|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270445 is a reply to message #270400 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 09:52   |
 Kendrix
Messages: 966
Registered: April 2004 |
Gold Member |
|
|
Great read.- Thanks for posting that.
Rick says that the labels need to understand that they are sellng ART.
However, it will be interesting to see whether his aversion to corporate politics helps or hurts his mission.
Big, established organizations are slow to change even in the face of pro-active power brokers that are used to working in such environments.
The ability of a svengali-outsider and some zen-ish vibes to make change happen is not so clear. I wish him luck. I hope he succeeds in doing some good for the industry. It's good to see Sony attempting some bold moves.
Ken Favata
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270448 is a reply to message #270400 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 09:57 |
McAllister
Messages: 1134
Registered: April 2004 |
Platinum Member |
|
|
Go Rick, go!
M
" Important things = loved ones and music; unimportant things = everything else. Everything."
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270465 is a reply to message #270463 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 11:57 |
rnicklaus
Messages: 3859
Registered: May 2004
Location: Left Coast |
Platinum Member |
|
|
When you watch the news, the only person that predicts the future is the person doing the weather.
R.N.
|
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270468 is a reply to message #270400 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 12:25 |
 |
Doug Rogers
Messages: 288
Registered: January 2006
Location: Los Angeles |
Active Member |
|
|
Rick Rubin is living proof of the small entrepreneurs who contributed so much to the music business. An independent thinker not afraid to alter course, even when he was on a roll with something else.
Unfortunately over the years, profit, not art, became the most important consideration of the record companies as they got taken over by liquor barons, gobbled up the small labels that often nurtured the acts, and then gobbled up each other.
What we've ended up with is a headless chicken, and Rick provides a ray of light to hopefully change that.
I hope for all our sakes, he succeeds, and encourages other record companies to follow suit.
- DR
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270477 is a reply to message #270400 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 13:40 |
RMoore
Messages: 4406
Registered: May 2004
Location: Spaceship Earth |
Platinum Member |
|
|
From the article - Rubin:"the support of a record company like Columbia is still really important. I grew up in the independent music business, and you still really need the muscle of the majors. A record company call can still get you heard like nobody else."
People's Republic of Ryan
http://www.myspace.com/twilightcircus
http://www.youtube.com/user/Ryonik
By the end of today, another day is gone forever. You will never get it back.
We must never let up for a second. Work harder at every single thing - Terry Manning
You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take - Wayne Gretzky
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270479 is a reply to message #270400 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 13:46 |
 |
kats
Messages: 1440
Registered: September 2005 |
Platinum Member |
|
|
| Doug Rogers wrote on Sun, 02 September 2007 18:25 |
Rick Rubin is living proof of the small entrepreneurs who contributed so much to the music business. An independent thinker not afraid to alter course, even when he was on a roll with something else.
Unfortunately over the years, profit, not art, became the most important consideration of the record companies as they got taken over by liquor barons, gobbled up the small labels that often nurtured the acts, and then gobbled up each other.
What we've ended up with is a headless chicken, and Rick provides a ray of light to hopefully change that.
I hope for all our sakes, he succeeds, and encourages other record companies to follow suit.
- DR
|
Record companies (or any company for that matter) have always been about profit, not art as the most important consideration. They are very much interested in "art" if it sells - then they are all about art 
If art was the main consideration, you would have never seen the likes of The Beatles (for eg). The genre was not nessecarily considered "art" by the days standard, but the popularity and opportunity was obvious and the "companies" played ball.
We all want the quick solution, the fast answer - but it's simply not there. These things happen from the grassroots and then they explode. It comes from somewhere we never expected, could never predict, and with hindsite is "easily" explainable
In that artical Rubin replaces the existing formula with a new one in a nice pretty package. But it's still a formula. Just another strategy.
Tony K.
http://empirerecording.ca
Entertainment is a bore, communication is where it's at! - Brian Jones 1967
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270482 is a reply to message #270468 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 14:10 |
RMoore
Messages: 4406
Registered: May 2004
Location: Spaceship Earth |
Platinum Member |
|
|
| Doug Rogers wrote on Sun, 02 September 2007 19:25 |
Rick Rubin is living proof of the small entrepreneurs who contributed so much to the music business. An independent thinker not afraid to alter course, even when he was on a roll with something else.
Unfortunately over the years, profit, not art, became the most important consideration of the record companies as they got taken over by liquor barons, gobbled up the small labels that often nurtured the acts, and then gobbled up each other.
What we've ended up with is a headless chicken, and Rick provides a ray of light to hopefully change that.
I hope for all our sakes, he succeeds, and encourages other record companies to follow suit.
- DR
|
Yes I'm very curious too as to what will transpire,
For me the most interesting new business tact was the creation of the Columbia 'word of mouth' promotion department..
What I find sad about the new state of the record biz eg: no cash to be earned from the sinking ship, is that all the potential new Rubin's, Berry Gordy's, Chris Blackwell's etc - basically all the figures who combined musical taste with business savvy to create thriving independent labels breaking exciting new artists and genres - all these types are going to take one look at the record biz and say no thanks, and instead start an internet socializing site or a new P2P software...leaving the new artists to busk with their tunes on Myspace and collect a few digital nickels flung their way..
People's Republic of Ryan
http://www.myspace.com/twilightcircus
http://www.youtube.com/user/Ryonik
By the end of today, another day is gone forever. You will never get it back.
We must never let up for a second. Work harder at every single thing - Terry Manning
You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take - Wayne Gretzky
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New York Times article on Rick Rubin [message #270536 is a reply to message #270530 ] |
Sun, 02 September 2007 21:11 |
rnicklaus
Messages: 3859
Registered: May 2004
Location: Left Coast |
Platinum Member |
|
|
| Hank Alrich wrote on Sun, 02 September 2007 18:55 |
If nobody was ever on it for the art, Hammond would never have signed Dylan. Yeah, it worked out profitably, but he was reasonably alone thinking that art would sell.
|
Folk music hot when Dylan was signed. They also had The New Christy Minstrels. It wasn't done in a vacuum. Columbia had the hits of the day in order to finance Dylan as well. Johnny Mathis just being one of them.
R.N.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Home
