anyone here rock as a job? (1 Viewer)

[Lili Marlene]

And what are the artists going to make the money from?

stop talking to him.

I'm not going through this again

 

[Space]

Stephen will you manage my band?

I've had enough of this DIY shite.

Personally I rock for life. .|..|

 

[Eddie Gorilla]

I don't get how you can measure someone's sincerity, how genuine they are etc. by looking at whether they want money or not. You're putting your own baggage on someone else

it's not me looking at whether they want money or not. if the sole reason for creating the music or whatever other art form it may be, is to earn money, i don't see how that can be sincere. and by that same token, i think once you start letting that motive influence you, your output will in turn become less sincere depending on how much it influences you.

I would LOVE to see an example of 'pure expression'

huh? it's not up to me to be able to tell what's more pure than anything else. how should i know someone elses motives? i like music that sounds good to me, whether it's a "pure expression" or not. it's not like i need to respect someone or their motives to enjoy their art, like.

 

[Bad Intentions]

stop talking to him.

I'm not going through this again

Yep. I will now beat a hasty retreat. Sigh.

 

[stephenoblunt]

stop talking to him.

I'm not going through this again

Yeah, just let John speak the whole time, that'd make this forum incredible!!

 

[Space]

Stephen will you manage my band?

I've had enough of this DIY shite.

Well will you?

 

[Lili Marlene]

it's not me looking at whether they want money or not. if the sole reason for creating the music or whatever other art form it may be, is to earn money, i don't see how that can be sincere. and by that same token, i think once you start letting that motive influence you, your output will in turn become less sincere depending on how much it influences you.

well you might sincerely want to make lots of money so you make the best damn music you can.

huh? it's not up to me to be able to tell what's more pure than anything else. how should i know someone elses motives? i like music that sounds good to me, whether it's a "pure expression" or not. it's not like i need to respect someone or their motives to enjoy their art, like.

oh right, so we're agreed that it doesn't matter. Grand so.

 

[Eddie Gorilla]

what doesn't matter? it doesn't affect whether i like the art or not, it affects the respect i have for the artist.

make the best music you can? what?! how do you know the "best music you can" will be what will make you money? surely you mean "the most accessible music you can", no? so you believe that the best music is that which makes the most money according to that argument, right? hmmm.

 

[Lili Marlene]

what doesn't matter? it doesn't affect whether i like the art or not, it affects the respect i have for the artist.

oh right, fair enough

make the best music you can? what?! how do you know the "best music you can" will be what will make you money? surely you mean "the most accessible music you can", no? so you believe that the best music is that which makes the most money according to that argument, right? hmmm.

No. The best pop music is pretty challenging and/or inspiring stuff.

It's a thin line between but i'm more interested in people walking it than falling on either side.

 

[Eddie Gorilla]

oh completely like, plenty mainstream pop songs have lots to them, but it's usually a much different process to just someone writing a song and releasing it, with people often recording and releasing songs that were written for them, and aren't their own really.
that's kinda seperate to this debate like.

but i'm still confused about your point about making the best music you can because of needing money.
why would it have to be pop music? i'm not saying pop music can't be challenging and intricate as hell, but i don't see why the best music anyone could write would necessarily be pop music, ya know?

 

[Kermit McDermott]

I'm a journalist.... When you finish your two year course in music management are you hoping to earn a living from it? Or are you going to give your services to musicians for free?

Shut up blunt the argument's over....

 

[Unicron]

it's not me looking at whether they want money or not. if the sole reason for creating the music or whatever other art form it may be, is to earn money, i don't see how that can be sincere. and by that same token, i think once you start letting that motive influence you, your output will in turn become less sincere depending on how much it influences you.

So what happens if you wind up making enough money to never have to
worry about where your next meal (or even next Porsche) is coming from and that level of financial security gives you utter artistic freedom to do whatever the fuck you want to do. Does your music then become legitimate again because money (if it ever was) ceases to become the motivation.

I've always thought the case of the Dandy Warhols was kind of interesting here. OK they were fairly shit before the Vodafone ad and they were shit after but prior to it they were making poppy shit but the money from the ad meant they were then freed to do whatever they wanted and have subsequently gone on to make more difficult, but artistically fulfilling to them, music (which is shit).

As for whether or not it's moral or ethical to be a full time musician and to make a living from it ... I would have thought that doing so gave you the opportunity and time to make more and better music than if you worked some job (particularly if it's a tough or draining one be it either physically, mentally or emotionally) that when you come home from it you might not have the energy or inspiration to create.

 

[Scientician 0.8]

What the fuck is "the industry"?

The industry the name of my new funk workout/smooth jazz hybrid band.

 

[Scientician 0.8]

Bands/artists etc should get a few quid, cos every other cunt involved (except maybe the fans/friends of the band) is making money.
"Promoters", venues, printers, the press, websites, Rupert Murdoch all make a few quid off your gigs and your music so it's only right and proper that you get a few shillings too. Has anyone here ever quit their square ie paying job to work on their music fulltime and if so how did it work out?

 

[pete]

I like that one! true too.

http://thumped.com/music/Large_Mound-Rock_Is_For_Sanity.mp3

 

[snakybus]

Anyone who makes music for the sake of it, and not for money, is a fool. Of course, I happen to be one of these fools, but that's entirely beside the point.

 

[Eddie Gorilla]

So what happens if you wind up making enough money to never have to
worry about where your next meal (or even next Porsche) is coming from and that level of financial security gives you utter artistic freedom to do whatever the fuck you want to do. Does your music then become legitimate again because money (if it ever was) ceases to become the motivation.

I've always thought the case of the Dandy Warhols was kind of interesting here. OK they were fairly shit before the Vodafone ad and they were shit after but prior to it they were making poppy shit but the money from the ad meant they were then freed to do whatever they wanted and have subsequently gone on to make more difficult, but artistically fulfilling to them, music (which is shit).

As for whether or not it's moral or ethical to be a full time musician and to make a living from it ... I would have thought that doing so gave you the opportunity and time to make more and better music than if you worked some job (particularly if it's a tough or draining one be it either physically, mentally or emotionally) that when you come home from it you might not have the energy or inspiration to create.

interesting points.
now, lemme chop 'em up n shit.

and that level of financial security gives you utter artistic freedom to do whatever the fuck you want to do

why would you not have had utter artistic freedom before? do you not have artistic freedom until you're making a very comfortable living off it?

Does your music then become legitimate again because money (if it ever was) ceases to become the motivation.

whether it's the motivation or not, surely it's still a strong influence, no? you'll get dropped from a label if it doesn't sell, etc. you're bound to be very conscious of what got you to that level of financial security, i'd imagine.

As for whether or not it's moral or ethical to be a full time musician and to make a living from it ... I would have thought that doing so gave you the opportunity and time to make more and better music than if you worked some job (particularly if it's a tough or draining one be it either physically, mentally or emotionally) that when you come home from it you might not have the energy or inspiration to create

surely shit draining jobs are one of the biggest inspirations for budding musicians!
ideally you'd have as much time as you want to your art, but i personally think, regardless, it's important to keep art and work seperate.

as for you working so much that you're too tired to create etc.; i think realistically most serious artists usually don't let themselves get into a situation where they don't get to create art at all because of a job. anyway, despite how horribly long the working week is for alot of people, i can't see how, from a legal standpoint alone, someone could have to consistently work for long enough that they have no time to their art. surely the people who would be creating the art couldn't survive like that?

i'm still a bit shakey when thinking about that point though, so that's why my reply may seem a little confused. it's such a vastly debatable idea.

 

[Unicron]

why would you not have had utter artistic freedom before? do you not have artistic freedom until you're making a very comfortable living off it?

Well my position would be that you always have that freedom, you're the one that's saying the getting money involved restricts that freedom. I think most musicians aim to make the best music they can and if it winds up selling then cool if not well they've done something they're proud of; I'm sure even Westlife think what they do is good first and foremost.

whether it's the motivation or not, surely it's still a strong influence, no? you'll get dropped from a label if it doesn't sell, etc. you're bound to be very conscious of what got you to that level of financial security, i'd imagine.

If you're at the mansion in the country doing coke out of supermodels' assholes level I'm sure you'd give 2 shits whether or not you sell another record or not. But that's just me, I know that one of the reasons that I'll never have a million Euro is because I don't want 10 million.

surely shit draining jobs are one of the biggest inspirations for budding musicians!

But Hard-Fi are fucking dreadful.

ideally you'd have as much time as you want to your art, but i personally think, regardless, it's important to keep art and work seperate.

I think we fundamentally disagree here. I reckon if you could quietly make your art and do whatever you want and wind up getting paid for it then then that'd be a dream scenario.

as for you working so much that you're too tired to create etc.; i think realistically most serious artists usually don't let themselves get into a situation where they don't get to create art at all because of a job. anyway, despite how horribly long the working week is for alot of people, i can't see how, from a legal standpoint alone, someone could have to consistently work for long enough that they have no time to their art. surely the people who would be creating the art couldn't survive like that?

Dude, they'd have real life responsibilities; food to buy, spouses, kids, mortgages, things that supercede the compulsion to create in level of importance. I'm never going to make a penny from it but there's pretty much nothing I enjoy more than making/playing music but work restricts it and it's something that I accept; I don't even have a particularly tough job but there's evenings when I'll be stressed out or tired and pick up a guitar and get nothing, can't even play shit I wrote before much less come up with a new idea. And there's times in work when something will pop into my head and I'll have something all arranged and worked out but by the time I finish work it's gone. It's just the way it is.

 

[Ivytheterrible]

Brian O'Higgins pretty much drums for a living.

drummers have it easy! always in demand, always get to pick and choose.. I love them tho, don't get me wrong!

 

[Lili Marlene]

but i'm still confused about your point about making the best music you can because of needing money.
why would it have to be pop music? i'm not saying pop music can't be challenging and intricate as hell, but i don't see why the best music anyone could write would necessarily be pop music, ya know?

no but if you're good at making pop songs.....

herge took a few years out to draw do abstract paintings and stuff and was told they were very average and he should stick at doing Tintin cos that's what he was best at, and that WAS genius. Oh and intricate does not equal good music,

see: 99 percent of math-rock