|
<< prev | goto page
|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:52 am 
juan wrote: Caley wrote: I hope they schmooze with some independent label reps while they're there. Yes, do this Eisley. i always imagined eisley to be on saddle creek or merge _________________ Oneironaut http://www.facebook.com/ChengBand |
|
|
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 | Posts: 1156 | Location: Nashville
|
|
   |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 10:18 am
The Man In The Moon wrote: juan wrote: Caley wrote: I hope they schmooze with some independent label reps while they're there. Yes, do this Eisley. i always imagined eisley to be on saddle creek or merge I often see bands come over here from the states and play small gigs and even support others at small gigs. I'm seeing midlake on Friday at a venue in Newcastle which holds 200 tops. I usually wonder how the midlakes and iron and wines can come play small gigs. Yes they sell records and have established fan bases or are establishing them, but there was a time when they were over here playing support to half filled clubs and probably not making millions. Seems to me eisley doesn't get such opportunities and I, rightly or wrongly assume this is down to WB. Even the support slot to the not so mighty TBS was at mostly mid size venues. Would be good to see eisley over to Europe for a long summer of slogging on the festival circuit or a few support slots to other emerging artists. It seems their position with wb seems to automatically mean support should generally only happen to well established artists at bigger venues etc etc. Where economies of scale keep the label happy but in real terms leads to no great forward progress. All at the expense of the duprees without any great concern from the label. And yes i know not all tours have been to bigger artists, but many have. Perhaps I'm wrong,I don't know, I'm just a fan. Frustrated one at that. Sorry I've hijacked the thread with irrelevant ramblings! Hope sxsw is everything eisley hope it will be, and works out better than the past! _________________ "A mathematician is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat which isn't there." - Charles Darwin (legend) |
|
|
Joined: 04 Apr 2003 | Posts: 1296 | Location: Gateshead - good ol' blighty, up north
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:12 pm
The Man In The Moon wrote: juan wrote: Caley wrote: I hope they schmooze with some independent label reps while they're there. Yes, do this Eisley. i always imagined eisley to be on saddle creek or merge Saddle Creek maybe. Merge, I doubt (but then again, they did have Camera Obscura for a bit). I could see them on Nettwerk or ATO before either one of those. Hopefully, they'll stay away from the labels that are all tangled up in the God-rock scene (Tooth and Nail, Essential, etc). |
|
|
Joined: 03 Jan 2003 | Posts: 476 | Location: Austin TX
|
|
  |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:17 pm
^What's wrong with Tooth & Nail & The Militia Group? The put out good music (and some not as good music) just like any other label. Honestly, some the best touring Combos I've known Eisley to travel with were bands on those labels then, or currently: Copeland, Lovedrug, MAE, and Aaron Sprinkle does a lot of work for them, and had a hand in maybe the most well known and loved Eisley song. _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB           
 = personal fave  = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:13 am
wilsmith wrote: ^What's wrong with Tooth & Nail & The Militia Group? The put out good music (and some not as good music) just like any other label. Honestly, some the best touring Combos I've known Eisley to travel with were bands on those labels then, or currently: Copeland, Lovedrug, MAE, and Aaron Sprinkle does a lot of work for them, and had a hand in maybe the most well known and loved Eisley song. True story. _________________ cynlovescandy wrote: kulvir wrote: I bet R. Kelly approves of peeing in the shower. The world is R. Kelly's shower. It's a golden world. Nowhere Man wrote: mr pine wrote: is there a difference between dubstep and techno?
you know besides the name? techno: uhnd chik uhnd chik uhnd chik uhnd chik dubstep: BOOM Chik.. Boom Boom Boom Chik.. PEOOOWWwwww BOOM BOWowoWOWoWOWow zipzipzipzipzipwoowooowoow EEEEEeeeeeerrr BOOM BOOM BOOM Splat! |
|
|
Joined: 02 Mar 2006 | Posts: 2522 | Location: Kansas
|
|
 |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2010 8:17 am
I'd be against Eisley joining Tooth & Nail and the Militia Group because, even though Mae has done pretty well, I think Eisley would be pigeon-holing themselves. And while they have been open about their faith, I've always gotten the impression they never wanted to be known as a solely Christian band. They want to be seen as a pop/indie/rock band from Texas. They've never promoted themselves as a Christian band, from my knowledge at least. Yes, they do seem to have close friends who've really made a name for themselves in the Christian rock arena, but Eisley has never pursued it, and I think that speaks volumes on what kind of label they'd want to be apart of. But that's just me. However, if they do decide to go that route, it wouldn't affect me. I'd still be a huge fan either way. _________________ "I cannot discuss your verses; for any attempt at criticism would be foreign to me. Nothing touches a work of art so little as words of criticism." -- Rainer Maria Rilke |
|
|
Joined: 19 Nov 2005 | Posts: 1045 | Location: Mansfield and Austin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2010 1:06 pm
^ I can understand that perspective, but to be honest, I never really thought of MAE, Copeland, or Lovedrug as "Christian Bands" as they don't do worship or praise songs for the most part. They're music is about as Christian to me as Jimmy Eat World, Death Cab For Cutie, or say The Velvetteen, three bands I might compare them all to respectively. Outside of the connotations some associate with the labels, their music might as well be secular to the multiple agnostics I know who like them (seems most of my Rock N' Roll buddies take the church as a speed bump in their path to happiness). I didn't know either were "Christian Labels" until well after the fact, and even upon having that sort-of spelled out for me, many of the bands seem to have that U2 "we're Christians in a band, but this isn't a Christian band and we don't make Christian music" mentality. Anberlin is the latest to go major and make a point of doing a Danzig cover... I'd go so far to say, after a certain point, business takes over and those labels are just labels, and more indebted to genre's for their success than the power of songs documenting or promoting faith. If anything, at best I at least assume there won't be a whole lot of cursing, but that's about it. Keep in mind the Bible is one of the most controversial and provocative reads there is, and gives someone using it as a foundation for songs, the freedom to write about all manners of sin, so long as they address them in a thoughtful way. In a bit of Irony, I find it funny that the two people who REALLY won me over from hip hop to alternative: Kurt Cobain and Jeff Buckley did so using Christian imagery in an artistic way. The video for Heart Shape Box is what really won me over to Nirvana being more than 4 songs off Nevermind and done. Buckley called Jesus a chump, named his record Grace, and will forever be known as the guy who made Hallelujah THE standard in the American Songbook for the early 21st century. This whole pro/ anti God thing in music is such a tarpit of bad rhetoric and sour grapes. Question God in a song, and you're a bold artist, particular if people think the song is good: Imagine - Lennon, God - Amos, Dear God - XTC you get the picture... Promote God, in an artful or explicit way, and it doesn't seem anywhere near as profound. I guess, as my X said "This is an age of Disbelief." Meh. I'm not for Bible thumpin' Jesus Freakin' revivalism, but you know, all I am saying is, if done correctly, there's no harm in believing in God, and/ or Jesus, so long as Love is the primary and greatest characteristic of the God you believe in. That's my one caveat right there. Should that come out in a song, or the imperative of a record label, what's the harm in that? There should be little consequence in the association since living and loving are complex, and can inspire art that covers the gamut of positive and negative emotions and their management and lack there of, just like any other musician can do? I mean, to me, nobodies topped Amazing Grace, and that song rang true when I wasn't identifying as a Christian and just a child responding emotionally to music. Why not all songs, no matter the source? _________________ yup, that's my name. FOR YOUR RATING PLEASURE: 4 LIKE Buttons, 1 NEUTRAL, 1 VEXED, 5 DISLIKE buttons. LC > FB
= personal fave = Eisley fans should dig it
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Apr 2008 | Posts: 9641 | Location: Greater St. Louis Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing City Forum Index -> eisleyBlog -> Eisley @ SXSW 2010
Page 2 of 2 << prev | goto page
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|
|
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|
|
