New Rick Beato video on GNR

[Billy Cundy]

2 hours ago, IzzysMissy said:

This is a very Advanced Music Industry analysis and I applaud you. Agreed on all the points as well. I’ve literally never heard of Beato until the last few mins of reading this thread btw, and literally laugh out loud every time ANY band/label/mgmt company goes after content being used for exposure. Dealing with legacy acts on any level or form is like… yelling at clouds..

Thanks. I know, it does seem petty for these already wealthy dinosaur bands and labels to go after content creators, especially if the content is promoting the band and legacy… but, my point is, the artists that created the music and the labels that have funded the production deserve final say. And the move towards people feeling entitled to using someone else’s music for their own purposes (and personal gain), even if it is to promote it in some way, is troubling - music shouldn’t be so devalued that it just becomes public property for everyone to use as they wish. Call me a ‘sycophant’ if you want but that kind of thinking has led to the financial ruin of the biz.

 

part of me thinks Pandora’s box has already been opened and we should just accept it, but then I do primarily think… good for Guns. Good for Don Henley. 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Billy Cundy

[Voodoochild]

6 hours ago, Billy Cundy said:

Labels were just banks who’d loan/invest in artists, and lend enough money to produce a product. Yeah it wasn’t perfect, but when every fucker was dropping £10 on a record, they made enough money to send artists to amazing studios, and pair them with brilliant producers, engineers and other creatives. Quincy Jones had the budget to call David Paich, Greg Phillinganes, and Steve Lukather - he could pay them to get ‘em into the studio and help record Thriller. Then he could pay a genius like Bruce Swidene to engineer it. Those days are gone. 
 

They also made enough money to take risks on lunatics like GNR if they saw potential. NOW - you have to either look like Dua Lipa or be crushingly obedient and ‘safe’ before a label will even drop a penny on you… they just don’t have the money to take a risk. And even if you do look like Harry Styles, your first song has to be a hit - or you’re out. 
 

people get through the net - Haim, 1975, Wet Leg, Royal Blood etc…. But they aren't invested in the same way, they’re destined to tour incessantly to make any cash. 
 

The ‘evil label’ model allowed for a band like Steely Dan to create some of the most jaw dropping pop music ever committed to tape, played by the most jaw dropping musicians, without ever needing them to tour. Those days are over.
 

PS.. I have also had a cover of Hotel California taken down by YouTube. I spent ages getting two good takes, editing a splitscreen.. and it got taken down.  I didn’t intend to profit on it… BUT ITS NOT MY SONG. Not gonna be butt hurt when I have no real claim to it.

Commercial DJs pay a PPI fee/license so don would be  compensated. As he should be. 
 

Even if Beato’s cork sniffing has a positive effect on a band’s legacy (though I don’t think the Fuckin’ Beatles have much to worry about), I can’t help feel some of his content sucks the magic out of it. I do appreciate the interviews, I hope he carries on down that route… but I used to love pouring thru magazines to find tidbits about the amps used, fiddling on my amp to get the tones right, listening to the albums on repeat… Beato lays it all on plate for you and strips it bare. And then bitches if he can’t get what he wants. Is this concern for an artists legacy, or a content creator being aware that properties like the Beatles and GNR will generate massive viewership? Maybe I’m being a bit cynical but business is business after all. 
 

I think we are just of differing opinions on this. I see what you’re saying - but as I said.. criticising artists and labels for not ‘getting with the times’ has lead to streaming, and streaming, whilst good for the listener, has irreversibly stripped budgets for A&R and recording, and subsequently made labels more risk averse… meaning there is talent out there who will never achieve the potential they may have been afforded under the old regime. 

Again, if it's just a cover, shouldn't be that fair use? Would you feel the same if somehow you couldn't even perform Hotel California in a live set?

I mean, sure it is their music, but why does it have to be so anal about it? It's not like those days would come back if they act so protective at the point of getting a bad rep with all this corporate mindset of protecting the minimal level of revenue (which is questionable, as it does harm their streaming numbers).

Several others achieved legendary status with regular people - AFD, Nevermind etc. But pop music will always be about looks and safety. That didn't change at all.  And well, Thriller was an once in a lifetime album with top tier people, but only made possible after MJ several years of top hits with either J5 and as a solo artist. That wasn't for everyone.

[Billy Cundy]

8 minutes ago, Voodoochild said:

Again, if it's just a cover, shouldn't be that fair use? Would you feel the same if somehow you couldn't even perform Hotel California in a live set?

I mean, sure it is their music, but why does it have to be so anal about it? It's not like those days would come back if they act so protective at the point of getting a bad rep with all this corporate mindset of protecting the minimal level of revenue (which is questionable, as it does harm their streaming numbers).

Several others achieved legendary status with regular people - AFD, Nevermind etc. But pop music will always be about looks and safety. That didn't change at all.  And well, Thriller was a once in a lifetime album with top tier people, but only made possible after MJ several years of top hits with either J5 and as a solo artist. That wasn't for everyone.

Regardless of how I feel about not being able to play I song I love, in any context, it is superseded by my belief that music shouldn’t be public property, because artists and the labels who made the initial investment deserve to be paid fairly for their work in all capacities. 

I don’t agree with your ‘well, it’s already fucked so let’s carry on devaluing it.

Regarding AFD and Nevermind… what do you mean by ‘regular people’? My point was exactly that - these guys - Nirvana, GNR.. they weren’t typical squeaky clean pop stars, but because Geffen had the money (from physical record sale profits) to pay A&R men like zutaut to find these outliers and take a huge risk by in investing in them, paying for pros like Mike Clink, Mike Barbeiro, Steve Thompson to work on their albums and sticking them in a pro studio like Rumbo, they were able to create something of immense quality. 

That ‘corporate mindset’ gave us phenomenal music. The democratisation of music and the stripping of the financial incentive has given us what? Bedroom musicians home brewing albums and never achieving their potential? Releasing albums just to justify the Punishing touring, the last means of making any money? Record companies being far far more risk averse than they ever were? 
 

Give me the greedy corporate 70s, 80s and 90s any day. 

[Voodoochild]

18 minutes ago, Billy Cundy said:

Regardless of how I feel about not being able to play I song I love, in any context, it is superseded by my belief that music shouldn’t be public property, because artists and the labels who made the initial investment deserve to be paid fairly for their work in all capacities. 

I don’t agree with your ‘well, it’s already fucked so let’s carry on devaluing it.

Regarding AFD and Nevermind… what do you mean by ‘regular people’? My point was exactly that - these guys - Nirvana, GNR.. they weren’t typical squeaky clean pop stars, but because Geffen had the money (from physical record sale profits) to pay A&R men like zutaut to find these outliers and take a huge risk by in investing in them, paying for pros like Mike Clink, Mike Barbeiro, Steve Thompson to work on their albums and sticking them in a pro studio like Rumbo, they were able to create something of immense quality. 

That ‘corporate mindset’ gave us phenomenal music. The democratisation of music and the stripping of the financial incentive has given us what? Bedroom musicians home brewing albums and never achieving their potential? Releasing albums just to justify the Punishing touring, the last means of making any money? Record companies being far far more risk averse than they ever were? 
 

Give me the greedy corporate 70s, 80s and 90s any day. 

Nobody is saying that music should be public property. I must insist: it falls under the fair use category. It's not taking profit from anyone. And it's not devaluating either, kinda the opposite - like I said, it can affect the streaming numbers for the better. 

I meant "regular people" like Mike Clink, or Butch Vig. They had their thing and were indeed pros, but were not superstars from the music production until then. The risk Geffen took was overset by several other contracts that didn't get the same attention. They literally signed dozens of bands just to see if at least one would be good enough, than fucked the other ones with restrictive contracts. Hendrix had to deal with this kind of shit. Prince too. Even Guns with Chinese - it had so many stakes and interference from the label that its release was butchered by everyone, including Axl. 

What gave us phenomenal music were the artists. I still listen to several new artists now who just don't care to oblige to all the bullshit. They are not mega stars and they don't intend to be. As a musician, I'm sure you know it is highly possible to make great music in a bedroom without huge egos gatekeeping everything. 

[Billy Cundy]

59 minutes ago, Voodoochild said:

Nobody is saying that music should be public property. I must insist: it falls under the fair use category. It's not taking profit from anyone. And it's not devaluating either, kinda the opposite - like I said, it can affect the streaming numbers for the better. 

I meant "regular people" like Mike Clink, or Butch Vig. They had their thing and were indeed pros, but were not superstars from the music production until then. The risk Geffen took was overset by several other contracts that didn't get the same attention. They literally signed dozens of bands just to see if at least one would be good enough, than fucked the other ones with restrictive contracts. Hendrix had to deal with this kind of shit. Prince too. Even Guns with Chinese - it had so many stakes and interference from the label that its release was butchered by everyone, including Axl. 

What gave us phenomenal music were the artists. I still listen to several new artists now who just don't care to oblige to all the bullshit. They are not mega stars and they don't intend to be. As a musician, I'm sure you know it is highly possible to make great music in a bedroom without huge egos gatekeeping everything. 

As a musician, no - I am a firm believer of ‘alone faster, together further’. Give me a collaboration of people in a wonderful studio like Rockfield or Electric Ladyland or wherever over the sad state of home production any day. Just my taste. I still marvel at Bonham and Glyn John’s drum sound after 3 billion listens. It’s hard to be inspired when I hear the same drum sample pack /amp sim I use on a track i hear by another bedroom musician. 

Artists WITH producers and engineers gave us incredible music. Van Halen wouldn’t have been the band we know today without Ted Templeman/Don Landee. Same goes to George Martin and Geoff Emerik with Beatles. Same goes for Quincy, Butch Vig, Tony Visconti… All of them. You can not underestimate their input.
 

musicians nowadays have to be their own producers, engineers social media managers, booking agents… you can only spin so many plates before something suffers.. and it’s normally the music. You won’t convince me I’m afraid. When the industry was booming, artists were afforded higher budgets which generated higher quality output.

Bring back the Gatekeepers.. I’d rather be paying for quality than drowning in free shit. 

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Billy Cundy

[axlsalinger]

3 hours ago, Billy Cundy said:

Regardless of how I feel about not being able to play I song I love, in any context, it is superseded by my belief that music shouldn’t be public property, because artists and the labels who made the initial investment deserve to be paid fairly for their work in all capacities. 

Again, all they need to do is what most other bands are doing. Have the video de-monetized when their song is used, and get the ad revenue from the video. 

The internet has completely changed many things in society, a lot greatly improved, some completely destroyed. But no matter how angry it makes Don Henley, it ain't never going back. The music industry and newspapers took huge blows, no doubt.

Most of the things you're complaining about have nothing to do with YouTube anyway. I'd love to see bands work in a proper studio with producers again too, but on the flip side it's way easier and cheaper to record now than it ever was back then. 

You standing outside a newspaper office holding up a ghetto blaster isn't going to bring newspapers back into your arms either. 

And the whole "gatekeeper" thing was total bullshit, anyway.

[Voodoochild]

2 hours ago, Billy Cundy said:

As a musician, no - I am a firm believer of ‘alone faster, together further’. Give me a collaboration of people in a wonderful studio like Rockfield or Electric Ladyland or wherever over the sad state of home production any day. Just my taste. I still marvel at Bonham and Glyn John’s drum sound after 3 billion listens. It’s hard to be inspired when I hear the same drum sample pack /amp sim I use on a track i hear by another bedroom musician. 

Artists WITH producers and engineers gave us incredible music. Van Halen wouldn’t have been the band we know today without Ted Templeman/Don Landee. Same goes to George Martin and Geoff Emerik with Beatles. Same goes for Quincy, Butch Vig, Tony Visconti… All of them. You can not underestimate their input.
 

musicians nowadays have to be their own producers, engineers social media managers, booking agents… you can only spin so many plates before something suffers.. and it’s normally the music. You won’t convince me I’m afraid. When the industry was booming, artists were afforded higher budgets which generated higher quality output.

Bring back the Gatekeepers.. I’d rather be paying for quality than drowning in free shit. 

 

Im not underestimating producers, mixers and engineers. That's actually why I watch Rick Beato's videos, I like to learn as much as I can about it even tho I know jackshit about theory. I'd love to have an in-depth look at all the GNR albums with people who worked on it. And that won't happen because nobody can play the actual songs. 

But it's just a lot easier - and cheaper - to have a lot of premium sound even for small/medium studios. Nobody is gonna dismiss how Pro Tools made the recording a lot faster and easier. It's a lot more freedom to get creative. You can still be contrived to some limitations if you want to, just like Slash did with his latest album. And yeah, you can still record in those wonderful studios all you want. Agree about the drums, though. 

You can still pay for those gatekeepers if you want to. They will still use algorithms and recommend label-payed shit anyways. And the old bands won't be getting a piece of that because they refuse to stay relevant somehow.