Music output. Art or Business?


#1

Aphex Twin, great artist, always had been always will be - but a little output to fill the cash stock up then all quiet again. No knocking him just an easy example. Do you established artists put material out when they need a payday?


#2

Yeah, probably


#3

Got to appreciate his 26 Mixes For Cash for exactly that reason.


#4

Yes, great reply. Could apply to many, many other artists of course.


#5

I like that he was so upfront about it, particularly given that half of the source material was fairly unrecognisable.


#6

:grinning:

Such a weird collection, but some absolute gems on it.

On the flipside, he did give away over 100 unreleased tracks for free


#7

I quite like that (possibly untrue in RDJ style) story where the courier showed up to pick up a remix and he just gave him a random tape


#8

Was gonna link ttf and TAFH but I’m sure they’ll find their way here. Corgan definitely amps up the Smashing Pumpkins legacy stuff whenever he wants a payday


#9

Excuse me, since when were obelisks not art?


#10

#11

Lucian Freud used to do this with pairings. Rack up enormous gambling debts and then do some paintings to pay them off. When his paintings started to be worth 100s of thousands or whatever people stopped taken his bets as they were too large!


#12

Was just now listening to Mogwai and looking at their back catalogue and thinking how prolific they’ve been recently and also how they’re probably simultaneously at their most popular (no idea if this is true or not?), started theorising in my head that the more support/money they get the more keen they are to pump it all straight back into their art, which is why there’s so much being released lately and which is a great thing to do imo.

Dunno though, I’m quite bored today so this could be nonsense.