What's up with Chad Taylor? Options

[ShadowStormEK]

Did anybody see his facebook post two hours ago???

2 hours ago ·

Chad Taylor - "You ever just totally fuck something up? What does it mean if you do it over and over again? When I get it right, its so right but when its wrong....ahh. Hopefully, forgiveness can work in two directions. If I've wronged YOU, please remember it was only about me. End narcissistic post. "

What does he mean? Could he be talking about Ed???

WTF??

A girl can dream right?

[thefunkyredcaboose]

I would be willing to bet real money that this isn't related to Live at all.

But since the subject was opened up, there is no way to spin requesting a "lead singer bonus" as a good thing. Like it or not, this situation with Live isn't unique. In the music business lead singers get more attention, and eventually they go solo because they realize they don't "need" their bandmates any longer. Why share the money? They usually spin it as a creativity issue and then make music that sounds just like what they made with their band, except usually it is LESS creative.

The modern fascination with lead singers is a big part of the reason that the music business is in such a shitty state right now.

And that, my friends, is why Chad's story makes such a great deal of sense.

[Sakhmet2]

The modern fascination with lead singers is a big part of the reason that the music business is in such a shitty state right now.

And that, my friends, is why Chad's story makes such a great deal of sense.

Just as a point of music history: When was it not about lead singers? Janis Joplin, Mick Jagger, Jim Morrison, Alice Cooper, Ozzy Osborne, Michael Hutchence, Mark Bolan, - even Bret Michaels fuck's sake! The majority of bands in the past had a public persona dominated by the lead singer.

I would be willing to bet real money that this isn't related to Live at all.

If this is about Live, I will die laughing at all the drama that will ensue here.

This post has been edited by Sakhmet2: Apr 22 2010, 6:56 pm

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Just as a point of music history: When was it not about lead singers? Janis Joplin, Mick Jagger, Jim Morrison, Alice Cooper, Ozzy Osborne, Michael Hutchence, Mark Bolan, - even Bret Michaels fuck's sake! The majority of bands in the past had a public persona dominated by the lead singer.

In the public eye, yes, of course the fascination has always been there.

The difference is that now the contracts for band members reflect that more than they ever have before. Also, going solo and staying solo wasn't nearly as popular back then. The music business was a much different place in the time of the Doors, Sabbath, Joplin, Rolling Stones (okay any time period is their time period, haha).

[Sakhmet2]

In the public eye, yes, of course the fascination has always been there.

The difference is that now the contracts for band members reflect that more than they ever have before. Also, going solo and staying solo wasn't nearly as popular back then. The music business was a much different place in the time of the Doors, Sabbath, Joplin, Rolling Stones (okay any time period is their time period, haha).

Well, Joplin went solo. So did Ozzy. Morrison's death killed the Doors. How many people know that Alice Cooper was a band? And would anyone care about the Mothers of Invention without Frank Zappa? How many people know The Edge vs. Bono? Bono is the voice of U2.

Strange to say, the big exception to this was KISS. Back in the original days they were presented more or less equally. Now, it's Paul Stanley's and Gene Simmons' band - and Gene is the one that everyone knows. He may not be the lead singer, but he is the dominant face of the band - and that's what this is really about: the public face of the band. So it's not a lead singer thing, it's a spokesperson kind of thing.

Lyricists are usually chosen as the public face because they are the often the most comfortable with words. And who wrote the lyrics for Live?

From 1997 on Ed got stuck with most of the interviews. I remember reading somewhere an interview with Chad T. in which he said that the record company "worked Ed like a dog".

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Well, Joplin went solo. So did Ozzy. Morrison's death killed the Doors. How many people know that Alice Cooper was a band? And would anyone care about the Mothers of Invention without Frank Zappa? How many people know The Edge vs. Bono? Bono is the voice of U2.

Strange to say, the big exception to this was KISS. Back in the original days they were presented more or less equally. Now, it's Paul Stanley's and Gene Simmons' band - and Gene is the one that everyone knows. He may not be the lead singer, but he is the dominant face of the band - and that's what this is really about: the public face of the band. So it's not a lead singer thing, it's a spokesperson kind of thing.

Lyricists are usually chosen as the public face because they are the often the most comfortable with words. And who wrote the lyrics for Live?

From 1997 on Ed got stuck with most of the interviews. I remember reading somewhere an interview with Chad T. in which he said that the record company "worked Ed like a dog".

I'm not really sure what this has to do with my post, I acknowledged that the attitude towards lead singers has always been there, but explained why it is different today. The contracts are handled differently today and that has effected the music business negatively. End of story and everything this has to do with this thread.