Talent, Luck, or Who You Know
I've always wondered which of these things matters more in the music industry. You have a lot of super-talented, creative bands like Wilco and Yo La Tengo, which are well known, but really only moderately successful. Then you have the Limp Bizkits of the industry, which were either lucky or well connected, which sold a lot of units in a short time, on little talent. I wonder what matters more...
|
Talent, obviously. I don't think I would want to be hugely successful if I thought my music was shit.
Of course, I don't really know how Limp Bizkit feels about their music. |
A mix I think. Like there are a lot of talented local bands in my area, but they don't know anybody so they can't catch a break. As long as they're not concerned about money, they still do have a handful of really dedicated fans who recognize how talented they are.
|
Ah, I interpreted this wrong. I would still say talent is number one, but who you know would be second.
|
Who you know that recognizes it as talent.
|
...or that recognises it as a quick buck.
|
I'd say it's a mix. Fortunately, a lot of genuinely talented bands get picked up by persons in the music industry. But unfortunately, a lot of crap gets signed simply due to luck and who they know.
I think marketing has a good deal to do with it as well. If a record label thinks a particular artists is marketable (e.g. Avril Lavigne and her "punk" image etc) then they will give them a chance even if their music is terrible. |
Quote:
|
A combination of the lot I reckon. One of my mates is in a great band (sounds better than a lot of stuff that pollutes the airwaves these days) but for a lack of the luck or the connections they haven't even got a deal. I'm guessing it's the same for countless other unsigned acts too.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:09 PM. |
© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.