To reply to this message thread, or to create a new topic, send E-mail to:VegaNet@aol.com

Editor: Unique212@aol.com

Subj. My opinions From: John Cooperider (coop@ctol.net) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 18:17:58 -0400 Well, I have been listening to Nine non stop since I got a CD that would open ;) As I listen to some of the songs I keep thinking of the musical similarities I hear. Please understand that these opinions are entirely my own. This is how I listen to music, you see. "Casual Match" sounds dead on like a Talking Heads song to me. I can just hear David Byrne singing this one. "Lolita" has a sound reminiscent of the Police (in my opinion) The percussion in the beginning sounds VERY similar to "Walking in your Footsteps" from Syncronicity "My Favorite Plum" has a sound and feel that reminds me alot of Portishead. Not quite as depressing though... :) And for those who are still reading, my favorite songs on the CD are Birth-day, WBC, and Stockings, but these are bound to change as I listen. My least favorites are the ones with music by Mitchell (Hmmm, sorry Mitchell, they are starting to grow on me.), but I really like the whole album. The concert this month will probably affect these picks. My favorite CD is still Days of Open Hand...for now. Just a side note, is anyone else feeling that this is the last shot with A&M records? It just seems like if "Nine" not a really big commercial success Suzanne might not get that much support, ala the shortened Days Tour. Just a thought... John Connecticut Re: My opinions and NEW Website Video Anonymous@aol.com Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:05:28 -0400 Hi! New video clip on the website - it's the Tom's Diner DNA remix. Check it out: http://www.vega.net. Thanks again to Neil, for creating the clip, and also to John Giannandrea at meer.net for hosting the site for these past 20 months - access lately has been very heavy! In a message dated 96-10-02 18:20:53 EDT, John Coop. writes: << Just a side note, is anyone else feeling that this is the last shot with A&M records? It just seems like if "Nine" not a really big commercial success Suzanne might not get that much support, ala the shortened Days Tour. Just a thought... >> I don't see much support *now*, at least not in the states! I have yet to hear a single SV song on the radio or see a video. And then there's the tour - folks have written in saying that SV's popular on this or that *college* radio station, yet the tour doesn't hit a single college! All of A&M's SV info on their website comes from links to our site. Judging from the website stats, a large % of visitors come from ".edu" domains, which means educational institutions: colleges, universities, high schools, etc. Sure, this isn't going to mirror exactly SV's 'real life' audience, since it is a % of those that are net-connected, but it is true that many students are fans, or many fans are students. Looking at the tour dates, it seems like most of the shows are the 21-and-over 250-400 seat deals. These seem to be the same venues that all the 'folkies' play - check out the tours of other 'folkie' artists, and you'll see these same venues popping up again and again. On the tour discussion: only going to markets where Suzanne has done well historically - In my opinion, _Solitude Standing_ and 9OOD are two completely different products, and, excluding the die-hard Vega fans, probably would attract different audiences. So, for me, what's happening in the US is preaching to the converted.. I still think that not playing or doing promo in Florida, Texas, Louisiana, etc., creates a self-fulfilling prophecy for limited sales. Then again, I'm not laying out the money to try and sell recordings. Suzanne has said that the next album is going to be a retrospective, so maybe that will end things at A&M. Maybe that's a good thing? My own observations and opinions, maybe I'm right, maybe not.., Re: My opinions and NEW Website Video Unique212@aol.com Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:30:36 -0400 It was written: << Suzanne has said that the next album is going to be a retrospective, so maybe that will end things at A&M. Maybe that's a good thing? >> Well, maybe not. Don't forget that A&M has a reputation for being an "artists' label," allegedly standing behind those who are not platinum sellers with each release. They were the last of the major independent labels. Now, maybe that emphasis has changed since they were swallowed up by Polygram, but if A&M decides to drop her (perish the thought!) where will she go? To some small outfit like Rounder or Plump or Palmetto? Not bloodly likely. A&M, if you are listening, TAKE YOUR TIME AND WAIT UNTIL THIS TOUR IS THROUGH TO MAKE A DECISION!!!!! U212 Re: My opinions and NEW Website Video Anonymous@aol.com Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:56:56 -0400 In a message dated 96-10-02 20:41:18 EDT, Unique212 writes: << Well, maybe not. Don't forget that A&M has a reputation for being an "artists' label," allegedly standing behind those who are not platinum sellers with each release >> Yes, I've heard that said, but the point I was trying to make was that it doesn't seem to me like there *is* much support. I guess that's what you meant with 'allegedly.' Perhaps a different major label would do a better job? What's the point of working for a major 'artists' label, if you can't get the songs played on the radio, videos on the tube, book a 'vanilla' tour to cities that shut out most college students, and most of the country, etc.... Did anyone outside of NYC or LA hear "Caramel" on any radio station? "NCT?" I still have never heard anything from this album on any radio station, in NYC or Florida. My friends in Minneapolis, Milwaukee and Austin haven't heard a peep either. See ya, Subj: My opinion From: John Cooperider Date: October 3, 1996 Well, I was trying to hold back, but I think you are exactly right. A&M has basically set this album up to fail. I am really glad that Suzanne is coming near me this time around because I bet A&M will not put on a really extensive tour. (Sorry everyone who can't get to see her this time around.) There have been a few smaller selling folkie types who have had trouble with labels. John Wesley Harding was on Sire/Reprise and got no promo help from them, so he switched to Rhino who had done a great job re-issuing his first album. Another dropped by Reprise is Luka Bloom, who in MY opinion is one of the most brilliant singer/songwriters around. Moral: Suzanne should definitely NOT go to Reprise... I have done MY part at least. I am a DJ at the local college station and featured 9od last week (and probably quite a bit for a while) I played Birth-day, Stockings, and WBC. I think that this area is going to be hearing a little bit every week. :) Glad I could stir things up in here... hehe John C (who can hear the A&M exec saying "Can't you just make an album like Sheryl Crow or Alanis???") Connecticut From: D Andrew Reynhout (reynhout@milkcrate.com) Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 03:26:57 -0400 Re: "My opinions" Unique212@aol.com wrote: > > It is written: > > << Suzanne has said that the next album is going to be a > << retrospective, so maybe that will end things at A&M. > << Maybe that's a good thing? > > Well, maybe not. Don't forget that A&M has a reputation for being > an "artists' label," allegedly standing behind those who are not > platinum sellers with each release. They were the last of the > major independent labels. Now, maybe that emphasis has changed > since they were swallowed up by Polygram, but if A&M decides to > drop her (perish the thought!) where will she go? To some small > outfit like Rounder or Plump or Palmetto? Not bloodly likely. John Cooperider > >Well, I was trying to hold back, but I think you are exactly right. >A&M has basically set this album up to fail. Aiigh. I can't believe I'm reading this. I normally am more than happy to lurk in a list, but you folks are soo far off that I can't resist being archived as the person who made sense. (Them's fightin' words! :-) FIRST: I don't know anything about SV's intentions regarding releasing a retrospective. Logic tells me it doesn't make much sense unless this record really takes off, because as far as the unenlightened masses are concerned, she's only had three songs, and only one of them was a hit. You all know which songs I'm talking about. SECOND: It is to A&M's credit that she is still putting records out on A&M. While their marketing has been less than stellar, she hasn't made any money for them in ten years, and most labels wouldn't wait that long. I think she needs to find a better home, because A&M doesn't know what to do with her. She's a tough one to pigeonhole, and the music industry is made up of differently sized pigeonholes. If you don't fit, you don't make enough money to support the overhead of a major label. Period. It's neither good nor bad. It just is. Major labels like large companies are good at doing the same thing over and over. They're not good at recognizing when a special circumstance would make a different course of action preferable. Other difficult-to-market artists are realizing this and making the switch: some to smaller labels; the more adventurous are doing it themselves (Jane Siberry, Throwing Muses, Kelley Deal). Some have known this all along and told the majors to exploit someone else (Ani DiFranco). THIRD: If it becomes necessary or desireable (or possible, given the nature of contracts these days) for SV to find a new home, she would be doing extremely well to work with the folks at Rounder, and anyone here with a shred of pretense to artistic integrity should realize that. Rounder is as good as labels get, and they're no slouch at the cash register either. It would be an even trade: SV would bring a impeccable name to Rounder's roster, and Rounder would bring impeccable credibility to the promotion of anything she released. FOURTH: A&M setting up a record to fail?!? I'm sure you mean it in the sense of not knowing enough to do things right, rather than in the sense of sabotaging. You may be correct; Her A&R people probably feel helpless, because they can't help her (and themselves.) You have to realize the insidious nature of comm- ercial radio to fully appreciate how difficult this is. "Luka" didn't happen overnight, and it's not even one of her better songs. She expected "Left of Center" to happen in a bigger way than "Luka", and it should have except that radio wasn't ready for it. (Wanna talk about A&M not trying hard enough?? Joe Jackson and John Hughes?? I know, that was ten years ago also, but that sort of stuff doesn't happen by accident.) We're not talking about how good the records are, we're talking about how radio-friendly they are. Some would say that these are diametrical opposites, but I don't agree. She hasn't had a viable radio single in ten years, no matter how hard A&M might or might not have tried. "Book of Dreams"?!? Radio tried to play it, but they couldn't do anything with it; it wasn't good enough to over- come the distance in time since "Luka". _99.9F_ was an ambitious risk that came very close but didn't quite gel as an album, but as singles came off really weakly. _9OoD_ shows that she is (finally) comfortable with her medium (again). She develops a few of her attempts on _99.9F_, but she does it perfectly...comfortably. But it's been TEN (nine) years since _Solitude_. If this record happens, it will rightly (from commercial viewpoints) be called her comeback record. This record DESERVES to happen. She has at least three viable radio singles on this record, and they're all high quality songs to boot. It will take time for radio to take the "chance" on her, because she doesn't have a good radio track record (somebody ask me some time to tell you how much I loathe commercial radio :-) but I have to cling to the ideal that the songs will speak for themselves (as, unfortunately, the last ones did.) If this record is unsuccessful, it *will* be A&M's fault, either by picking the wrong singles (sound stupid? It is.) or by not promoting past the initial resistance which WILL be there. The record has been out in the US for two weeks. Anyone remember how long it took for "Luka" make the top 100? But I still believe that she'd be happier on a smaller label where she can get flexible and creative promotion for her records. I really don't think she has any desire to be Alanis ("I'd rather be without you than be anything like her..." -Softies) so I think she'd be happier working for people who wouldn't want her to be Alanis. Sigh. OK, I can sleep now. Apologies to a string of English teachers who did their best, but would probably never sleep again if they could read this. :-) -- D Andrew Reynhout reynhout@ubernet.com "You've got your whole life to do something, reynhout@milkcrate.com and that's not very long..." -ani difranco ..support independent radio and music (and UNIX contractors :-).. Re: My opinions Robert King (bobking@gate.net) Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:58:40 -0400 (EDT) Gosh, with all the career advice flying around here, I'm sorry I didn't come to the list when I was undecided about switching jobs a few weeks ago. Seriously, we sound like a bunch of jealous suitors: Nobody else is good enough for our Suzy! First of all, I seem to recall that signing Suzanne at A&M was controversial among many of the company's execs, who predicted she'd sell something like 50,000 copies. Her first album sold 10 times that many, if I'm not mistaken, so I think those who supported her were vindicated. Yeah, that was a decade ago, but still ... Second, I didn't think that record companies actually lost money on their artists except by paying them ridiculously high advances, which I can't believe applies in this case. Don't the musicians end up paying for _all_ the costs of recording, distributing, touring, etc. by having them deducted from their royalties? I've heard musicians on another list bemoaning the fact that record companies are unique in being able to profit from a product they don't pay to create. Third, I thought 99.9F was fairly well promoted, at least from the standpoint of seeing that eye-catching poster _everywhere_ I went. Does A&M still have its reputation as an artists' label? I think it was after the Polygram buyout that the label decided to stop promoting Days, even though the executives said they loved it to pieces, which shows you the kind of commitment the new regime had to supporting art they believed in. Not that that's surprising from the recording industry. Not everybody who's signed to a major label goes quadruple-platinum, and not everybody who fails to sell at that level gets dropped. (Anyone check Laurie Anderson's sales figures lately? How's PJ Harvey doing?) They do seem to drop people who they spend insane amounts of money on, expecting an instant hit, only to be disappointed. They should know enough to not expect instant anything out of Suzanne, just consistent high quality that will appeal to a certain segment of the consumer base, absent miracles like "Luka." Labels seem to keep some artists solely for the prestige they bring (in this respect a Grammy nomination would help, though normally I find those kind of appalling. So will that NYT article.) The bad part is that low expectations may be dictating this low-expectation marketing strategy, which both can become a self-fulfilling prophecy and deprive many of us loyal fans of a chance to see her perform. Hey, starting in the low 90s isn't that bad. We had a band in Tampa that got signed to Polygram with much local fanfare a year ago, only to have its album sell something like 1,000 copies (according to Soundscan, which is probably a 4-to-1 understatement). They didn't much appreciate it when I suggested that they declare it a limited edition. Anyway, enough of me rambling on about stuff I know nothing about. I think Suzanne will be able to guide her career, though I'm sure she's glad we care. Whatever. -- Bob, not sure what I think anymore P.S. I'm consistently struck by how international this list is. I can't think of another one I'm on (which is a lot) that has so many people outside North America. Keep it up! Re: My opinions David Algranti (algranti@club-internet.fr) Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:47:51 +0200 (MET DST) Did it never occur to you that Suzanne might want it that way? In the French interview I told you about yesterday, she tells how happy she is to be able to walk in the street without being recognized. People know her name but not her face, and lately in a shop she was paying with a credit card and the sellor told her "do you know that a famous singer is called just like you?". Suzanne is one of the very few artists who can sell millions of records and keep a very quiet life (public-wise). And anyway, A&M's decision to release 9OOD in January so that it doesn't compete with Sheryl Crow shows that they really want to give Suzanne a chance. And I don't agree that she's not bringing A&M any money. I'm sure that 'Luka' only is still regularly bringing them and her money. It still gets regular airplay in Europe (at least in France). And maybe that the making of 9OOD didn't cost them much, because MF probably has its own studios and A&M may only distribute the album. I don't know nothing about home-studio-recordings, but have you noticed that 9OOD is only a AAD album, whereas most of the new albums are DDD? Oh, yes and one last thing: USA are not the world. 'Book Of Dreams' remained in Top 50 for a long time in France for example. I guess that the USA are so huge a market that it's always tough to deal with it (that's why they threw Tori Amos away to the UK in 1992) David. Label discussion Sawyer, Keith (Keith.Sawyer@FMR.Com) Thu, 03 Oct 1996 10:15 -0400 (EDT) Unique212 wrote: >Well, maybe not. Don't forget that A&M has a reputation for being an >"artists' label," allegedly standing behind those who are not platinum >sellers with each release At one time that was true, but not anymore. As I mentioned a little while ago, A&M has recently ditched several acts (Robyn Hitchcock, Soul Asylum, Swervedriver, The Blue Nile) that garnered critical praise but weren't adding *huge* profits. A&M seems to be more interested in creating those potential big sellers, like Sheryl Crow (who now is big) or DelAmitri (who they're trying to make big). Suzanne and other A&M bands (i.e. The Innocence Mission) that have not sold amazing units recently should worry. A guy wrote: >I don't see much support *now*, at least not in the states! I have yet to >hear a single SV song on the radio or see a video. And then there's the >tour- folks have written in saying that SV's popular on this or that *college* >radio station, yet the tour doesn't hit a single college! All of A&M's SV >info on their website comes from links to our site. >Looking at the tour dates, it seems like most of the shows are the 21-and-over >250-400 seat deals. and John C added... >Well, I was trying to hold back, but I think you are exactly right. A&M >has basically set this album up to fail. I am really glad that Suzanne is >coming near me this time around because I bet A&M will not put on a really >extensive tour. (Sorry everyone who can't get to see her this time >around.) I don't think they're 'setting it up to fail.' They did spring for the promotional jaunt through the radio stations and record stores, they are supporting the tour, they did get her on Letterman, they did get her on a couple of soundtracks. However, I don't think A&M is pushing it too *enthusiastically,* it's more like going through the motions. They have not tried to move the single or the video in a major way. If the video is on VH1 that's good ... but it doesn't seem to be in any kind of rotation. A&M is doing as much as they have to do to justify that they did not abandon her, and they're hoping in the process to get lucky with a hit. But with each Suzanne release her 'hit' potential declines. As D Andrew pointed out, they are not going to stick it out - they're not in business to push promo money towards something that probably won't go big when they can push it towards something like Sheryl that will. Backwards logic I know, but that's how they keep their jobs - with successes not failures. The intial SoundScan positions of #92 and #108 back them up. Looking at it objectively, the album does not exactly have viable commercial potential. It doesn't have easy-to-understand sexually explicit lyrics filled with some sort of coy come-on or diluted rage. It doesn't have yowling guitars and easy-to-follow beats. And it doesn't have an incredibly gorgeous Babewatch babe singing. You seem to need those to be one of the big sellers like Alanis, No Doubt, Poe, Tori Amos, Donna Lewis, etc. I realize there are other female artists making it out there as well, but it seems like you need a lucky hit (i.e. Tracy Champman) to pull it off. Here's to hoping Suzanne gets another one. The tour does hit some college towns (though not college campuses) - look at the Eastern swing in VT, the 2 MA venues and RI - all areas with large college populations. At the Boston in-store there was a heavy college-age slant to the crowd. And at least with these eastern dates the venues are significantly larger than 400 seats ... hey, she's playing the Irving Plaza, *not* the Bottom Line! David says: >Did it never occur to you that Suzanne might want it that way? D Andrew Reynhout points out: >THIRD: If it becomes necessary or desireable (or possible, given >the nature of contracts these days) for SV to find a new home, >she would be doing extremely well to work with the folks at >Rounder, and anyone here with a shred of pretense to artistic >integrity should realize that. Far be it from me to argue with a Softies fan :) - but a indy is not what Suzanne needs. She won't get the press, the distribution, or the tours. Sure, Rounder (or someone like Ryko) has decent distribution, but it's nothing like the pull a major has. While she may not *want* to be super-famous, I'd hope she's at least still looking to expand her audience somewhat aggressively. Switching over to an indie won't do it. I realize it's becoming trendier to make this backwards jump (like the new Throwing Muses record), but that just satisfies current fans without significantly growing the base, which eventually spells doom for most careers. I feel there are still major labels out there willing to support an artist or two without expecting huge profits in return. Within a portfolio of musical artists, someone like Warners or Columbia have shown the willingness to sign a reputation to balance out the one-shot garbage. Their presence can be used to entice other 'hot' artists into signing with the label - those who either have a great deal of respect for Suzanne an or those who assume because Suzanne receives creative flexibility they might also. and David adds: >I guess that the USA are so huge a market that it's always tough to deal >with it (that's why they threw Tori Amos away to the UK in 1992) Well, statistically the U.S. has the greatest potential for sales, so the majors have to focus on it. You can move 4 million units in the U.S. a lot easier than in all of Europe ... I'm speaking just by pure statistics. And Tori was sent to the UK as a test-marketing ploy to try and figure out how to push her in the US. Sometimes I wish she stayed there ... keith keith.sawyer@fmr.com P.S. I don't know if anyone else out there has this problem, but I cannot see who the 'sender' is of an Undertow message. All I see is 'owner-undertow' ... if the message is not signed I have no idea who wrote it. So I can't 'cc:' people I quote ... sorry! Re: Label discussion Rob Walters (rwalters@lafayette.unocal.com) Thu, 3 Oct 1996 11:28:03 -0500 Hello everyone, I too was going to stay out of this, since it's really just speculation on our part, but I'll add my 2 cents anyway. Keith Sawyer wrote: >Suzanne and other A&M bands (i.e. The >Innocence Mission) that have not sold amazing units recently should worry. I hope you're wrong, but I have a feeling you're not. Innocence Mission, eh? Good taste! Anyone else think 'Glow' was their best yet? I'll admit though, that Karen Peris' voice gets a bit grating after about 10 songs. >I don't think they're 'setting it up to fail.' They did spring for the >promotional jaunt through the radio stations and record stores, they are >supporting the tour, they did get her on Letterman, they did get her on a >couple of soundtracks. Yes, but it's a short tour, and only in the 'major' markets. If you limit yourself from the beginning, as SV and her management have done (for reasons outlined by Ron Fierstein), to a small tour in hopes that good sales will result in a more extensive tour later on, it's likely that you'll be disappointed. The markets in which she's not touring won't play 9OD much on the radio - I didn't hear it in Dallas when I was there last weekend. A guy wrote: >- folks have written in saying that SV's popular on this or that *college* >radio station, yet the tour doesn't hit a single college! Keith wrote: >The tour does hit some college towns (though not college campuses) - look at >the Eastern swing in VT, the 2 MA venues and RI - Suzanne's kind of caught in the middle on this one. She's got a large enough, and diverse enough, audience to tour extensively worldwide, if she could afford to, but she needs the college/young adult audience to prop up the U.S. fan base. Unfortunately, she can't afford the time and money to travel with a band to these smaller venues. Definitely a dilemma. >Sure, Rounder (or someone like Ryko) has decent distribution, but it's >nothing like the pull a major has. Yes - you beat me to it on making this point. A&M's international distribution network and presence are, I would think, far more extensive than that of a smaller/indie label. >You can move 4 million units in the U.S. a lot >easier than in all of Europe But remember that, like Nanci Griffith and others, SV is more 'popular' in some countries in Europe, etc. than she is in the U.S. - or at least she has a large, committed following in these places that can't be ignored. >it's becoming trendier to make this backwards jump (like the new Throwing >Muses record), but that just satisfies current fans without significantly >growing the base, which eventually spells doom for most careers. Well, hopefully jumping to Ryko won't spell doom for TM. Again, I say, you have good taste! I'm really enjoying 'Limbo' - it's as least as good as 'University,' their final album for Sire/WB. Perhaps Throwing Muses appeals more to the college crowd than Suzanne does? I don't know. -Rob ---------------------------------- rwalters@lafayette.unocal.com *any opinion expressed or information provided is my own and not that of my employer* Re: My Opinion and other unsolicited advice Unique212@aol.com Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:39:35 -0400 Hi folks, Gosh, look what I started! At least this discussion has brought many knowledgeable people out of deep-lurk mode. Mr. Reynhout, are you in the industry, or do you just play an insider when caught in the Undertow? As for labels keeping people who are prestigious, I hate to bring it up, but look at what happened to Joni. She was about one day away from permanently quitting the business two years ago when she was dropped by Geffen. So let's hope that A&M sees the light and lets 9OD take its full course before leaping to conclusions. I second (or is that third or fourth) Wendy!'s vote for Birth-Day as the next single, because it will really reach the more mainstream rock audience. I have often been fooled into buying CDs on the strength of a decent single only to find the rest of the album is a "sh*t sandwich." If the more rock-oriented audience buys 9OD on the basis of "Birth-Day," they will be getting a wonderful album and a very pleasant surprise. Still reeeling from the sheer volume of correspondence, U212 Re: My opinions (long) D Andrew Reynhout (reynhout@milkcrate.com) Fri, 04 Oct 1996 12:00:37 -0400 Apologies to those who aren't interested in the business side of music, but it is (fortunately or unfortunately) a huge part of it. A guy@aol.com wrote: > Suzanne has spoken about a retrospective following this album > for almost 2 years. Last month she said, "But, I think that there > are a bunch of songs that I had written in my teens that I am > putting on a collection that I'm planning to call 'Odds And Ends,' > that will either be complete early material, or just stuff that's > hard to find, mixed in with older songs." So, that appears to be > the plan. I had read that somewhere -- I think on vega.net. BTW- anyone else make the mistake of typing vega.com?? It's a shock. :-) If this record takes off like it might, A&M should be crying for her to do something like that. Still, is a collection of early/ unreleased/rare stuff properly called a "retrospective"? Either way, no matter what she calls it, I'm looking forward to it! algranti@club-internet.fr (David Algranti) writes: >Oh, yes and one last thing: USA are not the world. 'Book Of Dreams' > remained in Top 50 for a long time in France for example. Yes, guilty as charged. I do forget that SV has a strange popularity outside the USA. Someone else mentioned that this list was oddly international, and so is her fan base. However, as a friend at a UK record distribution company told me recently, "England is a market about the size of Connecticut, but it's the gateway to Europe which is itself only about the size of LA, but we aren't people who invent or watch 'Married with Children'." Tough to argue with that. :-) Robert King writes: > Second, I didn't think that record companies actually lost money > on their artists except by paying them ridiculously high advances, > which I can't believe applies in this case. Don't the musicians > end up paying for _all_ the costs of recording, distributing, > touring, etc. by having them deducted from their royalties? I've > heard musicians on another list bemoaning the fact that record > companies are unique in being able to profit from a product they > don't pay to create. Actually, the problem is that record labels never "lose" money. When an artist signs, they're given an advance against future profits. This pays for recording, new instruments, rent, etc at the band's discretion (with some controls). Furthermore, all promotion costs are considered 100% recoupable. So, the promo person who spent hours on the phone booking SV for the Rosie O'Donnell show was being paid by Suzanne. The cool promo only packaging for _99.9F_, paid for by Suzanne. The more expensive clear CD tray, paid for by Suzanne. Everything. In six to eight months when money starts coming in, it starts to pay off the label's recoupable amount first. THEN, when that's all paid for, the artists (as a whole) get their measly ~10% of the DISTRIBUTOR price (about US$6.50) so with every purchase, the whole band gets ~US$0.65, presumably with most of it going to SV. The number of unit sales necessary before recoup varies tremendously with the amount of promo that goes into it. Some times the label will pay the artist 30% of their normal royalties until recoup (which, obviously, makes the recoup time longer but helps with cash flow.) So, if a label spends money on an artist in any way, the artist owes the money back to the label. Personally and collectively. Many artists spend their careers living reasonably comfortably, but in debt to their labels, and more or less at their mercy. Many more would, except that it's (usually) very profitable to tour. Some artists look at the label contract (and the record) as a big expensive promotion for their tour. "Sawyer, Keith" writes: > Far be it from me to argue with a Softies fan :) - but a indy > is not what Suzanne needs. She won't get the press, the dist- > ribution, or the tours. Sure, Rounder (or someone like Ryko) > has decent distribution, but it's nothing like the pull a major > has. While she may not *want* to be super-famous, I'd hope she's > at least still looking to expand her audience somewhat aggres- > sively. Switching over to an indie won't do it. I realize it's > becoming trendier to make this backwards jump (like the new > Throwing Muses record), but that just satisfies current fans > without significantly growing the base, which eventually spells > doom for most careers. Five years ago, I would definitely have agreed with you. Again, I may be guilty of only considering the USA market, but these days, with the emergence of AAA as a major music format and its position as a big crossover cultivator, I have to disagree. AAA is not afraid of indies like Rounder, Shanachie, Green Linnet, Blue Thumb, etc. The whole The Story/Green Linnet->Elektra; Jonatha/Blue Thumb saga demonstrates my point. How many (non-Boston area) Jonatha Brooke fans were Story fans first? Also, the Melissa Ferrick/ Atlantic->(new indie, I've forgotten) story. (new record out in Jan, btw). Jane Siberry/Duke Street->Windham Hill(!)->Reprise-> Sheeba. Throwing Muses/4AD->4AD&Sire->4AD&WB->4AD&ThrowingMusic& Rykodisc. Brenda Kahn/Community3->Chaos->Sony(almost)->Shanachie. These are not failed artists, they're artists who have realized that major label promotion was costing them a lot of money and not gaining them anything. These are uncommon artists. Not simple enough for lowest common denominator fans and standard packaging. SV is among them. She is bigger than these examples though; it may be true that a smaller indie couldn't do her justice, but they would be able to use new and different channels for promotion, and perhaps do a better job than A&M of expanding her dedicated fan base, if that's the goal. She would probably not get as many impulse sales, but she would recieve more royalties for them. It all depends on how you measure successful promotion. If SV was a folk artist, a la Mark Black, Mary Chapin-Carpenter, etc then major labels would know how to promote her. She isn't. They don't. Someone mentioned Sarah McLachlan as an example of a record that took a long time, but then became enormously popular. That's a perfect example of a major label with a great artist and a great record that eventually figured out how to do the right thing. A&M should raid Arista's promotions department. Or perhaps SV should be talking to the Arista people. :-) Unique212@aol.com writes: > As for labels keeping people who are prestigious, I hate to bring > it up, but look at what happened to Joni. She was about one day > away from permanently quitting the business two years ago when she > was dropped by Geffen. So let's hope that A&M sees the light and > lets 9OD take its full course before leaping to conclusions. Agreed. SV is important to the preservation of A&M's image as an artists' label, but I don't know how important that is to them. And as for this record, I really think they will do the right thing and it will happen. If it doesn't, it will be A&M's fault. If it does, A&M will deserve the rewards for having as much faith in SV as they seem to. I remain optimistic. BTW- as someone else said, I'm sure SV doesn't need our career advice. She's doing quite well on her own. Andrew -- D Andrew Reynhout reynhout@ubernet.com "You've got your whole life to do something, reynhout@milkcrate.com and that's not very long..." -ani difranco Re: My opinions (long) BobandSooz@aol.com Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:39:06 -0400 In a message dated 96-10-04 12:14:12 EDT, you write: << However, as a friend at a UK record distribution company told me recently, "England is a market about the size of Connecticut, but it's the gateway to Europe which is itself only about the size of LA, but we aren't people who invent or watch 'Married with Children'." Tough to argue with that. :-) >> This has nothing to do with SV or the record industry, and God strike me dead if anyone thinks I am defending "Married With Children," (I shudder involuntarily as I type), and I agree with every single thing you said, reynhout@milkcrate, and let me preface my comment by mentioning that I my childhood education was in a commonwealth country, and so I can therefore say this without malice . . . whenever my British friends get self-righteous about the quality of their television programming (and granted, I enjoy PBS broadcasts of BBC productions more than anything else on television), I remind them that they invented "Absolutely Fabulous," and it doesn't get much raunchier or low-brow than that. (I feel a new mission in life -- to stamp out cultural smugness whichever side of the Atlantic it comes from.) Re: My Opinions (long) Unique212@aol.com Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:39:22 -0400 Hi, In his latest message, Andrew Renyhout mentioned a number of artists who had successfully gone from major labels to indie labels. These included: Jonatha and Jennifer, Melissa, Jane, Kristen, Brenda, Mary, and Mary. HEY, ANYBODY NOTICE A PATTERN HERE? OR AM I JUST BEING PARANOID? Later, U212 who cannot believe that at the end of the millenium we are still putting up with this blatant nonsense... Re: My opinions and NEW Website Video Rolf Swadzba (swadzra@uni-muenster.de) Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:47:22 +0200 (MES) On Wed, 2 Oct 1996 A guy@aol.com wrote: > Yes, I've heard that said, but the point I was trying to make was that it > doesn't seem to me like there *is* much support. I guess that's what you > meant with 'allegedly.' Hiyah! regarding record company support, I think that, at least in Germany, the support for this album is bigger than for 99.9. There have been some ads in the bigger and better music papers and I can't remember any for the last album. Concerning videos, the problem nowadays is, that the big music channels here in Germany are quite influential. And obviously there is a kind of favourites list in the headquarters of the broadcasters (at least rumour has it) - and who's not on it isn't played. According to the same rumour, the persons in charge favour videos made by special directors / producers which they will definitely show. Tough luck for others. For example, it's a travesty that they had a special on Suzanne on German VIVA but they didn't even show any clip of NO CHEAP THRILL. Yes, they had bits of CARAMEL (yeah, a video) but leaving the single out cannot help to raise the sales figures. Until today, the single hasn't entered the TOP 100 and the album never made it into the TOP 40, it even dropped a bit in the third week. And I haven't yet seen the video. I'm not sure to what degree the record company might influence the broadcasting of videos, but if they can, they should. Concerning the two tour dates in Germany (and I still hope there will be more), I have never seen any press announcement (maybe there were some in Hamburg and Cologne), not even in the big music magazines. So, yes, support for the album should be bigger. I do have the feeling that the record company still tries to rely on the success of LUKA, a video which has been broadcast recently (what a nonsense, give us the new stuff). And of course, there's TOM'S DINER. Sometimes Suzanne's music seems to be reduced to these two songs in all the press. IMHO, a keen record company should try to put emphasis on the recent records. Probably, 99.9 came as a shock for A&M as they couldn't sell Suzanne as a folk singer anymore after that. I think, the big companies try to follow a certain type scheme, like, we want a folk singer (because it's en-vogue), we want a boy group, we want a grunge band etc. And whoever doesn't fit in isn't supported as much as they could be. I'd really like to know what Suzanne thinks about all this. Is she really happy with her record company's support/PR work? Well, I'm not. On the other hand, I am absolutely happy that Suzanne keeps following her own way and has developed her music through the years. 9OOD is really fantastic. Sorry for this long message! Greetings, Rolf ****There's no such thing as strangers, only friends who've never met.****