General Music Chat

Bob Lefzits of LA Times writes:



David Geffen called Don Henley a malcontent. Was never gonna let the Eagle get the best of him.

But Geffen's not only a businessman, but a billionaire.

We're used to that. Rich people believing they're entitled to speak their truth. Above recrimination. But ARTISTS?

I'm stunned at the traction Kelly Clarkson's response to Clive Davis got yesterday.

Used to be you were afraid to speak truth to power. And if you decided to, you vetted your words with a high-priced PR person and negotiated with the mainstream press to print them.

But Kelly Clarkson's words were most certainly her own, and she did nothing but post them online, and her minions spread the word.

The truth?

It almost doesn't matter. But what does is the days of artists being beholden sheep are done. We've reached a turning point. And isn't it stunning that the revolution is being led by the winner of a TV talent show. The ungrateful b____.

That's what the Internet has wrought.

A bunch of people who believe they rule. Who know you win by going to your fans, to the public, not the old men. (And those who are not men act just like them.)

It's like a Mafia movie. In one fell swoop, Kelly Clarkson took a shiv and killed Clive Davis. His book was reviewed in today's "New York Times," but that's irrelevant. Online Kelly Clarkson beat him so bad, he doesn't even know what happened.

Clive Davis wrote a whole book about how he did it his way. Steered the ungrateful ingrates known as artists, and if you don't think the execs have contempt for the acts, you don't know any, away from their instincts and on to success. Prevented them from recording their own lame material and insisted they record canned stuff in a fashion distilled to play well on Top Forty radio. They got rich. Everybody was happy.

Same deal with Tommy Mottola. He didn't want Mariah Carey to inject hip-hop influences into her music.

Yup, Clive and Tommy were anti-art. They were pro-money.

But artists aren't in it for the money, despite the ravings of that lunatic Gene Simmons, they're in it for the audience and the attention, the money is way down the list, the eyeballs fill a hole in their souls. One of the reasons we get crappy music is the people whoring themselves out to major labels are not damaged malcontents like Don Henley, but pragmatists who see music as a way to chase the wealth of Wall Street and the computer titans. And as the money disappeared from music, the execs squeezed the acts even more.

And now they're revolting.

The Eagles put out their own album.

And if the label is mad at you, you just post videos on YouTube, release mixtapes. They can't stop piracy, you think they're going to stop their own charges from making music? The acts of the pre-Internet era were afraid. No longer. Call it upbringing, say the Millennials are entitled. I'll say it's the Internet. Where people speak truth to power all day long. It's in their DNA.

Do you think anybody online is taking Clive's side? The octogenarian who's all over conventional media but doesn't realize that's passe? He thinks being on ABC gives him gravitas, when everybody in the audience laughs at the talking heads, making happy talk and bloviating.

Kelly Clarkson certainly sang those songs. She wrote some of 'em. She got a toehold and won't shut up. She was screwed by Clive, who buried her personal album, and not only is she not forgetting it, she's rubbing his face in it.

This is music's Arab Spring. When the youngsters take power from the old men and refuse to give it back.

Got to thank "American Idol" for that.

And the Internet.

Kelly Clarkson: www.whosay.com/m/kellyclarkson/content/515466

P.S. Kelly posts her rebuttal on WhoSay, which I'm sure Clive's never heard of, and finally, today, just an hour ago, Clive Davis releases a statement to the media. He doesn't even have a Website, and he's promoting a book! He's on Twitter, but it's canned promotion as opposed to personal revelations. Hell, he should have broken the fact that he was bisexual on Twitter the day before his book came out, THAT'S modern publicity:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/mu ... 5427.story

P.P.S. Geffen called Henley a malcontent in "History Of The Eagles," which is now on demand on Showtime.

Ha Ha these big record guys refused to change with the times believing they are ABOVE change! In the words of Gomer Pile "surprise, surprise, surprise"

There will be bands/singers who continue to kowtow to the execs who call the shots and write their paychecks. They may want the adoration of their fans, but they are also blinded by the instant $$$. Many of these artists are NOT songwriters (or at least not good ones) either, so using other people's music and doing what the management tells them to do - will keep them in the limilight linger than trying to do it their own way.

How many times can you poke an artist with a sharp stick before you get bitten? Kelly knows exactly how many times..and she probably sharpened her fangs before she went native.

If you don't like what the execs are doing with you, move on.
It's the only way to get your point across because people just don't listen and everyone thinks they are right. (That's why you must be ultra careful before signing anything or joining up with a label or any entity.)

And when $ is involved, the old guys get so tight that they could be making diamonds out of coal, but you don't want to know how.

I am all for educated compromise but don't get all "Dictator" and think that it will float. Most artists want to "full on cry" once you destroy something they worked hard to create just because they think they have the perfect spin for you and your product.

I can tell you that after they change something like that, it destroys the trust and you can't get that back. Afterwards, it's a job and unpleasant to do something you once loved.

Nah, stay independent and have a good time. If you have something truly superior going on, they won't have the nerve to attempt a coup d'etat or they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

The Grateful Dead were on his label for awhile


they changed some lyrics in concert " we used to play for silver - now we play for Clive "

Thats all I got.

melanie wrote a few good songs about playing the music game for fame and wealth and not wanting to get caught up in that. this one was written by phil ochs.

there's a lot of good lines in it....

they'll rob you of your innocence
and put you up for sale
the more that you will find success
the more that you will fail

but it all fades so quickly
like a sunny summer day
reporters ask you questions
and they write down what you say...


i love the irony here. she's singing this tune and there are these photographers right in her face clicking away and changing lenses. wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzECo5YnMDM

YOD I had to research this a little and to me Clive told it like it is, she says things before fully thinking them out, which is what she did.

To me thats just a side show.

Clive comes from the old school record label mindset and at 80 he aint changing.

The Dixie Chicks liked to speak thier mind, look what a set back it did for them.

"Baby you're a rich fat Jew"
I believe was in jest and Epstein knowing John so well knew it.
Lennon had a F'd up sense of humor sometimes but he wasn't afraid to speak his mind...

"Baby you're a rich fat Jew"
I believe was in jest and Epstein knowing John so well knew it.
Lennon had a F'd up sense of humor sometimes but he wasn't afraid to speak his mind...

I think the difference between Lennon and Clarkson, in terms of artistic presence and relevance is so vastly wide that they could throw a planet between them..

Clive is just telling his side of the story, but even he wouldn't try to ignore that planet, which now sits squarely in a museum somewhere.

"Baby you're a rich fat Jew"
I believe was in jest and Epstein knowing John so well knew it.
Lennon had a F'd up sense of humor sometimes but he wasn't afraid to speak his mind...

I think the difference between Lennon and Clarkson, in terms of artistic presence and relevance is so vastly wide that they could throw a planet between them..

Clive is just telling his side of the story, but even he wouldn't try to ignore that planet, which now sits squarely in a museum somewhere.

PD... I wouldn't even mention the two as artists in the same sentence.
Mgmt. and artists will always be at opposite ends... eventually.

I was just sighting one of my favorites.

It seemed like the point was that the artist is in control these days when it comes to public relations.

The article takes pains to point out that this powerful man, Clive, is behind the times concerning social media and communicating with fans. The model he once had to reach everyone at once is gone.

The artist, Kelly, has a grasp on modern communication technology better than the "boss" and can therefore get her side of the story out quicker and to more people than the corporation can.

In other words, an unhappy artist could do real PR damage to the label now, whereas that was impossible in the past. The label could ruin an artists reputation/image with no recourse available.

Moral of the story: Labels should treat artists better than they have in the past, because the internet allows the artist to push back in a big way now.

I think it would be a mistake to judge the importance of social media to rashly,
just like in physics;
power takes a long time to accumulate and it takes a long time to dissipate.

YOD the sad thing on Clarkson is she is indebted to Clive whether she wants to be or not. I totally understand what Clive said about her, and she just proved it be hitting back at him.

Is there some devine right or wrong here? I dont really think so, just two headstrong people.

And I hate to say it but Clive could probably do way more damage to Kelly, than Kelly can take away from his legacy.

It is what it is.

But things have changed for sure and will continue to evolve.

There is an interesting article in Guitar Player magazine last month, Chad Kroegor talks about cutting hit songs, his thoughts were that its gone back the way of the old singles, you are only as good as your last song, the days of throwing one hit on an album (cd)(download) are over, people are into individual songs again, so each one better be good.

I know Nickleback takes a lot of flack for being a formula band, but I like thier songs, theyve carved out thier own little niche for now.

Anyway I got sidetracked with this.

People can cut people like Clarkson, because they came thru American Idol, but honestly how many of us on here would have thick enough skin and basic chops to go thru the process? My hats off to any of them that are on there week after week and get into the top 10, thats an accomplishment, as far as PR, its the greatest thing going. Bands in the 60s and 70s only a very limited amount of TV time avaiable, but these days these shows really bring out some interesting artist to me. I know I couldnt personally go thru the process they go thru.

So thirty-something soccer moms aren't the only ones who like Nickleback?

Jimmy I love em and aint afraid to admit it!

I wish I had the royaltys off the song Rock Star! LOL!