I think it also boils down to the intention when making the track too. If I'm gonna make a track "for" a label, then I should be willing to work with the label on fine tuning it to their liking etc.
However, if a label contacts an artist asking about a track they heard on SoundCloud that they wanna put out "but" they'd like him to change this or that, then it's much more in the artist's favor whether or not he wants to change it (any changes are more of a favor than an obligation). On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Kevin Kennedy <the...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, @ Andrew: this is NOT regarding a specific situation. I am > curious as to the thoughts, feelings of others on this subject...just > opening up a discussion since there are a bunch of us artist types on > this list...I felt like since we were going retro on the 313 list this > week, I'd bring up a 'would you rather' type of question...just to add > to all of our activity:) > > > @Joe: Well put. > > @ Jason: Well said as well...I tend to agree with this > sentiment...however, I feel like there are times that change can be > good since many of us as artists tend to isolate rather than explore. > > > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Jason Kenjar <jasonk1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> im a FIRM believer that the artist primary concer is to >> satisfy themselves. if others like it great! if not then they be damned. >> >> of course this kind thinking is not for marketing purposes. >> >> On Sep 3, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Kevin Kennedy <the...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Should an artist, working with a label (who may or may not pay them) >>> revise a tune that they (the artist) consider a 'complete' work? And >>> if so, how far _should_ an artist compromise in order to satisfy the >>> desires of a label? >>> >>> Curious to see your answers 313ers! >>> >>> >>> -- >>> fbk >>> >>> sleepengineering/absoloop US >> > > > > -- > fbk > > sleepengineering/absoloop US >
