Record labels basically “own” a person who agrees to sign. It’s a way of
regulating competition and, of course, protecting the artist’s creations. The
formation of TSOAF was extremely unconventional. Many of the artists involved
were tied to different record labels. Those labels were not so keen on
losing the advantage of “owning” an individual and receiving all of the money
that comes with the name. These record labels claim to be upholding the law of
copyright, but copyright is supposed
to promote creativity, not prevent it. TSOAF resolved the issue by protecting
the artists’ identities with animal pseudonyms and masks, thus avoiding severe
legal consequences.
Rich Balling, Innovator:
Balling
wanted to protect the identities of participating artists for completely
different reasons than the record labels. "Their anonymity - the animal names, the masks - isn't about dodging recognition, rather, it's there to help the listener focus on the experience of the music and its creation instead of the personalities behind it" (Epitaph Records). The point of the pseudonyms was for the audience to be involved
in the listening experience, and not consumed with labels and how it defines an artist and his work.
Audience:
A major concern in the digital age is pirating. Nearly everybody does it at some point - it's quick and easy, and fits with our digitized values of instant access at any given time. Balling readily admits that "we definitely don't get rich off of this band" (Midget). But really, the public might argue, how much sales value am I really taking away from the band if I'm only pirating one song?
And therein lies the problem, at least for Balling, who believes that "what's lost in downloading is the artistic vision of the overall package" (Stereo Subversion). The music is experimental, sure, but each album has its own feel. By downloading only a song or two from a given album, the entire experience that Balling intended for the audience to go through, to connect to, is lost.
But, perhaps the personal connections that Balling desires others to make when listening to TSOAF is found elsewhere. This is the digital age, after all. And there are so many genres and artists and remixes. I think, today, we make our own strong connections to music, because we have a tendency to just pick out our favorite songs from an artist and add them to our digital collection. It is another way of transcending genre boundaries. The experience of TSOAF might be incomplete in Balling's opinion, if an individual were to pick and choose songs from an album. But to me, I think the experience is just as complete, and much more individualized, by adding certain songs to my personal collection. Balling's genius primarily stems from his organization of different sounds in order to create a mood. Well, hey, that's where a lot of my generation's genius comes from, too. All of the playlists, all of the remixes, that people in the digital age create - it's a reflection of this generation's cultural knowledge and experiences. I just can't see it as a modge-podge, a random collection of good grooves. We do interact with music on a very personal level, but today, it's much more about the songs we relate with than the artists we (or rather, society) prefer.
Creative Commons Activists:
But what if TSOAF had just dumped its artwork into the grounds of the Creative Commons? On the one hand, chances are there would be much less awareness of the group. One of the reasons for switching record labels so frequently was to reach a larger audience. Although there is definitely a growing movement for more resources in the Creative Commons, people are still more likely to prefer what's considered popular. The Creative Commons, at least at the moment, is more a place for amateurs looking to get popular. It's a sampling space. On the other hand, the reissue of the first album, including remixes of TSOAF by different bands, shows quite clearly that members of TSOAF have no qualms with forever letting the work be an ongoing process.
"Good music often cannot be heard if people don’t rise up in defense of good artists. The money making machine has been in control of what music gets out. But today, artists and fans are fed up. The elite record labels are overthrown. They have no respect anymore. They are only after making the almighty buck. They care nothing about music. We, the artists, are sticking it to them. They have no authority over the artist anymore. They will not control the release of good music anymore. They rarely put out good music. The record company is irrelevant and outdated. The revolution is upon us. The fearful status quo thinking of the record company suits is over. We, the artists, have taken charge. There ARE many alternatives to getting the music out there. There is a free culture movement going on. Artists are starting to give their music away. I have done this. The bottom line is to have the music heard." - Jim Guittard
But maybe the Creative Commons isn't the best resource for rising bands. That's not to say it's an unnecessary resource for the public. But Balling began TSOAF with an independent label, and switched labels due to financial struggles. Such is life. However, sticking with independent labels would very likely accomplish just what Guittard envisions - an artist's full control over his own work
Audience:
A major concern in the digital age is pirating. Nearly everybody does it at some point - it's quick and easy, and fits with our digitized values of instant access at any given time. Balling readily admits that "we definitely don't get rich off of this band" (Midget). But really, the public might argue, how much sales value am I really taking away from the band if I'm only pirating one song?
And therein lies the problem, at least for Balling, who believes that "what's lost in downloading is the artistic vision of the overall package" (Stereo Subversion). The music is experimental, sure, but each album has its own feel. By downloading only a song or two from a given album, the entire experience that Balling intended for the audience to go through, to connect to, is lost.
But, perhaps the personal connections that Balling desires others to make when listening to TSOAF is found elsewhere. This is the digital age, after all. And there are so many genres and artists and remixes. I think, today, we make our own strong connections to music, because we have a tendency to just pick out our favorite songs from an artist and add them to our digital collection. It is another way of transcending genre boundaries. The experience of TSOAF might be incomplete in Balling's opinion, if an individual were to pick and choose songs from an album. But to me, I think the experience is just as complete, and much more individualized, by adding certain songs to my personal collection. Balling's genius primarily stems from his organization of different sounds in order to create a mood. Well, hey, that's where a lot of my generation's genius comes from, too. All of the playlists, all of the remixes, that people in the digital age create - it's a reflection of this generation's cultural knowledge and experiences. I just can't see it as a modge-podge, a random collection of good grooves. We do interact with music on a very personal level, but today, it's much more about the songs we relate with than the artists we (or rather, society) prefer.
Creative Commons Activists:
But what if TSOAF had just dumped its artwork into the grounds of the Creative Commons? On the one hand, chances are there would be much less awareness of the group. One of the reasons for switching record labels so frequently was to reach a larger audience. Although there is definitely a growing movement for more resources in the Creative Commons, people are still more likely to prefer what's considered popular. The Creative Commons, at least at the moment, is more a place for amateurs looking to get popular. It's a sampling space. On the other hand, the reissue of the first album, including remixes of TSOAF by different bands, shows quite clearly that members of TSOAF have no qualms with forever letting the work be an ongoing process.
"Good music often cannot be heard if people don’t rise up in defense of good artists. The money making machine has been in control of what music gets out. But today, artists and fans are fed up. The elite record labels are overthrown. They have no respect anymore. They are only after making the almighty buck. They care nothing about music. We, the artists, are sticking it to them. They have no authority over the artist anymore. They will not control the release of good music anymore. They rarely put out good music. The record company is irrelevant and outdated. The revolution is upon us. The fearful status quo thinking of the record company suits is over. We, the artists, have taken charge. There ARE many alternatives to getting the music out there. There is a free culture movement going on. Artists are starting to give their music away. I have done this. The bottom line is to have the music heard." - Jim Guittard
But maybe the Creative Commons isn't the best resource for rising bands. That's not to say it's an unnecessary resource for the public. But Balling began TSOAF with an independent label, and switched labels due to financial struggles. Such is life. However, sticking with independent labels would very likely accomplish just what Guittard envisions - an artist's full control over his own work
Sources:
Epitaph Records - http://www.epitaph.com/artists/album/530/The_Ocean_And_The_Sun
Midget - http://www.rockmidgets.com/features.php?page=3&id=1589
Stereo Subversion - http://stereosubversion.com/interviews/the-sound-of-animals-fighting
Guittard - http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Case_Studies/Jim_Guittard
Epitaph Records - http://www.epitaph.com/artists/album/530/The_Ocean_And_The_Sun
Midget - http://www.rockmidgets.com/features.php?page=3&id=1589
Stereo Subversion - http://stereosubversion.com/interviews/the-sound-of-animals-fighting
Guittard - http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Case_Studies/Jim_Guittard
No comments:
Post a Comment