Metallica has its own independent record label

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 10619
  • Start date Start date
im not sure if anyone can answer this question yet but are they going to add other artists to their roster? because if not this probably wont make much of a difference for fans, since theyre metallica.
 
benduncan":3b3tllyo said:
im not sure if anyone can answer this question yet but are they going to add other artists to their roster? because if not this probably wont make much of a difference for fans, since theyre metallica.
Click to expand...

:yes:
 
"Forming Blackened Recordings is the ultimate in independence, putting us in the driver's seat of our own creative destiny."

Makes me laugh. Like any suits would have been telling them how to write or arrange, mix or do anything about their music. Except maybe the packaging/distribution. It just means they control "all" the money now. Hell if WB had any say on the music we may not have gotten all the shit we have for the last 20 years.

I can't quite see someone at WB at a meeting saying "we can't sell the units we need without the most abrasive snare sound possible. Get Wilkins down to the studio asap and sort this shit out. We'll make these Metallimonkeys dance to our drum dammit!"

"These songs aren't cutting it for radio at nice perfect 4-5 minutes, make these idiots stretch out material to 9 minutes. I don't know, just get them to repeat intro's and parts for an extra go round or two! We need that radio spread. Dance Monkey Dance!!"
 
skoora":1qmb3va1 said:
These songs aren't cutting it for radio at nice perfect 4-5 minutes, make these idiots stretch out material to 9 minutes
Click to expand...

:lol: :LOL: :lol: :LOL: :lol: :LOL:
 
skoora":29brif1q said:
"Forming Blackened Recordings is the ultimate in independence, putting us in the driver's seat of our own creative destiny."

Makes me laugh. Like any suits would have been telling them how to write or arrange, mix or do anything about there music. Except maybe the packaging/distribution. It just means they control "all" the money now. Hell if WB had any say on the music we may not have gotten all the shit we have for the last 20 years.

I can't quite see someone at WB at a meeting saying "we can't sell the units we need without the most abrasive snare sound possible. Get Wilkins down to the studio asap and sort this shit out. We'll make these Metallimonkeys dance to our drum dammit!"

"These songs aren't cutting it for radio at nice perfect 4-5 minutes, make these idiots stretch out material to 9 minutes. I don't know, just get them to repeat intro's and parts for an extra go round or two! We need that radio spread. Dance Monkey Dance!!"
Click to expand...

:hys:
 
i have no idea how many units of the back catalogue they move these days, but i would think it's a lot. With 100% of that coming to them now it's a huge revenue increase.

I'd rather they get the money than Warner Bros
 
Regarding the St. Anger issue, I honestly think it was a doomed project from the get go as you can see in the movie 'Some Kind Of Monster' I think Bob Rock's idea as producer to approach it as a b-sides, demo type of vibe was a band-aid on a flailing band dealing with issues. In that case, I would have to say that album is not something Metallica would have released and been proud of. It would have probably been either shelved, or possibly released as a stylized demo e.p. to tide fans over. The fact that is was released clearly matches the thinking of music industry suits which goes something like... Metallica makes us money. We own the recordings. Metallica fans are a bunch of dumb hicks. They will buy this just because it has the Metallica name on it and Metallica can't stop us from releasing it because of our contract. These guys are old anyway, let's milk them for what we can before the ship hits the sand.
 
Stone Heavy Sound":3qj3w3p6 said:
Regarding the St. Anger issue, I honestly think it was a doomed project from the get go as you can see in the movie 'Some Kind Of Monster' I think Bob Rock's idea as producer to approach it as a b-sides, demo type of vibe was a band-aid on a flailing band dealing with issues. In that case, I would have to say that album is not something Metallica would have released and been proud of. It would have probably been either shelved, or possibly released as a stylized demo e.p. to tide fans over. The fact that is was released clearly matches the thinking of music industry suits which goes something like... Metallica makes us money. We own the recordings. Metallica fans are a bunch of dumb hicks. They will buy this just because it has the Metallica name on it and Metallica can't stop us from releasing it because of our contract. These guys are old anyway, let's milk them for what we can before the ship hits the sand.
Click to expand...

In fact, it was the "Presidio Sessions" in 2001 that was the original demo-type-of-vibe project to get the band back together, after Jason Newsted left.

St. Anger was just a continuation of that project when James Hetfield came back from rehabilitation in 2002.

I think it was a good initiative of Bob Rock to get them to do the project- Sort your shit out, stop stewing in your sandbox carrying on like whinging toddlers and MAKE something, even if it is rubbish.

You can hear bits of the original 'Presidio Sessions' throughout that film, and honestly, I reckon the St. Anger stuff shits all over it, even if that's only by a small margin. I'm glad that the Presidio stuff was not released, because it REALLY was shit.



I'm actually surprised that Metallica did not do this back in 1998, fourteen years ago.
Lars Ulrich started a small record label pompously called "The Company", which I think was stopped a year or two later.



In saying that, I find that I enjoy Metallica's music a lot more when I don't stay abreast of all their news and politics etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top