Author Topic: Michelle Branch  (Read 321128 times)

Lucy

  • Make me high on lullabies
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1185 on: January 06, 2006, 05:30:22 pm »
err, spill...

tricia

  • Moderators
  • Keepin' secrets at midnight
  • *****
  • Posts: 3342
  • Trust me, I'm a doctor.
    • View Profile
    • Facebook
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1186 on: January 06, 2006, 07:43:40 pm »
Quote from: "missbehavior"
haha

I have the truth about why the Branch slagged off The Veronicas :D


Jealousy?
I think you underestimate the level of my sneakiness

missbehavior

  • Willing and Able to... Run
  • **
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1187 on: January 07, 2006, 12:13:01 am »
Kinda.

I PM'd you Tricia. *taps side of nose*

  • Guest
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1188 on: January 07, 2006, 11:45:48 am »
I imagine the reason Michelle took a shot at The Veronicas is because of how they allow themselves to be exploited from an image perspective to sell music.  This is what Michelle's post was all about.  She is sick of having to compramise herself as an artist in order to remain marketable to the MTV demographic.

  Michelle also appears to be fed up with the flac she's taking for Jess and her decision to promote their upcoming album as a country record.  I think the reason this album has taken so long to get released is largely because Maverick wants Michelle to make pop songs for TRL and what-not and they aren't very happy that Michelle has too much integrity to sacrifice her music for the extra money she could make by churning out radio-friendly pop songs for the rest of her life.

  Michelle wants what every artist deserves: creative freedom.  She doesn't want to act a certain way so her music will get extra sales based on the false image she would be presenting, and she doesn't want to deviate from making the kind of music she feels in her gut just to stay on top of the charts.  

  And, proposing the question 'why did Michelle want to be famous in the first place?' isn't really fair.  When you're a 17-18 year old girl who has dreamed about being a musician your whole life, you're probably not thinking about how your just going to be exploited by a record label, you're just freaking out that your dream is coming true.  If she had it all to do over again, I'm sure she wouldn't sign to a big label, but that's all in hindsight.

missbehavior

  • Willing and Able to... Run
  • **
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1189 on: January 07, 2006, 05:14:53 pm »
Quote from: "abbottANDcostello"
I imagine the reason Michelle took a shot at The Veronicas is because of how they allow themselves to be exploited from an image perspective to sell music.
Wrong.



Anyhoo, she should just put out some new music already. I'm bored.

tricia

  • Moderators
  • Keepin' secrets at midnight
  • *****
  • Posts: 3342
  • Trust me, I'm a doctor.
    • View Profile
    • Facebook
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1190 on: January 07, 2006, 06:46:17 pm »
Quote from: "missbehavior"
Kinda.

I PM'd you Tricia. *taps side of nose*


Fantabulous.

Thanks Tal...you're the best!
I think you underestimate the level of my sneakiness

nosticker

  • Your true colors shown
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
    • AOL Instant Messenger - DanTVFish
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1191 on: January 07, 2006, 11:36:54 pm »
Quote from: "abbottANDcostello"

  Michelle also appears to be fed up with the flac she's taking for Jess and her decision to promote their upcoming album as a country record.
  And, proposing the question 'why did Michelle want to be famous in the first place?' isn't really fair.  If she had it all to do over again, I'm sure she wouldn't sign to a big label, but that's all in hindsight.


Look at what going country did for Jewel's career; it almost killed it.  If she wants to go country, she will essentially be starting from scratch, as she has no identity within country music, and chances are the public will not follow her there.  The label is trying to avoid it for good reasons.

Who knows why anyone does things?  Major labels are great for international distribution, but sucky at almost every other aspect you can possibly think of.

If she really wants to be free, she should settle up with WB and start fresh, independently.

Again, she is where millions of talented people will never be.  I do not feel bad for her.  I'd dig her so much more if she would just shut up and played the hand she was dealt like Nessa has.


Dan/NS

  • Guest
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1192 on: January 08, 2006, 09:19:56 am »
Quote
Look at what going country did for Jewel's career; it almost killed it. If she wants to go country, she will essentially be starting from scratch, as she has no identity within country music, and chances are the public will not follow her there. The label is trying to avoid it for good reasons.


  Sure, the label has good reasons to keep her from going in this direction, but all they care about is profit margains.  Michelle is maturing as a musician and she should let herself grow in whatever direction feels most natural to her.  Michelle is one of the few artists of this generation who is about the music first-most and fore-most.  This is one of the few things she actually does have in common with Vanessa.  Implying that Michelle should just go through the motions and churn out the same old homogenized songs year after year is blasphemy according to pop culture religion.  If Michelle loses a bunch of fans because of her new sound, then so be it.  Remember what she said in her post-  she'ed rather be playing her guitar in a coffee house and folding clothes at the gap than be a superstar but have to compramise her integrity and music because of Maverick. The difference between Vanessa and Michelle is that Vanessa has been lucky enough to make her albums the way she invisions them.  Right now, that freedom is being taken away from Michelle.  If Vanessa's label tried to force her into making music she didn't want to make, I'm sure she would be just as upset as Michelle, because, like Michelle she's about the music, not the fame.

Quote
If she really wants to be free, she should settle up with WB and start fresh, independently.


  Michelle only wishes it were that easy.  Maverick is in crisis mode financially, and Michelle is one of the few artists they have that has the potential to make a lot of money for them so they aren't letting her go anywhere.  Michelle has, however, unsuccessfully attempted to sue her way off of Maverick multiple times.

  • Guest
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1193 on: January 08, 2006, 09:38:07 am »
I don't know why so many people here seem to be more worried about Michelle losing fans and/or popularity than the fact that she isn't being given the right to grow as an artist.  

  I appreciate the fact that many of you are fans of Michelle's original sound and you're disappointed that she may be deviating from that, but, in all fairness, her first three records were just diary confessional, bubble-gum pop albums.  I love those albums too, but, when you get right down to it, bubble-gum acts grow on trees.  There will always be a sufficient amount of that around.  If Michelle thinks she's ready to move on to something else, I for one would like to hear what she's got to offer.  If that means she loses some fair-weather fans and some chart recognition, I don't care.  Popularity and chart success doesn't mean squat.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is going to have to explain to me how Ashlee Simpson hit  8O number one with her very first album, 8O  but none of folk-rock icon Joni Mitchell's albums ever so much as broke the top ten.

missbehavior

  • Willing and Able to... Run
  • **
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1194 on: January 08, 2006, 09:55:00 am »
I interviewed Saul Williams the other day...he's like THE artist of our generation. A complete genius. The quote that stood out was "The only thing critical acclaim means is that you can't sell records."


Yeah, I just thought I should shove that in here.

jessicaweiser

  • Just a day, just an ordinary day
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1195 on: January 08, 2006, 10:26:09 am »
Listen, just to clarify something, I've actually heard SSLP. Parts of it anyway. It ain't country, my friends. Not what you'd expect to hear on a country record anyway. I know they are going to do a crossover type thing w/ the record. The song that comes closest to country is "My Oh My." I think the record is more folk/rock.

Also Michelle is not "going country." She's doing this side project with Jess and then Jess is doing a solo country record and my guess is that Michelle will go back to making pop/rock records, but who knows.

  • Guest
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1196 on: January 08, 2006, 10:44:08 am »
Quote from: "jessicaweiser"
Listen, just to clarify something, I've actually heard SSLP. Parts of it anyway. It ain't country, my friends. Not what you'd expect to hear on a country record anyway. I know they are going to do a crossover type thing w/ the record. The song that comes closest to country is "My Oh My." I think the record is more folk/rock.

Also Michelle is not "going country." She's doing this side project with Jess and then Jess is doing a solo country record and my guess is that Michelle will go back to making pop/rock records, but who knows.


I saw The Wreckers in Chicago, and if that's how the album is going to sound, then I agree that the countryness of it is mild at most.  I didn't mean to sound like Michelle was turning into Bill Monroe, but I guess I did overuse the word "country."  It just hits a nerve with me when I hear people complaining about her developing as an artist simply because she will lose popularity.

  Doesn't anyone care about the integrity of the music anymore, or is everyone content to adhere to whatever MTV and the radio gives the most spins to?

  • Guest
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1197 on: January 08, 2006, 11:01:20 am »
Quote from: "missbehavior"
I interviewed Saul Williams the other day...he's like THE artist of our generation. A complete genius. The quote that stood out was "The only thing critical acclaim means is that you can't sell records."


Yeah, I just thought I should shove that in here.


I can't say I totally disagree with Saul Williams's statement, but I will say that a legitimate musican should care more about making quality music (or, at least whatever music feels true to them) rather than making marketable music.

If one cares more about selling music than being true to themselves, then they aren't artists, they're businessmen.  And, if they let their thirst for popularity compramise their music, then they aren't professional musicians, they are nothing more than professional celebrities.

Neither critic acclaim nor sales numbers mean anything.  Harmonium didn't have either and that album was great.  Britney Spears's Oops I Did It Again had both, and that album isn't even in Harmonium's league.

jessicaweiser

  • Just a day, just an ordinary day
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1198 on: January 08, 2006, 12:39:09 pm »
Quote from: "abbottANDcostello"
Quote from: "jessicaweiser"
Listen, just to clarify something, I've actually heard SSLP. Parts of it anyway. It ain't country, my friends. Not what you'd expect to hear on a country record anyway. I know they are going to do a crossover type thing w/ the record. The song that comes closest to country is "My Oh My." I think the record is more folk/rock.

Also Michelle is not "going country." She's doing this side project with Jess and then Jess is doing a solo country record and my guess is that Michelle will go back to making pop/rock records, but who knows.


I saw The Wreckers in Chicago, and if that's how the album is going to sound, then I agree that the countryness of it is mild at most.  I didn't mean to sound like Michelle was turning into Bill Monroe, but I guess I did overuse the word "country."  It just hits a nerve with me when I hear people complaining about her developing as an artist simply because she will lose popularity.

  Doesn't anyone care about the integrity of the music anymore, or is everyone content to adhere to whatever MTV and the radio gives the most spins to?


Sorry, I should have said I was responding to Dan(nosticker) and not really yours. Also I was in Chicago too :) Such a great show. I have photos of it up somewhere. We were in the vip balcony seating up above the stage.

I care about the integrity of music. I don't give a shit about the radio or MTV.

ps: I'm a huge fan of Ani Difranco too.

jessicaweiser

  • Just a day, just an ordinary day
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Michelle Branch
« Reply #1199 on: January 08, 2006, 12:41:31 pm »
Quote from: "abbottANDcostello"

If one cares more about selling music than being true to themselves, then they aren't artists, they're businessmen.  


Amen brother :)