Tame Impala
Qloxr4jtswsd49dpg3bd?policy=eyjlehbpcnkiojmxntu3njawmdasimnhbgwiolsicmvhzcisimnvbnzlcnqixx0%3d&signature=11e150cf8f9eda6d535978740033af44dc4ecf534e6994e68f6745335d09cb60 bnew Tame Impala
Kevin parker's ama is a great read, here's a choice excerpt:
"Eh.... I feel like music will be free sooner or later, and i think I'm all for it. There's all this talk of music needing a monetary value, this ownership of music, even that it needs a physical form. But intrinsically... it's MUSIC, it should be better than that. Some of my most important musical experiences were from a burnt CD with songs my friend downloaded for me at a terrible digital quality... I didn't care... it changed my life all the same. For me the value of music is the value you extract from it. You want to know a story? Up until recently, from all of tame impala's record sales outside of australia I had received.... zero dollars. Someone high up spent the money before it got to me. I may never get that money. Then Blackberry and some tequila brand or something put my song in an ad. Then I bought a house and set up a studio. I know what you're thinking... "wait so...when I bought an album I was helping some businessman pay for his mansion on an island somewhere, and when some dude bought a mobile phone he was helping to pay an artist? WHHHYY?" I'll tell you why, IT'S MONEY. It doesn't always go where you want it to go. It's like a shopping trolley with a bung wheel. As far as I'm concerned the best thing you can do for an artist is LISTEN to the music...fall in love with it.......talk about it.........get it however you can get it....Let the corporations pay for. This is just my brain rambling remember, I'm sure there are holes in my theories... for example I realise not everyone's music is suited to a mobile phone ad, and it would be lame if artists tailored their music for that purpose."
0
See who liked this See who liked this