Sunday, December 03, 2006

Isn't this the sort of thing you shouldn't say in public?

Very few people, outside of a small knot of thirteen year-olds, though there was anything much original about Evanessence, but is it entirely wise for Amy Lee to publicly admit Fallen was pretty much stolen ideas?:

EVANESCENCE singer Amy Lee has slammed her ex-boyfriend and former bandmate Ben Moody for "ripping off" other musicians on their hit album Fallen. Lee accused guitarist Moody of copying existing songs. He left the group in 2003.

Sure, she might have got the frisson of joy that comes from calling your ex a cheesecock, but if some of the artists who he'd been xeroxing decided they'd like to get some sort of payment, there's little defence Lee could now offer, surely?

It's wiser, in these matters, to restrict your public dissing of your ex to remarks about his tiny penis and poor social and domestic skills.


8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Her actual comment from an interview in Kerrang magazine, which in itself was taken out of context, was that their new gutarist, Terry Balsomo, isn't ripping off the rifts from other guitarist. It was meant as a jab at the unoriginallity of Ben Moody's style, not that they lifted their entire album from other people's work.

I don't care what you think of Evanescence. But if you're going to hate them, at least get your facts straight.

simon h b said...

My mistake.

I just assumed that was what she meant because their last album sounded like it had been lifted wholesale from any number of shopping mall goth bands.

I think we both know that's what she meant.

Anonymous said...

So they sound so much like every other "shopping mall goth band" that they they were niminated for five Grammys and won for Best Hard Rock Performance and Best New Artist? Obviously, many people who make up the music industry(those who vote for the Grammys) felt differently.

simon h b said...

The Grammys, like the Brits, reflect what makes money, not what's any good.

Shopping mall goth bands make shedloads of money (see also: My Chemical Romance).

"The music industry" and the art of music have very, very little to do with each other.

Anonymous said...

Really! If it was only whoever sold the most albums that year, then shouldn't have 50cent received that Grammy for Best New Artist? He sold more albums than Evanescence's "Fallan" album did that year. The fourteen million sold was over a three year period.

simon h b said...

You really believe the Grammys are about quality of the records, don't you?

That's rather sweet.

Evanessence sold a lot of records, they helped drive the Hot Topic Goth genre, they were rewarded for that.

Even the Grammys themselves admit they're for "achievement" - achieving sales.

Anonymous said...

From grammy.com.

Having now celebrated 47 years of musical excellence through the GRAMMY Awards, The Recording Academy continues its rich legacy and ongoing growth as the premier outlet for honoring achievements in the recording arts and supporting the music community.

The GRAMMYs are the only peer-presented award to honor artistic achievement, technical proficiency and overall excellence in the recording industry, without regard to album sales or chart position.

Now I'm not naive(so you can stop acting like a little prick) and think that sales are not a determing factor. It's a lot easier to win if an artist has sold ten times more than someone else whose been nominated. The reason why is because more members of the Academy would have heard of them rather than the latter artist. If sales were the only factor, then Evanescence would have won the next year for Best Pop song if sales were the sole factor but were beaten by a little heard of band at the time known as Los Lonely Boys.

simon h b said...

Don't be so touchy, Anonymous - i said it was sweet, I didn't suggest you were naive. Although now you mention it...

First, Los Lonely Boys won for Heaven, which was a single which sold shedloads - it was number one in the Billboard Adult Contemporary chart for something like five months. Just because you hadn't heard of a band - who were big enough to win a huge advertising deal with Pepsi and the backing of Willie Nelson - doesn't make them obscure.

And, yeah, I'm well aware what the Grammys like to pretend they're about. But unless you believe that arthouse films which open on seventeen screens are in with a shout at the Oscars, or something on Spike is going to scoop the Emmys, you know that the bit about "without regard to album sales" is the sort of thing that the RIAA say about caring about artist's rights.

Post a Comment

As a general rule, posts will only be deleted if they reek of spam.