Quote:
|
Originally Posted by creepysusie
Sure, we could all classify The Postal Service as "pretending to be indie" but if the music they produce is valid and good listening, should it really matter? Compared to the Mass Media shit (Paris Hilton is making another album... readies puke bucket), it should really be about the sound the artist makes, not necessarily the lable. If Sub Pop is giving them the artistic freedom that they seek, isn't that all that matters? If The Postal Service was really heavily mass produced and mediated, we would not be hearing what we hear from them.
|
Again, I like The Postal Service. I have issues with the way the big four do business (it's fucked up that Ben Gibbard can't produce music under whatever label he chooses; the movie industry did away with this concept of talent as property decades ago), but it doesn't impact the talents of the artists.
The Postal Service isn't heavily mass produced precisely because Warner doesn't think they'll sell on a large imprint. Instead of letting the consumer decide whether the music is worth listening to, Warner relegates them to a smaller subsidiary where they're guaranteed to get less exposure, in order to cater to hipster snobs who will only listen to music if it comes from an independent label (despite the fact that Sub Pop isn't independent at all). The whole system is ass-backwards and due for a shake-up, but I've ranted on that subject enough already. Suffice to say that it doesn't matter what label The Postal Service is on except to the label bosses who want to get as much money out of their talent as possible and to that particular subcategory of listeners who choose to make an issue out of it. My comment that The Postal Service is pretending to be indie was more a jab at that sort of listener than anything else, since a bit of research reveals that many of the biggest independent labels aren't really independent at all.
Sub Pop got bought because their music was selling. The entire Seattle grunge scene of the 90's started with Sub Pop before David Geffen came around and bought it. Mudhoney, Reverend Horton Heat, Smashing Pumpkins and Nirvana are a few of the bands that got their start there, back in the day when Sub Pop really was independent.
This is why Warner now owns half the label, and that they do is a fact they don't advertise precisely because as long as that information isn't widely known they can continue to cater to the label snobs who wouldn't touch anything they produced under one of their larger imprints (ie Atlantic or Reprise).
The music industry is a fucked up place to be. I'm always amused by people who buy into the trends without even really understanding the bigger picture behind them.
This does not, however, reflect on the artists in any way whatsoever.
'Nuff said?