jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (6 posts)

Are independent artists better artists?

  1. Earl S. Wynn profile image84
    Earl S. Wynnposted 6 years ago

    Are independent artists better artists?

    Why or why not?

  2. chelseacharleston profile image60
    chelseacharlestonposted 6 years ago

    I would say no, artists are artists.  The ones that get paid to do so are most often extremely talented, as well.  And being "independent" doesn't necessarily mean an artist is any good.

  3. DougBerry profile image83
    DougBerryposted 6 years ago

    I don't think it really makes a difference.  Husker Du was the first of the American 2nd generation punk bands to go major label.  They did it merely because the distribution of their products through SST was horrendous.  Bob Mould later helped others, such as Sonic Youth, make the same type of transition.

    Bands like Rush, who have controlled their own production from the beginning, raise the question:  are they major label or independent?  While their distribution is major, their content is not.

    Then there are the bands like The Church who started on major labels and are now on indie labels.  The Church had their Arista years where they were pushed to the breaking point, but it did yield Priest = Aura, arguably the most popular among their fans.  While it's singles Ripple and Feel did get some airplay, they only charted only on the College charts.  Now we would call them alternative, back then, they were just not popular.

    That said, most of what I listen to is not played on the radio.  At least, not out here in the sticks.  The only thing I ever hear broadcast is news on NPR.  Most of the stuff I own is from small labels, but is there a stigma attached to a large label? There are still folks at those places that love what I consider good music and they can have a few bands signed that are never going to make anyone rich. 

    If Ke$ha can fund a few good bands, go baby go.

  4. rutley profile image75
    rutleyposted 6 years ago

    I'm a self taught artist!  Never really ever made much money.  A few murals here and there.  People really don't want to pay or they just don't have the cash flow to do so.  I just paint because I can.

  5. FatFreddysCat profile image99
    FatFreddysCatposted 6 years ago

    Doesn't every artist start out as an "independent?"  Some of the biggest bands/singers in the world once had to play in crappy bars or nightclubs or record albums for obscure independent labels before hitting the "big time"

  6. SidKemp profile image93
    SidKempposted 6 years ago

    I think it's best not to generalize.

    What matters is that an artist is true to his or her voice. For some artists, that means being independent of the corporate system in the marketplace. Others find their true voice fits into the mainstream. Others - including all poets in America - must find another source of income.

    What matters is being true to our voice and improving the quality of delivery. How it reaches the world matters much less