|
|
Post by simpledream on Oct 16, 2015 23:33:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Oct 17, 2015 13:07:04 GMT -5
Wish the whole article/interview had been printed instead of just a teaser. I cringed when I saw that "It wasn't until 1980 that I really started to learn how to sing" header, and thought here we go again with Linda berating how she sounded pre-1980 or rather her pre-big band era. It's a new variation of the story though with Linda pushing the "I didn't know how to sing" story line back to 1980. Before, it had been she didn't know how to sing before her big band era. Regardless, I wish she would stop putting down the way she sang on her 60s and 70s recordings. If she had been a lousy singer, she wouldn't have caught on with the millions of people who bought her records. In putting down her earlier recordings, she is putting herself down and the people who bought her records.
In fact, I'd argue the point with her that in a sense, she was like the self-taught musicians of rock who wrote some amazing songs because they didn't know the rules of songwriting. When some of those musicians did learn how to read and write music, their songs became less interesting and more pretentious and contrived. In learning the rules, they jettisoned their own formulas for success. They would've been better served not learning how to read and write music.
In Linda's case, learning to be a better singer wasn't necessarily a bad thing, but the question here is what did she do that was different in her singing? I'd also argue the possibility that the decline in many of her album sales post-big band era might have had as much to do with her being a better singer as much as it might have been Elektra not being all that interested in her. Or whatever other reason there might have been that could explain the drop off in her sales. In learning the techniques of being a better singer, maybe she lost something that was more special and unique to her singing than she realized.
The other teaser they included, about not being able to go to the grocery store to buy food without fans coming up for autographs is probably a common complaint among most celebrities. One of the reasons Elvis was a night owl was that it was about the only time he could get out of his house and do the things people normally did. I doubt that Linda was chased by thousands of fans at one time but if there were too many fans imposing on her personal space, it's surprising she too didn't become a night owl. It might have been less stressful for her if she had, especially when it came to dealing with the fans. But, I kind of have to wonder if she would've been more bothered if none of the fans had bothered her?
|
|
|
|
Post by PoP80 on Oct 17, 2015 15:22:11 GMT -5
There was a difference in her singing, pre-and post-Pirates, but I would hardly say she was "terrible" early in her career. As you said, she wouldn't have been so successful if that was the case, and there was a great deal of competition with other talented artists at that time. I'm sorry her encounters with fans were so annoying--we do have her best interests at heart...  |
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on Oct 17, 2015 15:25:56 GMT -5
I agree re: the headline for the article. I guess it is 1980 before she took on the Pirates role that is the line here. She has also said in recent years, she did her best singing after 50. That is not exactly apples for apples but in the same vein. I have heard her say that she did not know how to sing for like the first 10 yrs or so out. It just sooooo reeediculous!!!!!! eddiejinnj
|
|
|
|
Post by rumba on Oct 17, 2015 15:57:58 GMT -5
Wish the whole article/interview had been printed instead of just a teaser. I cringed when I saw that "It wasn't until 1980 that I really started to learn how to sing" header, and thought here we go again with Linda berating how she sounded pre-1980 or rather her pre-big band era. It's a new variation of the story though with Linda pushing the "I didn't know how to sing" story line back to 1980. Before, it had been she didn't know how to sing before her big band era. Regardless, I wish she would stop putting down the way she sang on her 60s and 70s recordings. If she had been a lousy singer, she wouldn't have caught on with the millions of people who bought her records. In putting down her earlier recordings, she is putting herself down and the people who bought her records. In fact, I'd argue the point with her that in a sense, she was like the self-taught musicians of rock who wrote some amazing songs because they didn't know the rules of songwriting. When some of those musicians did learn how to read and write music, their songs became less interesting and more pretentious and contrived. In learning the rules, they jettisoned their own formulas for success. They would've been better served not learning how to read and write music. In Linda's case, learning to be a better singer wasn't necessarily a bad thing, but the question here is what did she do that was different in her singing? I'd also argue the possibility that the decline in many of her album sales post-big band era might have had as much to do with her being a better singer as much as it might have been Elektra not being all that interested in her. Or whatever other reason there might have been that could explain the drop off in her sales. In learning the techniques of being a better singer, maybe she lost something that was more special and unique to her singing than she realized. The other teaser they included, about not being able to go to the grocery store to buy food without fans coming up for autographs is probably a common complaint among most celebrities. One of the reasons Elvis was a night owl was that it was about the only time he could get out of his house and do the things people normally did. I doubt that Linda was chased by thousands of fans at one time but if there were too many fans imposing on her personal space, it's surprising she too didn't become a night owl. It might have been less stressful for her if she had, especially when it came to dealing with the fans. But, I kind of have to wonder if she would've been more bothered if none of the fans had bothered her? Most of my favorite singing of Linda's is before she "knew how to sing". She's way too inside it to have an overall perspective. |
|
markv
A Number and a Name
Posts: 93
|
Post by markv on Oct 17, 2015 16:24:52 GMT -5
Must we always pick apart everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard W on Oct 17, 2015 18:11:34 GMT -5
Just finished the book Hotel California. More than one person is quoted as saying that Linda, in the early '70s, had no idea of the true extent of her talent, that she didn't believe in herself as the singer others heard.
Others heard her as we heard her, but she didn't.
As the singer, that's her perogative.
|
|
|
|
Post by Goldie on Oct 17, 2015 18:39:49 GMT -5
Linda has always been her own worst enemy. Self-esteem, self-denigration behavior partly I think was said to get sympathy, reassurance and approval from others. She does it even until this day. I can't help but wonder if some of it hasn't come out of her religious upbringing (mainly schools and at the church). It formed in her early childhood and has remained. This is all to the chagrin of her fans and to the delight and confirmation of her detractors. It is something we just need to accept as she will never change. At least now she seems to be getting the love and approval she so strongly (especially subconsciously) needs.
|
|
|
|
Post by simpledream on Oct 17, 2015 18:54:15 GMT -5
I don't think any of us are qualified (my assumption) to speculate on the reasons why LR feels the way she does. You are more than welcome to subscribe to Uncut to access the story. I circulated the link for your interest. pax
|
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Oct 17, 2015 19:04:47 GMT -5
Must we always pick apart everything. I don't see it as picking everything apart. I see it as Linda fans discussing Linda. And I'd like to think we as fans have the right to agree or disagree with things she has said, and not the kind of fans who think one shouldn't disagree and should only say positive things. Linda was never a terrible singer pre-1980 or pre-big band or whatever period of time it was she thinks she became a better singer because she learned how to sing. As a singer, Linda was the best there was, from her first recordings in the 1960s to her last in 2006 with Ann, and every concert or performance she gave over the years. But, she has been saying all that for a very long time, and it's a subject that, if it's going to be brought up, why not get her to open up more on how she thought she improved as a singer? |
|
|
|
Post by Goldie on Oct 17, 2015 19:27:28 GMT -5
This isn't the first time we talked about this and certainly not the first time for Linda. If you read her very early interviews she was very talkative about her personal life, emotions and her perception of her abilities which were often conflicting. When she hit it big she pretty much clammed up. It is only natural if she talked about it her fans would too. Even her thoughts on "fandom" are interesting and have been a struggle for her if it is her fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by erik on Oct 17, 2015 22:12:33 GMT -5
I take what may be called a fairly unconventional view of this issue.
I do think at times that Linda makes a lot of hopped-up statements about herself in the press, and they, and then the fans, jump on this and react however they will. It's one thing to be modest about one's objectives, another to have an excess of braggadocio about it all as well, and still another to put down so much of what you do like Linda arguably does. At various times, I don't know whether she does this to make fans feel guilty about the albums and songs that they helped to make popular, but it is a suspicion that's always been at the back of my mind.
For me, each segment of Linda's career has had far more high points musically than low ones, even if that's not necessarily the prevailing wisdom among members here, let alone Linda herself: The entire period from 1967 to 1983 was one of virtually non-stop achievements of one magnitude or another, even if, especially in the first years of the 1970s, it didn't seem that way at the time; and this embraces the Pirates Of Penzance phase as well. The time frame from 1983 to 1992, which takes up the Nelson Riddle albums, Trio, the Spanish-language albums, and Cry Like A Rainstorm, also had lots to recommend, although there was also some contention among both critics and fans with regards to these projects as well.
For the rest of the 1990s, when her popularity with audiences took a nosedive from which she never really recovered, she made two of her most criminally underrated albums ever in Winter Light and We Ran, three if you count her Western Wall collaboration with Emmylou. Feels Like Home had sterling songs like "The Waiting", "Walk On" (may country radio roast in hell for not playing this song more when they had a chance), "The Blue Train", "After The Gold Rush", and the title track. But I still feel she slipped on "High Sierra" (way too strained vocals) and "Lover's Return" (she doesn't convince me); and nothing can convince me that "We Will Rock You" works as a lullaby.
In terms of A Merry Little Christmas, the religious/choral material like "I Wonder As A Wander" and "Xiochi Xiochi", and her take on "River", works far more than the Christmas pop standards; on the latter, she does them fairly well, but I don't think her versions stand out from the many other versions they've received.
Everything on Hummin' To Myself works in its pop/jazz approach to the Great American Songbook, as does what she and Ann Savoy did in traditionalist ethnic/folk terms on Adieu False Heart. And in terms of "New Partner Waltz", the track she did for the Louvin Brothers tribute album in 2003 with Carl Jackson, she seemed much more her 70s country-rock self than she did on "High Sierra."
All of my assessment really proves is that we all will have different takes on Linda, one way or another. That's what being a fan is all about, it seems to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on Oct 17, 2015 22:57:11 GMT -5
Linda has always been her own worst enemy. Self-esteem, self-denigration behavior partly I think was said to get sympathy, reassurance and approval from others. She does it even until this day. I can't help but wonder if some of it hasn't come out of her religious upbringing (mainly schools and at the church). It formed in her early childhood and has remained. This is all to the chagrin of her fans and to the delight and confirmation of her detractors. It is something we just need to accept as she will never change. At least now she seems to be getting the love and approval she so strongly (especially subconsciously) needs. Don't remember the exact wording ... it was one of the interviews past couple years. promoting her book.. didn't she say it wasn't allowed or tolerated in the Ronstadt household to brag out one self? I think she knew she was pretty good and better than most before the 1980's or at the least didn't suck because I doubt she'd even pursue it professionally if she truly believed she wasn't any good.. She herself has said she wouldnt think it fair to charge admission if she couldnt sing. I also feel during that time after the 80's she began to learn other things about music and singing, which in retrospect perhaps made her feel like a novice in her earlier days. but I think that's true with any career no matter how gifted you are.. we're always learning and getting better. Anyway, that's how I see it. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Oct 17, 2015 23:40:30 GMT -5
Linda has always been her own worst enemy. Self-esteem, self-denigration behavior partly I think was said to get sympathy, reassurance and approval from others. She does it even until this day. I can't help but wonder if some of it hasn't come out of her religious upbringing (mainly schools and at the church). It formed in her early childhood and has remained. This is all to the chagrin of her fans and to the delight and confirmation of her detractors. It is something we just need to accept as she will never change. At least now she seems to be getting the love and approval she so strongly (especially subconsciously) needs. Don't remember the exact wording ... it was one of the interviews past couple years. promoting her book.. didn't she say it wasn't allowed or tolerated in the Ronstadt household to brag out one self? I think she knew she was pretty good and better than most before the 1980's or at the least didn't suck because I doubt she'd even pursue it professionally if she truly believed she wasn't any good.. She herself has said she wouldnt think it fair to charge admission if she couldnt sing. I also feel during that time after the 80's she began to learn other things about music and singing, which in retrospect perhaps made her feel like a novice in her earlier days. but I think that's true with any career no matter how gifted you are.. we're always learning and getting better. Anyway, that's how I see it. I agree. I think she knows very well the length of her talents. She is just being modest because that is the way she was raised. She is a very humble, modest, non pretentious lady and this together with all her other qualities and talents is what makes Linda so Linda!  |
|
|
|
Post by LindaRAdmirer on Oct 18, 2015 1:00:27 GMT -5
Look at it this way. Her big-selling, chart-topping albums from 1974 until 1980 don't really need to be "talked up" by her or anyone else. They are well known masterpieces. Linda knows she can say little or nothing about them and they will continue to get heard. When she says she did her best singing in her 50s, she's directing people to her later but lesser known triumphs "We Ran" "Western Wall" "Humming..." "Frenesi" etc. I think she's just being honest but it's also genius as it brings new fans to the later work. But I can't imagine how Linda can listen to her renditions of "Crazy Arms," "Down So Low" and "Love Has No Pride" and find them in any way lacking. I don't hear "careful singing" on those. A vibrato she might have smoothed over, a different breath here or there, or more technique over the raw emotion she exhibits in those songs might have reduced their impact. She just sang her heart out and her brilliance will be admired for a very long time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Oct 18, 2015 2:15:04 GMT -5
Look at it this way. Her big-selling, chart-topping albums from 1974 until 1980 don't really need to be "talked up" by her or anyone else. They are well known masterpieces. Linda knows she can say little or nothing about them and they will continue to get heard. When she says she did her best singing in her 50s, she's directing people to her later but lesser known triumphs "We Ran" "Western Wall" "Humming..." "Frenesi" etc. I think she's just being honest but it's also genius as it brings new fans to the later work. But I can't imagine how Linda can listen to her renditions of "Crazy Arms," "Down So Low" and "Love Has No Pride" and find them in any way lacking. I don't hear "careful singing" on those. A vibrato she might have smoothed over, a different breath here or there, or more technique over the raw emotion she exhibits in those songs might have reduced their impact. She just sang her heart out and her brilliance will be admired for a very long time. Maybe also she prefers people buying her later albums especially the Mexican and Standards because she doesn't have to pay any royalties. I may be wrong but since all those songs are so old and their authors are mostly dead she might be able to make more money out of them. Does anyone know how that works? |
|
|
|
Post by rumba on Oct 18, 2015 3:30:51 GMT -5
Look at it this way. Her big-selling, chart-topping albums from 1974 until 1980 don't really need to be "talked up" by her or anyone else. They are well known masterpieces. Linda knows she can say little or nothing about them and they will continue to get heard. When she says she did her best singing in her 50s, she's directing people to her later but lesser known triumphs "We Ran" "Western Wall" "Humming..." "Frenesi" etc. I think she's just being honest but it's also genius as it brings new fans to the later work. But I can't imagine how Linda can listen to her renditions of "Crazy Arms," "Down So Low" and "Love Has No Pride" and find them in any way lacking. I don't hear "careful singing" on those. A vibrato she might have smoothed over, a different breath here or there, or more technique over the raw emotion she exhibits in those songs might have reduced their impact. She just sang her heart out and her brilliance will be admired for a very long time. Maybe also she prefers people buying her later albums especially the Mexican and Standards because she doesn't have to pay any royalties. I may be wrong but since all those songs are so old and their authors are mostly dead she might be able to make more money out of them. Does anyone know how that works? That has nothing to do with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Goldie on Oct 18, 2015 3:34:30 GMT -5
Linda shared her deepest thoughts and anxieties in an old Esquire interview that has stuck with me through the years. Linda's abilities have touched upon a musical meme of sorts that go beyond some secret chordal-emotional connections or innate chemistry that controls all of us. I think she may have used her abilities haphazardly, sometimes without direction. Opposites attract and like attracts like and each sends out confusing signals and makes for difficult decisions whether in life, love or music. While her outward behavior may have been influenced by familial ties it appears to me she has been on a search that is as hard to describe as is the sacred sound of the shakuhachi. No wonder she once described it as her favorite instrument. In simple terms, Linda has been seeking bigger fish to fry and looks at life here without some veil of illusion as generated by your typical entertainment industry. I think she may have underestimated some of her fans, especially the ones that frequent this site on a regular basis who also have no illusions of stardom. And she would be proud.
|
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Oct 18, 2015 4:06:53 GMT -5
typical Guest comment ...... without thought
|
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Oct 18, 2015 4:17:57 GMT -5
Personally I totally agree with Linda .... I rarely listen to her earlier stuff. I could listen to the Nelson Riddle albums, CdmP, Mas Canciones, Frenesi, Trio, CLAR, Winter Light, Feels Like Home etc daily - she most certainly (in my opinion) grew as an artist and vocally during this period. The first 3 albums I never listen to, the albums from 73 to 80 I listen to more now that some of them have been remastered (the MoFi Editions I like) but Mad Love onwards for me is true Linda. Its such a shame that her later work wasn't as commercially successful as her early 70s stuff - a lot of her fans are stuck in the 70s and can't move beyond that.
Listen to some of the live bootlegs from 90s and Linda is in the middle of a Nelson Riddle set and some clown shouts out "sing Heatwave..." - thats actually very disrespectful.
People have their favourites, I get that - you have to understand that Linda does too and she's not afraid to voice that opinion.
Whatever your favourite we all have to agree that she has left an astounding body of work, across many musical styles and I'm proud to be a fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Oct 18, 2015 4:48:06 GMT -5
typical Guest comment ...... without thought I feel very hurt by your comment. Don't worry I won't be posting anything again. |
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Oct 18, 2015 5:48:53 GMT -5
sorry you feel like that but your comment was really kind of strange .... I'm sure Linda (or any artist) doesn't push albums to consumers just because they don't have to pay royalties on songs out of copyright. She's saying this because she connects more and is seemingly more proud of this music.
Again sorry to have upset you but I didn't think your comment was very well thought through.
|
|
|
|
Post by Goldie on Oct 18, 2015 7:40:13 GMT -5
We keep hearing about how all of those early groups became penniless making very little money. Linda did have her own publishing company I believe (Normal Music) so somewhere in her and her management's thoughts there had to be a process to be done to help with the creative and money making process. We often read how Linda said she "only wanted to sing" when asked about fame and fortune but she could have sung in a church choir or around the house if that were true. And how many people seek music contracts that "only want to sing?" She liked the fame, she liked the fortune but she didn't seem to like the other stuff that goes with it i.e. trying to remain glamorous, touring, problematic fans, media attention, etc. It would be nice if we could all pick and choose the parts we like but life isn't like that. I doubt she would like sitting in a cube for 40 years like most of us and would gladly accept the other things if she really thought about it. Because we love her we overlook some of the stuff she has said and in the scheme of things how much does it really matter? I personally have found her fascinating beyond the music. Her story really is worth telling even with the uncomfortable parts she may not wish to talk about. It is a story bigger than Linda herself and as big as the Great Southwest with an influence that is as important as todays news. www.gcglaw.com/resources/entertainment/music-copyright.html"For over a century, Congress has recognized that musicians are particularly vulnerable in market negotiations for the rights to their music. For songs written after 1978, a copyright contract can be terminated by the author 35 years following the date of the copyright transfer or grant. This right is unavailable to any composition made as a work-for-hire, so the musicians should protect their second chance to benefit from their music by avoiding work-for-hire transfers. Cover songs reflect the limited exclusivity provided by copyright. The original copyright owner has an exclusive right to publish or release the first sound recording of a song. After that, all other performers have the right to cut their own version of the song. To release a cover version of a song, a musician must pay the compulsory or government-set rate for use of the song. Known as mechanical rights, the payment gives the musician the right to use the music in its own sound recording or master. Cover songs can be released on CDs or digital downloads. The statutory right to make a cover song does not extend to movie soundtracks, video games or other audiovisual works. For these uses, a license must be obtained from the copyright holder. Under the law, the compulsory fee is paid through the Copyright Office to the copyright owners of the composition. Presently, the rates are the higher of 9.1 cents per song or 1.75 cents per minute of playing time. To better streamline the process, a nonprofit organization, the Harry Fox Agency, provides an easy to use website that provides a much simpler licensing system than licensing through the Copyright Office. For small runs of under 2,500 CDs or digital downloads, Harry Fox provides an online service called Songfile which makes for easy licensing of any of the 2 million songs in the Songfile database. The version of the song can vary quite a bit from the original song. It can be arranged as needed to fit the performer, "but the arrangement shall not change the basic melody or fundamental character of the work." More importantly, the arranger of a cover cannot receive a copyright on the new version without the express permission of the original copyright owner. Unlike the mechanical royalty, the public performance royalties are not determined through congressional action. Instead, the three performing rights societies — ASCAP, BMI and SESAC — license the venues where music is performed publicly. Public performances include live shows at public venues such as bars, restaurants, and auditoriums as well as performances of pre-recorded music on radio, television, the Internet and at public venues. For a musician, membership in a performing rights society provides a revenue stream that will be based on the popularity of the music. The funds earned by the performing rights society are distributed to the members based on record sales and airplay. Because copyright also protects the public performance rights of digital sound recordings, the organization SoundExchange serves to collect public performance fees owed to the copyright holder of the digital master — the record labels — based on a statutory license rate which continues to be the subject of great controversy and ongoing negotiations. By registering the with the Copyright Office when works are published and working with Harry Fox Agency and a performing rights society, the composer can maximize the opportunities to earn revenue from the compositions. Record labels — including independent labels — have the additional opportunity to earn royalties through the SoundExchange collections. Through these various organizations, an independent artist can be positioned to earn revenue from all of the sources created by copyright law. Through these organizations and through the rights of termination granted by Congress, copyright law provides many tools to enhance the livelihood of composers and artists." |
|
|
|
Post by Richard W on Oct 18, 2015 10:20:13 GMT -5
I would argue that the difference between someone who enjoys singing in the kitchen or the shower and an artist/vocalist like Linda is the need the artist has to communicate their art to others.
Relating to this personally: As a writer, I could be content to write my stories and put them in a drawer. Instead, I have a need to have those stories read by others. Why? I can't say, really. All I can say is that the need to communicate something to others is a driving force.
I can also add that, looking back on my early work, I find it rather embarrassing — despite the fact that my very first story got published. When I read that story now, all I can see is where I failed or where I could have written it better.
|
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Oct 18, 2015 10:53:02 GMT -5
As Linda once said " singing is too important to be left to the professionals". She is a professional singer but she is also a singer day in day out, unlike other singers who sing only in the studio or in stage... Eg Babs (who I also love)
I truly believe that Linda, taking Parkinsons, out of the picture, would still have an amazing strong voice as she uses her voice (exercising those vocal chords) daily - unlike other singers she use them once/twice a year ....
|
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Oct 18, 2015 12:42:03 GMT -5
Maybe also she prefers people buying her later albums especially the Mexican and Standards because she doesn't have to pay any royalties. I may be wrong but since all those songs are so old and their authors are mostly dead she might be able to make more money out of them. Does anyone know how that works? While the songwriters may be dead, and many of them are, the songs are still in copyright, even though many of them should already be in the public domain. Even if that were the case, Linda of the person or persons who arranged the songs for her could've put a claim in for the songwriting credit for the arrangement. Sort of like ASCAP had claimed the song "Happy Birthday" as being in copyright and then stopping people and organizations from using the song. What they had was a copyright for a piano arrangement someone had done. The song was out of copyright and as long as someone wasn't using the piano arrangement that was copyrighted and licensed by ASCAP, no one had to pay royalties on the song. All of the songs Linda did that maybe should've been in the public domain had different music publishers, so Linda wasn't getting any of the money on the publishing. Not that it would've made any difference as the royalty paid for arrangements on songs in the public domain are 1/20th of the royalty paid for an original song, which these days is 9.1 cents, which works out to less than half a cent. It's not really worth the trouble to put in a claim for the arrangement as it will generate very little money, even on a million seller. |
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Oct 18, 2015 12:53:41 GMT -5
Don't remember the exact wording ... it was one of the interviews past couple years. promoting her book.. didn't she say it wasn't allowed or tolerated in the Ronstadt household to brag out one self? I think she knew she was pretty good and better than most before the 1980's or at the least didn't suck because I doubt she'd even pursue it professionally if she truly believed she wasn't any good.. She herself has said she wouldnt think it fair to charge admission if she couldnt sing. I also feel during that time after the 80's she began to learn other things about music and singing, which in retrospect perhaps made her feel like a novice in her earlier days. but I think that's true with any career no matter how gifted you are.. we're always learning and getting better. Anyway, that's how I see it. I don't recall hearing her say bragging about one's self wasn't tolerated in the Ronstadt household, but that could be the reason why she downplays her accomplishments. I also remember her dismissing her work as being no good on a 1971 episode the "Mike Douglas Show," which was on youtube for a while but I don't know if it still is. So, she's always been very dismissive of her work and it could very well be that Linda's attitude towards her own music, at least publicly, can be traced back to her upbringing. I can also see how she could've learned other things about music and singing as she got older but I always she was very knowledgeable about music from the beginning. |
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Oct 18, 2015 13:15:14 GMT -5
We keep hearing about how all of those early groups became penniless making very little money. Linda did have her own publishing company I believe (Normal Music) so somewhere in her and her management's thoughts there had to be a process to be done to help with the creative and money making process. Unlike the mechanical royalty, the public performance royalties are not determined through congressional action. Instead, the three performing rights societies — ASCAP, BMI and SESAC — license the venues where music is performed publicly. Public performances include live shows at public venues such as bars, restaurants, and auditoriums as well as performances of pre-recorded music on radio, television, the Internet and at public venues. By registering the with the Copyright Office when works are published and working with Harry Fox Agency and a performing rights society, the composer can maximize the opportunities to earn revenue from the compositions. Record labels — including independent labels — have the additional opportunity to earn royalties through the SoundExchange collections. Through these various organizations, an independent artist can be positioned to earn revenue from all of the sources created by copyright law. Through these organizations and through the rights of termination granted by Congress, copyright law provides many tools to enhance the livelihood of composers and artists." I don't believe Normal Music was owned by Linda, but even if it was or had been owned by her, Linda only had a handful of songs she actually wrote, and about the same number of public domain songs on which she took the songwriting credit for the arrangement. And the reason I question as to whether or not she had owned Normal Music or part of it is the last song on which she had taken the songwriting credit for arrangement was a song she had arranged for Aaron Neville, and the publishing is listed by BMI as Apache Red Music. Regardless, neither publishing company appear to have published any other songs, so if Linda was or is the owner or part owner of the two publishing companies, very little money would be generated for Linda through those avenues. I always thought Linda should've had at least two music publishing companies, through which previously unrecorded songs could've been submitted to her for consideration. I've sometimes thought that maybe the reason she was and is so down on her recordings was that unlike many of her peers, she wasn't a songwriter or enough of a songwriter to keep coming up with original songs. Maybe she didn't like having to do all the covers or asking friends for their songs and didn't feel her recordings were legitimate. As much as I loved her versions of "Crazy Arms" and "I Fall to Pieces," both of those songs had been done to death many times over by many country singers. I always thought it a mistake none of her managers thought of setting up publishing companies for Linda or arranging for to write songs with others. |
|
|
|
Post by erik on Oct 18, 2015 13:25:36 GMT -5
Quote by Goldie:
Very true. I don't think too many of us (if any) are "starstruck" towards Linda in the literal sense of that word, though we are struck by the jaw-dropping variety of her artistry, as are her peers--even if, as fans, we are sometimes royally confused by the things she is known to say in interviews.
I would also say that, for all the discomfort and reluctance she has had over time regarding her status as a superstar and a sex symbol, she has managed to handle both with what I think is an incredible degree of dignity and grace, which is one of the reasons why I think she lasted for as long as she did.
|
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Oct 18, 2015 13:58:15 GMT -5
I've met most of my most favourite singers - I've been very lucky.
I was very nervous with Linda for which I'm frustrated with myself - she was gracious, charming and very accommodating to a bunch of overexcited fans. I'm fairly confident she didn't want to be there but it didnt show. I'll always remember that moment and cherish the autograph.
To reiterate my earlier comment - for me Linda was at her vocal and musical peak from 1980 to 1999. In that period she introduced 1000s of fans to music not known to them, including me. Without her I'm confident I would never have experienced and enjoyed the traditional Mexican Canciones and Latin tunes of Frenesí, the wealth of the great American songbook or (like countless others) experienced the joy, heartbreak or musicianship of the traditional bluegrass/ country tunes of Trio - plus other areas recorded, hinted upon and teased over the years. I feel very sad for the "fans" who left her behind in 1979/80/81 ..... You've all missed so much better from Linda than you experienced in the early part of her career.
And I feel equally as sad for those of us who followed her up until recently and have experienced her suffering and loss of voice due to Parkinsons.
All hail Linda!
|
|
