Does an 'artist' REALLY HAVE to do it all?

No, but millions of hormonally rampant teens do care.

Britney Spears can’t even sing. But that doesn’t matter. She’s a face/body/hornbucket to be the brand fronting an industry.

Kids aren’t going to buy into the image of a fat balding pop songwriter. but they are goingto buy into thesong if it’s fronted by someone who they either want to insert flower genus here or aspire to.

Shania Twain is another example. She can sing. But ugly woman with a better voice would never have made it to the big time like Shania did.

Ugly woman ends up being a succesful session singer doing backing vocals.

Capitalism ain’t nice. :slight_smile:

Pretty much. They’re selling sex and it sells pretty well. :laughing:

Would anyone in that age group care about Beyonce’ or Brittney or Janet Jackson (when she was selling records) if they looked like Oprah? Would Justin Timberlake (or the Bieber kid that seems to be everywhere at once) be popular if he was fat?

In the olden days (long before us) music was heard and not really seen except in concert so by the time you found out your favorite female singer looked like Ross Perot, you didn’t really care. :laughing: Now you see them often before you hear them and if they’re attractive enough you’ll listen longer.

Like Shakira. I can’t really stand her music but I sure like the way she shakes her booty… so I’d watch her about as long as I’d watch a really great, fat, old jazz singer chick… maybe longer. :mrgreen:

I have to say I don’t need music to like Shakira.

Susan Boyle’s outsold them and she doesn’t roll her own. Explain that babe? :mrgreen:
Painters don’t make their own paint,easels, brushes and canvas. Builders don’t make their own bricks.
You pay for everything, you’ve just got to work out what’s cheapest. Paying with time (to learn all the other jobs) or money on DDIY (Don’t do it yourself).

The top selling artist of all time, Elvis, never wrote a single song.

On the other hand, the second-best selling artist of all time, The Beatles, wrote 99% of everything they did.

Then, the third-best selling artist ever, Michael Jackson, co-wrote a fair amount of his tunes, and did a fair amount of songs others had written.

What am I getting at here? Uh, I don’t know, actually

That’s funny. :laughing: (and informative)

I am without a doubt the least successful singer songwriter guitar playin’ dude of all time, and I do it all. In fact, I just finished cutting and glueing together a CD jacket for my new CD.

Neither do I.
However your input is demonstrably relevant to the topic set, and the exploration cited in the first post.

When exporing the question “Does an ‘artist’ really have to do it all,” it makes sense to take inventory of existing artists through history, and present how much of ‘it’ they have done.
You are adding to a relevant data-pool. The more info, the more conclusions become enriched, and hence more reliable tools for subsequent inquiry.

Your input is a resource when exploring the value judgements implied in the title.

Two value judgements I can, at first glance, see are:
‘It is better to do, or to be able to do it all’
‘one is not an ‘artist’ unless one can do it all’

“Does a builder need to make his own bricks” is, imo, a great foundation question.
I will add the image of DaVinci, who made is own paints,
and also that of Michaelangelo and Dali, who, to manifest their works, handed sketches to assistants, who would do some of the painting.

If I could get Britney, Bieber etc. to record one of my songs it would guarantee an improvement in my bank balance and professional reputation. Sad, innit? :frowning:

The even sadder fact is that if you actually did manage to get one of yous songs recorded and released by one of the above mentioned, the amount of royalties you would get back after the publisher, producers etc had taken their cut would be a mere % of a %

One big trick that the producers do with little known songwriters is to rewrite some of the lyrics… Bang, there goes 50% of a percentage.

The option is take it or leave it.

Then why would anyone even bother? You have control over your songs, unless you have signed that away, and can say “Do it In it’s entirety or nothing.” If they want a (unreasonable) cut you can withdraw your song. It’s your ball. They will try and capitalise on greed and desperation. If you’re not greedy and desperate you can always say no. I rather think practices like this are rare and almost mythical.
A songriting tip is not to be too cheap. If you ask for too little the other guy thinks “If he wants almost nothing then he’ll be happy with actual nothing.” Don’t ask for what you need, ask for what it/you is worth.
If you ask what you’re worth at the correct price the other guy then knows you’re a serious businessman and will not disappear at critical business crossroads and are worth a longer time risk.

And as of oh, about 5 years ago it was already too late to get anything to Britney or Justin Booboo before their careers’ demise.
It’s better to visit kindergartens and listen to the screaming for a few months before picking a promising one out to write songs for in about 2015. Songs about love angst and death should do it.

Well indeed you have the choice, but I know that’s how it works from direct experience, if you want to get a profile and are relatively unknown and a publisher says a major act wants one of your tunes the terms are what they are. There is little room to bargain for a unknown songwriter. The choice, have one of your songs recorded by a major act and get little back but increase your profile or pull the song and stay unknown.

There is little room to bargain for a unknown songwriter.

Should have added “without a clue.” That’s what I meant about greed and desperation. If you want approach something and get a professional fee then you have to approach it in a professional manner.
Do your research find out the going rates. Make your own allowances and negotiate terms. You gamble on each other but the publisher is mostly the better horse. They see thousands of “songwriters” whereas songwriters only see scores of publishers. Work out the math.
If they say that if it sells only a million you’ll only get $300. Then you say but if it sells 1 million and one I want $3million.
The game is SHOW BUSINESS. Not Ivewritnasong anthenicemillionaire will givemealldamoney. :laughing:

I don’t want to argue but publishers have hundreds of small and big time teams writing songs for them, they keep them on the shelf so producers can come along and pick tracks for their artists. If you are lucky enough to have one picked you may well see several thousand pounds back (eventually) but in the great scheme of things it’s not a lot and if you try to get greedy and ask for a better contract you will more than likely get told where to go. Of Course the more you do the better known you are the more you can negotiate.

Uh, there are statutory requirements for recording a person’s song, and they are compulsory, at least in the USA. Typically,a publishing contract will split the royalty 50/50, although many “name” artists negotiate a higher percentage (such as 25/75). Also, in most cases a record company will pay a royalty of 75% the statutory rate if the performer is also the songwriter.

The question to ask is, “Am I better off controlling my own songs and selling 100 copies at $1 each… or sharing control with a publisher and perhaps selling 1 million copies at 4.55 cents a piece?”

if they say that if it sells only a million you’ll only get $300. Then you say but if it sells 1 million and one I want $3million.

If THAT is the deal you negotiate, I guarantee you that the sales of said song will forever be stuck at 999,999 units

I’m talking about writing stock songs for publishers (for which you get a fee) the publisher then tries to get major artists to use them for which you get royalties.

Talking exaggerated figures here. Of course life’s not like that. I haven’t got time to write an online book about it but a short business course should sort anyone out.
Window cleaners have to negotiate these things as well when they grow from doing houses to doing offices and then corporates. They manage.
As I said / meant with the kindergarten thing, you’re not going to go from the bedroom to Britney in a hurry. Start writing for people lower on the ladder and work up slowly. Big bucks that come fast also go fast and when the bucks come slowly they tend to hang around too.
And I can guarantee that nobody can guarantee anything in this world. Stop hitting yourself with negative vibes.
If you start low and you’re good you aren’t gonna be there for ever unless you want to be. But most of the guys I know with just middling deals that they make a decent, but not opulent, living from have to sweat a bit now and again. Sure they get bad deals but they also get some very good ones too. Occasionally they’ll get a big fish but it’s still part of their routine.
The best thing a sonwriter can be is a star spotter because none of the stars I have seen started out thinking they’d be quite as big as they ended up. Ask your publisher who’s just starting at the bottom of their heap and write songs for them.

:mrgreen: :smiling_imp: She’s had that seat stolen at least four times. Though I think she gave it away the last time as it was so much fun on the way home. :laughing:

Oh well, if all attempts at becoming a successful songwriter fail then I recommend making a pair of Wah-Wah boots :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

If you end up getting somw songs on a big stars album ( liek Spears, etc ) then you’re probably going to have to giev some publishing away to ‘Big star’ even if her only input to what is actuality your song is inflecting a certain line a different way.

So the writing credits on the album will be [Spears, Hazelrigg] - even though you wrote 100% of the song