The definitive work on the subject is Steve Albini’s The Problem With Music.
Every label wants a young, stupid, attractive person who can be turned into “product”, and won’t ask too many questions. With Autotune, professional songwriters, a hot producer, talented backing musicians and a sufficiently gormless teenager, they can make any attractive body and face into a successful property.
<shrug> Well, having lived in upstate NY for a while and then having moved to a city that does have a major music scene, I’m less than sympathetic toward people who choose to stay isolated and then proceed to bitch about not being recognized by the Music Industry [sic]. But it’s not all about sucking up to major labels, y’know. There are plenty of people who move to cities with music scenes to get exposed to larger audiences. There are plenty of people who move to cities with music scenes to get exposed to other musicians. There are plenty of people who release their own music. There are plenty of people who choose not to go the major-label route. And there are plenty of people who work with different producers to hone their material.
But hey, if she wants to be the Unabomber of self-indulgent progressive singer/songwriter musicianship, I suppose that’s her prerogative.
What in the world makes you think that she bitches about not being recognized by the Music Industry? She doesn’t care. That’s the whole point of what I said. If she cared she would have played the whole promotions/touring game. I might care, sometimes, but what I think doesn’t matter.
And there are plenty of people who choose to not do any of that, but who still have talent and release music. She’s gained a worldwide following anyway without doing any of that. She has released her own music (and certainly doesn’t need outside producers to hone her material). She is known by many musicians and has even worked with many people she’s never even met. She did the vocals for this cover of a Peter Gabriel song by long-distance, and the vocals for many songs on this album without ever meeting the musician.
You’re way off base, equating a musician who chooses to forego self-promotion with a murderer. And “self-indulgent”? I don’t even know where to begin with that. Her music is interesting and original, with beautiful vocals. Why is that self-indulgent? Should she sound and act like Britney Spears to not be considered self-indulgent? What are you talking about? I’m very confused.
Is this self-indulgent?
Is this self-indulgent?
Is this? This? This? This? This? This? (ok, that might be, but it’s still a great song). Tell me what you’re talking about and maybe I can explain whatever it is that you’re attributing to her.
Dude, she’s fuckin’ Exhibit A in the lesson plan for “Just because you have a giant box of crayons, does that really mean you have to use them all?”
How so? Which song?
…all of them? Every time I try listening to a Happy Rhodes track I find myself thinking “Jesus Christ, she needs a producer to rein this shit in.”
And then I hit the “Stop” button before the track finishes. I’m not sure I’ve ever bothered to listen to a complete song of hers.
And frankly, I have a broader range of tastes in music than a lot of people. I probably attend more shows in a year than Happy Rhodes has performed in her life.
So, y’know, you might want to explore the concept that the people who suggested that she miiiight want to hone her material did so because they have a clue about music too. But if she’s satisfied with her small-but-rabid fanbase and wants to remain Fiercely Independent…well, more power to her, I suppose.
What shit should she rein in though? I’m trying to understand what it is you think is over the top. I’m not trying to get you to like the music, but I’m totally baffled as to what you’re referring to.
I’ve already explored the concept that people who think she is fine the way she is have a clue about music too. Each to their own, nothing wrong with that.
Yep!
These are my sentiments exactly. I sent my husband a faux-panicky email about a month ago saying, “OMG, I think we were supposed to be watching Mad Men this whole tilme!” and then he told me just how long it’s been on. :dubious:
Can we just agree the Happy Rhodes is a talented but lazy musician?
50 shows since 1990 is just pathetic for a would-be aspiring musician. And the whole “doesn’t want to sign to a label because the would take away the rights to her music” is pure BS. She could sign to an independent label and have them distribute her music to a wider audience.
She’s not lazy, she just has a different way of doing things. She’s not anywhere near as bad as Kate Bush for instance. Kate took 12 years between albums, and has only ever toured once in her career and that was back in 1979!
That’s silly, sorry. She’s not a “would-be aspiring musician,” she’s an actual musician. But as a fan, I would agree that 50 shows is just pathetic, because I would love to see her tour the world. She could sell out in other countries just because fans would be so shocked and surprised they’d travel long distances to see her. Her last show, in 2007, sold out in about 2 minutes. People came from all over the US, plus Ireland, England and Germany, just because they thought they might never get the chance to see her again. They might be right.
Her music is available to a wide audience. Anyone listening to her almost certainly has internet access, and her music is not only free to listen to, it’s (well, most of it) available to buy at CD Baby and iTunes.