Is MB a Tiger Beat music forum?

[Soulflower]

Originally Posted by YorkeDaddy

Yeah, and again, try and convince anybody here that Arcade Fire, Vampire Weekend, MBV, NMH etc are only known by a few people. It'll be funny to see you try.

You live in your own little world and you only think the things you believe are true. "All indie bands are obscure" and "Amy Winehouse is underrated" are literally idiotic sentiments and both can easily be proven wrong by anyone with a brain.

It is not about "living in my world" those are just my perspectives.

You do not have to agree with them.

I don't know who any of those bands are you mentioned and if I was to walk up to the average person and ask them if they knew anything about any of the bands you mentioned majority would not either.

They're not accessible...period.

That is not to say that they do not have their niche fans but that is it. You need commercial backing to reach more people and the average music listener.

[Soulflower]

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

Do you understand that Sony, Universal and Warner are the major companies that control 88.5% of the market? It is foolish to think every single album that they own publishing rights to are not obscure to the general public. There are probably a huge percentage of albums no one has ever heard here. Being on a big label doesn't insure popularity no more than being on a indie label insures obscurity.

You're right because Janelle Monae has a similiar issue

BUT

Nine times out of ten if an artist is backed by a mainstream label they have more opportunities for their music to reach more people... that is just a fact. That is not a 100% guarantee for EVERY artist on a mainstream label but the the way they operate is very different from a independent label. They have more commercial backing and artists have more opportunities for exposure unlike if they were on a independent label.

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

I hardly think Arcade Fire would be asked to headline both Coachella & Glastonbury in 2014, the two biggest music festivals in the world if they were unknown.

[YorkeDaddy]

Originally Posted by realtalk92

They're not accessible...period.

So you know nothing about them....which in turn means that they definitively are "not accessible...period."

Nice outlook on life. You're a cool person.

You need to realize that your personal experiences do not apply in intelligent debates.

Vampire Weekend is about as accessible as it gets l0l.

[Soulflower]

Originally Posted by YorkeDaddy

So you know nothing about them....which in turn means that they definitively are "not accessible...period."

Nice outlook on life. You're a cool person.

Vampire Weekend is about as accessible as it gets l0l.

My opinion is really not based on whether or not I know those bands.

My opinion is just on independent music versus mainstream music as a whole.

Since that is what the discussion is on

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

The whole Mainstream vs Independent argument is redundant anyway.

Many indie labels have major labels handling their distribution, many indie labels are part owned by major labels who have a minority stake in them. A lot of indie labels are not even indie labels but just subsidiaries of major labels. Sometimes major labels will form a label specifically to appeal to non mainstream music.

Also bands have different contracts with different labels in different countries. Primal Scream & My Bloody Valentine were signed to Creation Records (An indie label) in Europe but in the U.S. it was CBS/Sony who put those records out.
Even Rough Trade which was considered the indiest of indie labels was owned by BMG between 2002 & 2007.

So unless you're prepared to go by an individual case by case basis this whole argument is a sham.

[Soulflower]

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

The whole Mainstream vs Independent argument is redundant anyway.

Many indie labels have major labels handling their distribution, many indie labels are part owned by major labels who have a minority stake in them. A lot of indie labels are not even indie labels but just subsidiaries of major labels. Sometimes major labels will form a label specifically to appeal to non mainstream music.

Also bands have different contracts with different labels in different countries. Primal Scream & My Bloody Valentine were signed to Creation Records (An indie label) in Europe but in the U.S. it was CBS/Sony who put those records out.
Even Rough Trade which was considered the indiest of indie labels was owned by BMG between 2002 & 2007.

So unless you're prepared to go by an individual case by case basis this whole argument is a sham.

Good points, You're right which is why I was speaking on independent and mainstream labels as a whole and didn't really name specific artists.

We would have to discuss those types of artists on a individual case because some indie artists are more well known than others because they are on labels that partner with major labels but then you have indie labels that do not.

[Screen13]

I seriously wonder what started this Tiger Beat comparison in the first place. This has a Pop section, but that's a small part of it. Clearly there are more Pop based forums around.

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

Originally Posted by realtalk92

Good points, You're right which is why I was speaking on independent and mainstream labels as a whole and didn't really name specific artists.

We would have to discuss those types of artists on a individual case because some indie artists are more well known than others because they are on labels that partner with major labels but then you have indie labels that do not.

That wasn't what I was saying at all. If anything I was saying the total opposite, you can't generalise that one thing is this and one thing is that.

[Neapolitan]

Originally Posted by realtalk92

You're right because Janelle Monae has a similiar issue

BUT

Nine times out of ten if an artist is backed by a mainstream label they have more opportunities for their music to reach more people... that is just a fact. That is not a 100% guarantee for EVERY artist on a mainstream label but the the way they operate is very different from a independent label. They have more commercial backing and artists have more opportunities for exposure unlike if they were on a independent label.

I don't know what you meant by bringing up Janelle Monae.

I took a look at the wiki entry on her and it stated that she was on Atlantic which was bought up by Warner, which leads back to the big three. She recorded on a label (founded by Sean P. Diddy Combs) Bad Boy Records whose parent company is Universal Music Group - back to the big three again that control 88.5% of the market.

Maybe I should also had said that time obscures an artist or band's popularity and that you probably wouldn't know or heard of every artist that is out now. You might know Monae, but probably not ever artist who has recorded on the Atlantic label. And there is so much music out there that there would be quite a few artists you didn't know, even on a big label, that would relatively be obscure to you.