only ok but are constructive caring things to do. Nobody believes in caring for employees more than me.....and I agree it is something that lacks in the U.S. and around the world in general. Big time.

But that is not what is going on with Wal-Mart detractors over the last years. The attacks are over-the-top. It is pc to hate Wal-Mart, so everybody feels comfortable shooting venom their way and piling on with the crowd. What the politicians have tried to do to Wal-Mart is disgusting too.

The complainers complain and spew venom, Wal-Mart, puts dollars into the pockets of the poor

James

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corporations are made up of people who create situations for others with their internal culture. My posts never said Corporations are evil. The people within can take advantage of others. Conversely, one person can make a huge difference with the right intentions toward others such as someone like Quincy Jones (just popped into my head) or Jay Z. They have the talent and business credibility to help other musicians. We are discussing the music business, right?

But speaking of football, I think collage players should be paid too. The talent isn't paid enough. ;)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James   

College players paid = the end of college football. We watch college football because it's amateur sports. When you pay them they become pros.  Pros who play at a level way way below the NFL, CFL etc. Why would we continue to love college football if it's just the NFL but played at a level a zillion miles lower? We wouldn't. Paying college players is an abomination and anathema to everything that college sports should be.

Paper, LC, I understand where you guys come from in your last posts. The truth is corporations through time have often treated employees badly.  In my part of the world the problem is worse. The culture is such that we, the average Joe, are treated like bacas (cows) by those in power - government, big banks, big phone companies etc. 

The U.S. employee has a better gig than most around the world because of a lot of things, one of which is that people like you guys care and advocate where you can for the underdog, for the employee. You guys are one of the reasons the U.S. became great - because you respect those who are underdogs and you guys are always in their court.nWithout people like you guys our society would not have advanced like it did.

Anyway, that's about it for me,  I think, maybe,hopefully,...

(please don't cheer)
:)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnneNR   

Isn't it interesting then, that two recognizable music personalities (Mr. Gene Simmons, and his bud Mr. Paul Stanley) are endeavoring to do something a little different --- I don't know how much different as I am not a football fan.  It will be curious to see, say a year from now, if these two guys manage to create something slightly unique in their approach to stadium football.

Perhaps at this point they see more in doing this than continuing to tour a lot, they are getting older after all, and I think perhaps Gene is trying to do something that might make Shannon feel more comfortable about him being involved in (just my take on it, I could be wrong).

AnneNR

P.S. --- Personally, I am sick to death of seeing things merchandised to the United States that are "made in China", or other places.  I want to acquire items we, the American workers, have made --- and by contrast I wonder if the people in other countries are tired of seeing "made in U.S.A." on their retail shelves??! :huh:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 things because I am typing on an iPad -

I am not sure about college football...in the south the competition between rivalries is severe and loses aren't well tolerated.

I do love my LSU.

Gene is good at merchandizing the Kiss brand and great at business; doubt his recent investment strategies are based on his wife or his age; more likely opportunity.

Back to rock...maybe Kiss can play at the games...lol!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I'm dubious about Walmart's "high quality" products ( ;) ), you have given me a different perspective to ponder, my friend. I'll give the Waltons props for the consumer. Admittedly, my view on the economy is limited, so your more international take gives me another outlook as well — and gives me pause to count my blessings.

I've rather enjoyed this discussion. It's been so long since I've had a civil dialogue like this that I'd almost forgotten what it was like. It's ... nice. Nice that we can share our views, banter on our differences and remain friends.

Cheryl

P.S. Don't college football player receive compensation in the form of scholarships? Not that I'm well versed in football. But it is Tennessee/Alabama Week, so ... ROLL TIDE! 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is Wal-Mart was recently caught selling donkey meat as ground beef...not a fan.

Yes the college players get scholarships but they are put in some difficult situations mentally and physically. I don't have an answer re compensation. They are money makers...Think I need to read more about this subject.

We should start a new topic for this.

p.s.  Cheryl I cannot "like" your comment because you dared to write the words "ROLL TIDE"...again, not a fan... :cool:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW! It is beyond "awesome" to use a very California surfer/girl word to get on this forum and once again read intelligent banter about a few different subjects all in one thread. It's like the way it used to be. I love it! The whole thread. :)

And LC's usual, it's great to see your name. :cool:

Oh, and James, I'm still looking for that next great video for you to "enjoy." You're welcome. ;)

PS: I think the word "sexist" gets tossed around more freely these days than "Rizzo" was in the movie "Grease." If someone called me "little girl" I guess I'd have to know the context in which it was used, as I will always be Ed Antanaitis', "little girl" and love that label!

Sure, it may be demeaning, but from what I read, I think it doesn't necessarily warrant an automatic "sexist" label. Just my thoughts. This to me was more of an ad hominem, than sexist.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James   

 

On 10/20/2014 at 2:25 AM, Wendy-Ann said:

Oh, and James, I'm still looking for that next great video for you to "enjoy."

Well, a video post would have come in handy last night as I was having trouble falling asleep. 

You know, if we could market your choice in videos, Sominex would be out of business !..

P.S., Get your fanny back here posting !..

:)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeC   

Excellent points. Great quote, LC.

And some spotlights on Rocks Bands that can showcase their music, and the record companies can showcase new talent this way, too: Just have bands record their songs, and put them on movie screens.

And there is The Beatles Radio, podcast on the internet, now. Playing song after song. Link it up to your computer, or business. If you have a flatscreen T.V., everyone at your business can see and hear it, too. Or you can ask them to show it, on their screens. With various artists and Ringo's song from an album, along with the rest of the band.

If a band agrees, why not put some video on screen at a live concert, while people wait to see an artist or band play. This way, they can hear bands they never heard, before.

Rock and other music genres can use theatres and have a Rock night, like a Saturday night, where bands are shown on screen. You can do this with an internet connection to the theatre.

It also helps that someone explain, before the show, what the band was about. So the new viewing audience understands.

And, vinyl records are coming back. On a different genre, Frank  Sinatra must have about eight albums, from the past, now on vinyl again. Including 50 never before released songs, from London,  in the 1960's. So, it looks like an artist contacts the record label to do this, because their name is also on an album.

Bands like Styx did 103 shows, last year. To their surprise, they will have 109 shows. Joe Perry has recorded some songs with Paul McCartney. I guess due out by Christmas. It's in the sound mixing stage, now. Neil Dimond with his new album, on Capitol Records. The Who celebrates 50 years, next year. I thought I heard something about a show. The Rolling Stones have a documentary/ performance movie out, from a few years ago.

Rock continues to be writen about, at least in new books by Ken Sharp and guitarest, Joe Perry, oif Aerosmith. Joe says that bandmember, Steven, has read the good chapters- through chapter four. He said, after that, we'll see whether or not there wil be a tour, next year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeC   

A pre- Halloween treat:

The KISS Band just did a concert on Wednesday, for winners of a contest. bSee Connect OCRegister.com/Kiss, Scroll down to "Readers Trown A Kiss." And they did perform for their fans at an Arena Football game, too. At the end of the season.

More treats: Tickets go on sale in January, 2015: The first Rio Rock concert in Las Vegast for May 8th and 9th, then the 15th and 16th, of 2015. With Metallica, Taylor Swift, Linkin Park, John Legend, and a lot more, For The Rio Rock Festival that usually is in Brazil.

And a correction that Styx did 103 concerts last year, with 109 scheduled, to their surprise, for this year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnneNR   

Taylor Swift pulls all of her albums from Spotify

Taylor Swift has been refusing to put her new album "1989" on Spotify since its release last week, and now she's also pulled her old albums from the streaming service.

It doesn't appear that any of Swift's songs are currently available on Spotify, and a Spotify spokesperson confirmed to Business Insider that she removed all of her albums from the streaming service.

Artists don't make nearly as much money putting their music on Spotify as they do selling digital albums and songs on services like iTunes.

It seems that Swift's strategy is working in her favor. She's had a record-breaking first week sales, and early projections claim that "1989" could have the highest selling first week by a female solo artist in U.S. history and the biggest sales week since 2002.

__________

I believe this is phenomenal.  Ms. Swift encouraged her album sales by doing this, I think.  More power to the artists in claiming their just due, I say.  And I will be one of the ones in the record stores making purchases for them.

This takes some cahones to do, and I wonder if this is a small step in perhaps fixing one aspect of reviving Rock 'N' Roll ??

AnneNR

6  6
__/

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeC   

Great one, Anne!

 I agree with Taylor. And, that's a great way to get more new promotion for an album, like Taylor's. And Taylor has switched over to Pop or contemporay music, now. I'm sure she includes some Country songs, still. And Garth Brooks went to iTunes, after about nine years of staying out of sites that sell music downloads.

I also would like to see the record labels include multiple artists on one album. We could start with five, then 10. Did I hear 100 albums? Well, alright. But everyone could make money, being on the same album, or the same iTunes download. Apparently, iTunes pays more to artists.

And also add some unknown artists on each album, like our own Matthew. The famous artists would receive more. And everyone could count on concerts for more money, each year. They could do their own, or play in other artists concerts.

Musicians like Wally Bryson, Dave Smalley of Raspberries could be added to some albums. I know they liked their own songs. Back then, their record label thought other songs would fit better on albums. Spending time to co-write would have helped. But, maybe Wally liked to party-hardy 'til the wee hours of the morning. I don't know. Yes, he wrote songs, that could be put out, with agreement with the owner of his songs. I guess he didn't have full ownership and rights to more songs he wrote. It was more about consideration of a possible album recording, that didn't become a reality. Unfortunately, for Wally.

Could he add them now, so that people could hear them, with agreement of his former record label?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×