pitchfork strikes again.

what does pitchfork have against kemado records?

sure, they gave the dungen reissue a high grade, but it's probably because they had no other choice, given the fact that the whole world would have smelled the proverbial something fishy had they done otherwise.

morons. i respectfully refer you to the following reviews (pop matters, the modern age, maxim, yeti don't dance, and oh about a million other places) for a viewpoint more similar to my own.

Comments

[SoundBitesNYC]

The review was way harsh, but... they (whether that's Kemado or the band) put all their best songs on that EP (every song killer), then put them all on the album too -- and the only really great new song is "Snakey Ruth."

Morgan, no doubt, is a superstar though.

i love kiss to tell - give that another listen!

it's because Kemado is a fake indie, funded by hollywood records. At least that's why they should hate them, besides the crappy music.

[Jo]

to the author of the comment prior; being 'funded by hollywood' is hardly a reason to hate anything, as is the idea of 'crappy music'.

why invest so much emotion? if you don't like it, wouldn't it be easier to just, oh, i don't know, not listen? just a thought.

as for Pitchfork... IF their intent is to uphold the sanctity of Indie Cred, they should really dig up their own turf; they've got a few trust-fund-dipping writers roaming around the upper west side.

[sara]

seriously. testy, testy!

i suppose you're opposed to the brilliant deal clap your hands say yeah made with warner records as well. i mean, they should have kept distributing their CDs themselves, right? to hell with making rent!

i also heartily contest the fact that their music is crap. but to each his own.

ahhh, but I do have a problem with Clap Your Hands and Death Cab and Modest Mouse and the YYYs jumping ship to majors. Even worse though are the umpteen "indie" labels who are funded by majors. You see, this all happened once upon a time in the early 90s - you know, the first time "indie" was big. Well, the commercialization not only ruined the music, it forced many of the small labels out of business. And pretty soon, the airwaves were ruled by corporate rock, like it will be again in less than 5 years. Believe me, I'm for the little guy making rent, but when you're selling thousands of records, why sign a piece of paper that says now you owe 30% of everything you make to a corporation? But to be fair, they were managed by the head of A&R at Warner, and have the biggest booking agent in the country booking them, so they're not really indie either. Which brings me to another point...isn't indie short for independent?

[manicmess]

i dunno. i go back and forth about this. there's a big grey area with regard to the indie/major label difference, as far as i understand it. where do big indie labels like subpop and matador fall on the spectrum?

i do know that i think there is a big difference between signing to a major label and signing a distribution deal with one. when i interviewed alec of CYHSY, it was awhile back and although they were selling lots of records, they had hit a major snag. namely, that, lacking major funds, the band had to wait until all the money had come in from prior CD sales before investing the money to fill new requests, a situation that led to month-long delays—hardly an ideal business situation. still, they didn't sign to a major label. they made a deal that warner would handle the distribution of their CDs only—the first or second deal of its kind in warner's history. a smart move, i think, because they retain the rights to their music, as well as artistic control, but they gain access to an incredibly efficient distribution network.

one could argue that this is the same thing that kemado did with hollywood, since they have no deal with them aside from distribution—which happens once they've already signed the artists and recorded their albums. no?

You answered your own question...there is a reason why the sub pop's, matador's, touch n go's, Merge's and ROIR's of the world are still around today. Don't forget, this is not new, the first two such indie-cum-majors that pop into my head are East West and Rawkus, and we all know what happened to them (if you don't, they both disolved). And what frustrates me about CYHSY is they were/are in a position to change the paradigm of the industry (you know, the one where artists make roughly 12% of the profits from their own music),but like I said, that was a well-crafted scheme they had going. How many unsigned bands do you know with booking, management and publicists working with them? Still, I do understand that this is a business. And it is silly to think that every band or label owner will make smart business moves. To me, the smartest businessman or woman is the one who ultimately has control over their destiny, and when you have funding of any kind, you lose some of that control. To make matters worse, when you sign to a major you lose that control to people working in cubicles and board rooms. Long love cubicle rock!

ps - I know I sound disgruntled, but the fact of the matter is you can be hugely successful avoiding corporate america. Case in point: Arcade Fire, which didn't even hire outside publicity to work their record. Case in point #2, MF Doom, who puts out 3-5 records a year, all on indies, and all scanning huge numbers. So with that said, it's just as easy to find the good out there, as the bad - like Kemado (sorry, I just really dislike Diamond Nights and the gaudy street team posters they hung up in front of my apt. C'monm, indie labels don't use posters that big, do they?)