That said, the little one does look great, you (plural) seem to have found a way around your aesthetic concerns without settling for an (un)comfortable midpoint.
Because it's like, their BRAND, you know? Even though they're, like, totally INDIE and don't believe in MARKETING because, like, they hate pop music because it just sounds like MARKETING.
(Don't get me started on this, because it will only bring up a host of other complaints. And I'm trying very hard to be goal-focused and think about what we're getting out of this. A single to promote us at Truck, and hopefully get our song on the radio. And that's it.)
8 Comments:
Clicking on the photo leads to a "no permissions" page. Are you entirely supposed to be showing us this?
That said, the little one does look great, you (plural) seem to have found a way around your aesthetic concerns without settling for an (un)comfortable midpoint.
No, that's my fault. I marked it "friends and family only" on Flickr but I've made it public now.
so why exactly is the record label's name/logo more prominent than the artists whose creative work is the product on sale?
Because it's like, their BRAND, you know? Even though they're, like, totally INDIE and don't believe in MARKETING because, like, they hate pop music because it just sounds like MARKETING.
(Don't get me started on this, because it will only bring up a host of other complaints. And I'm trying very hard to be goal-focused and think about what we're getting out of this. A single to promote us at Truck, and hopefully get our song on the radio. And that's it.)
You would think the *BRAND* could make enough space on the cover to at least put in the SONG TITLES.
Oh, coz this is clearly an indie label, so it's clearly about the MUSIC and not the BRANDING, right?
that's so cool. it looks like you're fending off demons with your guitar and pedals.
Post a Comment
<< Home