The truth about major lables

[Guest allsystemsfail]

Which is using the models created previously by the major labels' date=' I'd argue that now with the internet distribution for the smaller label is now stronger than ever, but prior to that, apart from word of mouth which was never enough to create a real impact then. Extensive distribution is easy but creating a stable distribution network requires money and people committed to doing that fulltime, we've sold cds worldwide but it isn't distribution, you can't go into a major store in any decent sized town in the UK and find our material. Distribution to specialist stores is one thing but to the mainstream is another. You may be right about a distribution network being in place for the DIY punk community but it was never far reaching enough to make enough of an impact as to rival the majors distribution.You are right that there was/is a smaller distroibtuion network in place, but i shoudl have said without majors there wouldn't be effective distribution to allow for chart positions, high slaes and major success,

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Internet distribution? Sure, while it has indeed made a powerful contribution, it is not central to the activities of the DIY punk underground - its distribution. World wide distribution of records, zines etc is achieved via a network that spans the globe - one built over many many years. And money? It requires little. And no, it involves no people working on this fulltime.

Regarding distribution to stores - many DIY labels and distribution sources have worked with stores. Even mainstream stores.

Chart positions, high sales, and major success? Many indie punk outfits, for instance the Dead Kennedys, have achieved huge success.

Sure, having said all this, such a network can never fully rival major label distribution, but it does offer an alternative - one based not on profit, but on community and trust.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

Its stupid to judge someone for being a success in their chosen field' date=' if you believe in your music, and that its powerfull and helps people, what's wrong with getting the music to a wider audience. Any scene which actively discourages people to be the best they can and reach as many people as possible seems to be a self defeating scene. The 'scene's politics' seems a silly phrase what does that have to do with creating music for individuals who enjoy it ? the 'scene's cause' ? Music is and always should be primarily a form of entertainment, there shouldn't be causes that stop you fulfilling your potential. Any sceene that stops people achieveing what they could to proivide well for themselves and their family and make a living out of it seems to me to be encompassing everything that is bad, holding people back because of misplaced ethics. I know this is all my opinion but it seems like the bands who started the 'ethics ' in the scene were probably never going to make it, so in order to be big fish in a small pond is to make everyone think that being a success is a bad thing.

All just my opinion, but as i said any scene that discourages people being a success and making the most money and impact they can is bound to eventually destroy itself as there is no ambition to reach bigger/higher audiences, as time goes on people will drift away from liove shows as they're doing already and people won't be able to make a living on such small setups and eventually they'll have to look to other ways to finance what they're doing which will probably mean going part time and eventually many of the bands will fade and die. At least thats how i see it,

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Misplaced ethics? I'm sorry, but the ethics I speak of are an essential facet of the punk community. They are what make it what it is. Leftist/anti-authoritarian opinion is central to its cause. You cannot both rage against the machine and be a part of it.

Success a bad thing? I said nothing of this. Many indie punk outfits, without compromising their politics, have been extremely successful.

Any such scene would eventually destroy itself? The DIY punk underground is strong, and is extremely healthy. Many of those involved, have been over many many years.

[Michael MacLennan]

That's crap' date=' there's no point in trying to be rich unless you're going to sign to a major but people play music for the love of it, it's a priority issue, money or music, if you're lucky you'll be able to sign to a major and get both. they are a means to an end, a necessary evil if you're against them, i personally have no problem with them at all.

[/quote']

You're wrong, admit it hobo Joe. You're just in it for the money. Go on. Admit it. Admit it hobo Joe. Go on. You don't love it, you love the money. The tantalising feeling of it being in your hands, I bet you'd fuck a goat to get on a major label. Go on, admit it hobo Joe. Admit it. Go on.

[Michael MacLennan]

Utter nonsense.

I know you are, but what am I?

[Guest allsystemsfail]

who gives a fuck about politics??

theres too much of this bull shit out there

you see it as betrayal i see it as growth.

and its a sad day when you stop liking a band just cos they've out grown the under ground.

Well, as I've said, and I am talking only about the punk community, such opinion is a vital part of the scene.

[jester1470]

Internet distribution? Sure' date=' while it has indeed made a powerful contribution, it is not central to the activities of the DIY punk underground - its distribution. World wide distribution of records, zines etc is achieved via a network that spans the globe - one built over many many years. And money? It requires little. And no, it involves no people working on this fulltime.

Regarding distribution to stores - many DIY labels and distribution sources have worked with stores. Even mainstream stores.

Chart positions, high sales, and major success? Many indie punk outfits, for instance the Dead Kennedys, have achieved huge success.

Sure, having said all this, such a network can never fully rival major label distribution, but it does offer an alternative - one based not on profit, but on community and trust.[/quote']

I appreciate this and think its true up to a point, but iin a world where we are profit based the problem is that community and trust will at times falter and if its based on profit at least everyone knows where they stand a bit better. I think in an ideal world then you're right but sadly its not and i think that eventually the community setups do become corrupt and money does rear itrs head, its human nature, thats the sad thing,

Cheers

Stuart

[HummerOfIntenseEvil]

I appreciate this and think its true up to a point' date=' but iin a world where we are profit based the problem is that community and trust will at times falter and if its based on profit at least everyone knows where they stand a bit better. I think in an ideal world then you're right but sadly its not and i think that eventually the community setups do become corrupt and money does rear itrs head, its human nature, thats the sad thing,

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

But it never will be an ideal world if we all just accept the way it is.

Personally, I think everyone should sign up to Ipecac records, cos they don't interfere with the music at all. And it's owned by Mike patton, the greatest living man not called Alan Partridge.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I appreciate this and think its true up to a point' date=' but iin a world where we are profit based the problem is that community and trust will at times falter and if its based on profit at least everyone knows where they stand a bit better. I think in an ideal world then you're right but sadly its not and i think that eventually the community setups do become corrupt and money does rear itrs head, its human nature, thats the sad thing,

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Sure, the odd individual (within the DIY punk community) has indeed ripped people off, but we are talking about a very very small number of people. Most who hold with the views I've spoken of, remain strong in their conviction. They believe fully in the DIY punk idea. The scene is, as I've said, extremely healthy, and is probably stronger than ever.

The alternative - a system based on exploitation and manipulation. I want no part in it.

[Guest RockMonkey]

No onehas to have a part in it. You can choose not to. If the DIY punk scene is thriving then there is no particular threat from major labels. If an artist wants to go the major label route it is up to them. The music industry is about money. Music isn't. There will always be failings. If all the kidz started getting into DIY punk rather than chewinggum pop, then the majors would be pumping money into it like there was no tomorrow. No one has to be a part of it, you make your choices as you see fit.

While I would not (as was accused of jester earlier) f$%k a goat to get a major label deal, it's unlikely that I would refuse it. But I'm not punk and cool and underground like everyone here.

So I guess I am the token sell-out!

[Guest allsystemsfail]

No onehas to have a part in it. You can choose not to. If the DIY punk scene is thriving then there is no particular threat from major labels. If an artist wants to go the major label route it is up to them. The music industry is about money. Music isn't. There will always be failings. If all the kidz started getting into DIY punk rather than chewinggum pop' date=' then the majors would be pumping money into it like there was no tomorrow. No one has to be a part of it, you make your choices as you see fit.

While I would not (as was accused of jester earlier) f$%k a goat to get a major label deal, it's unlikely that I would refuse it. But I'm not punk and cool and underground like everyone here.

So I guess I am the token sell-out![/quote']

Sure, the majors pose no threat to the DIY punk community. DIY punks will still be pushing for change long after punk's current popularity has faded and the majors have tired of it. However, when a punk outfit jumps to a major, it diminishes our message. Punk becomes only product, no longer a force for change.

The majors have sought, as they have done so before, to exploit this community. The DIY punk underground has, on the whole, resisted. Sure, some bands have made the jump, but I say to hell with them.

[jester1470]

Sure' date=' the majors pose no threat to the DIY punk community. DIY punks will still be pushing for change long after punk's current popularity has faded and the majors have tired of it. However, when a punk outfit jumps to a major, it diminishes our message. Punk becomes only product, no longer a force for change.

The majors have sought, as they have done so before, to exploit this community. The DIY punk underground has, on the whole, resisted. Sure, some bands have made the jump, but I say to hell with them.[/quote']

So you'll stop liking the music a band produces based on the label they're signed to ?

That seems kinda sad, why does the label matter so much to the message and the power of the music, at least if they're on a major surely there's more chanmce of the message gettingout there or is the message just that major labels are bad ?

Cheers

Stuart

[Guest allsystemsfail]

So you'll stop liking the music a band produces based on the label they're signed to ?

That seems kinda sad' date=' why does the label matter so much to the message and the power of the music, at least if they're on a major surely there's more chanmce of the message gettingout there or is the message just that major labels are bad ?

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

As I've said, jumping to a major involves a betrayal - a betrayal of the punk underground and what it stands for.

Yes, regarding getting a message out to more folks, it is indeed a dilemna, and one that I've often thought about, considering both sides of the arguement. However, jumping to a major can mean making a considerable compromise - for instance, if a staunchly anti-capitalist outfit were to make that jump. Some bands have done so. Chumbawamba is one example, and hey, few bands are, as a result, as despised within the punk community.

[Afro Droid]

If I read the words 'punk community' one more time I'll burn my copy of London Calling.

[rune]

There's no point playing music unless you want to be on a major label

There is more to life than money. There are bands on majors that get told what to write, you think they enjoy that?

[rune]

theres nothing wrong with bands signing on to majors

and folk who are shouting 'sell outs' were never true fans in the first place.

Nothing wrong? So bands on major lables that get told what to write is ok? So major lables taking huge cuts in a band's profits is ok? The term sell out comes from a band changing its musical style to gain more money, not from changing record lable.

[Afro Droid]

You know what, I think he was being sarcastic.

[rune]

If I read the words 'punk community' one more time I'll burn my copy of London Calling.

Go on then, go burn your commercial punk book

[Afro Droid]

Eh? You think The Clash were commercial? Good, cos they were.

[jester1470]

Nothing wrong? So bands on major lables that get told what to write is ok? So major lables taking huge cuts in a band's profits is ok? The term sell out comes from a band changing its musical style to gain more money' date=' not from changing record lable.[/quote']

It all depends again on the contracts signed, as for record companies making profits, well a lot of the time the bands wouldn't have any profits if it wasn't for the marketing etc of the label. They may be taking a large amount of the money but if a band goes from playing clubs to stadiums then the profits are much higher and its easy to forget that a lot of the bands wouldn't bein this position without the support of a major. Yep the label may be taking 50% of the profits which is say 1,000 a day and the band is only getting 500, but compare that to a band that was making 60 a night before the label and their support and they're still a lot better off.

Cheers

Stuart

[Guest Jake Wifebeater]

Majors are parasites. They need bands, bands do not need them. It's simple:majors rape bands, so if you get into bed with a major, the chances are you'll end up fucked and you'll have no-one to blame but yourselves. Ask Kurt Cobain about the joys of fame. People can join the circus if they feel the need, I and many others choose not to.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

It all depends again on the contracts signed' date=' as for record companies making profits, well a lot of the time the bands wouldn't have any profits if it wasn't for the marketing etc of the label. They may be taking a large amount of the money but if a band goes from playing clubs to stadiums then the profits are much higher and its easy to forget that a lot of the bands wouldn't bein this position without the support of a major. Yep the label may be taking 50% of the profits which is say 1,000 a day and the band is only getting 500, but compare that to a band that was making 60 a night before the label and their support and they're still a lot better off.

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Many popular outfits have been stung by majors. Take the Ruts for example. A hugely popular punk outfit in the late seventies hitting the high reaches of the charts several times, these guys were with Virgin. They are still to this day (despite having ended their contract with the company in 1980) in debt. They still owe money to the company even after all these years.

[jester1470]

Many popular outfits have been stung by majors. Take the Ruts for example. A hugely popular punk outfit in the late seventies hitting the high reaches of the charts several times' date=' these guys were with Virgin. They are still to this day (despite having ended their contract with the company in 1980) in debt. They still owe money to the company even after all these years.[/quote']

I realise this, i know for examplethat my favourite band Marillion only just paid off their debt to EMI about 5 years ago, despite being away from them for a number of years, however, the fact remains that they are now in a position where they have built up a name and they each earn over 100,000 a year off the back of their music career, if it hadn't been for the support of EMI in the early days an outift like Marillion would never be in the kind of position they could have made this much now. And they may have been in debt whilst they were with EMI but throughout that time they were still earning a reasonable amount of money and were living well by our standards. Its a catch 22, yes you may be able to make an impact without a major but comparably thats small compared to the others who don't and what being with a major often allows is the publicity that keeps these names in the minds of people long after the contract has finished, and in some cases takes a band from having a 3 year career to having a 25 year career and the ability to make a living for all that time.

Cheers

Stuart

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I realise this' date=' i know for examplethat my favourite band Marillion only just paid off their debt to EMI about 5 years ago, despite being away from them for a number of years, however, the fact remains that they are now in a position where they have built up a name and they each earn over 100,000 a year off the back of their music career, if it hadn't been for the support of EMI in the early days an outift like Marillion would never be in the kind of position they could have made this much now. And they may have been in debt whilst they were with EMI but throughout that time they were still earning a reasonable amount of money and were living well by our standards. Its a catch 22, yes you may be able to make an impact without a major but comparably thats small compared to the others who don't and what being with a major often allows is the publicity that keeps these names in the minds of people long after the contract has finished, and in some cases takes a band from having a 3 year career to having a 25 year career and the ability to make a living for all that time.

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Two bands that prove you wrong - Crass and Dead Kennedys. The impact that these acts have had is incredible. Their music and message continues to inspire folks around the world to this day.

[jester1470]

Two bands that prove you wrong - Crass and Dead Kennedys. The impact that these acts have had is incredible. Their music and message continues to inspire folks around the world to this day.

Thats 2 bands out of hundreds of thousands tho, shall we go through the bands signed to major labels that have had done that, you'll finds there's a lot more, this is the point i'm trying to make it is possible to do it without a major label backing but the chances are much stronger with it.

Cheers

Stuart

[Guest allsystemsfail]

Thats 2 bands out of hundreds of thousands tho' date=' shall we go through the bands signed to major labels that have had done that, you'll finds there's a lot more, this is the point i'm trying to make it is possible to do it without a major label backing but the chances are much stronger with it.

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Only two major label punk acts of that period have had a larger impact than Dead Kennedys and Crass - The Clash and Sex Pistols. This despite the fact that many many punk acts 1977-82 were on majors.