Welcome to Gaia! ::

That would totally explain why Trent puts out an album whenever the ******** he wants, and goes in directions that piss people off, and plays a small club tour when his label is pushing for arena shows, and publishes 5 extra songs to smaller markets than US fans, knowing that his label won't see the extra dollars in import fees. It makes perfect sense now. He obviously has no control there whatsoever.

Signing to a mainstream label means exactly what your contract says. If you tweak and sign the first thing they throw at you because you just want to see $$$$, you'll get ********. If you wait for someone that's offering you your own imprint and creative control, because they recognize the marketability of your current sound, well, you'll get just thet. Both major 'industrial' artists in the US, Manson and NIN, did exactly that, and it's gone great for them.

Interestingly enough, the big example of a band going downhill that I can think of right now is MSI signing to Metropolis, a label known for giving enough creative control for industrialists to be industrial. The moment they signed, they started doing serious songs again, and they sound incredibly overproduced now. What gives?

When you sign a mainstream contract, your signing away your free will right into a small communist rule over the signer. In otherwords, they own you, you write about what they tell you to write about, they tell you what to look like, they tell you how to live and force you into a socket perfectly fitted for money and nothing else.

He's got a point.

And either way, the thing is that a lot of people see only the money, regardless of what kind of music they want to make. I mean, of course, there are those with more integrity out there, props to them, but really, people like nice things too.

As far as the actual issue goes, I, like a few here, have no problem with a band going mainstream. However, the only thing I resent is when a band changes their sound, forced or not, for the worse. That's not to say I stop liking a band when their creativity runs out, but it's more of my perceptions on "whatever it is, they're just doing what they have to, or can, or want to." I'm sure we'll soon see a band that takes on a mainstream sound, but innovates it nicely. But meh. Politics about music to me is something that shouldn't even exist.

Obviously. xd



Yes.



Good, I won't have to share a fandom with you. biggrin



Oh <********> that with a rusty steak knife. If Nine Inch Nails wasn't "mainstream," Trent wouldn't have come out here on tour and I never would have gotten to see one of my favorite bands. I scrounged up a hundred dollars to get an amazing seat that would have cost me well over a hundred for most any other concert at that venue (to wit, my father went to see The Rolling Stones the week before, had shittier seats that were worth over three hundred dollars), a touque, and a patch. It was one of the most amazing experiences of my life and well worth every penny.

And hey, let's do talk about the NIN "core audience," the ones that bitched and moaned and complained about The Fragile which was quite obviously Trent's most personal, progressive, and experimental album. I wore my Fragile shirt to the concert and didn't see a single other one anywhere in the crowd of somewhere near twenty thousand people.

So ******** your elitism and pretention. Some of us would rather enjoy good music than deny ourselves over petty politicking.

going mainstream......that's not a bad thing as long as the bands don't sell out or anything......
in fact if a few industrail bands were to hit it big, it would really be good for radio