Big Machine Is Big Loser in Garth Brooks Comeback
As I’m sure you heard last week, Garth Brooks is making his triumphant comeback and will be releasing new music and embarking on a world tour soon. His new music will be released through a partnership that will see Sony Music Entertainment as his official record label, and RCA Nashville handling the retail and radio promotion side of things. This partnership will preside over the best selling artist in the history of country music, and the 3rd best in the history of American music overall, and one that is guaranteed to sell out stadiums and dominate album sales despite his 13 year absence from the business.
During Garth’s press conference on Thursday, July 10th announcing the new partnership, Garth didn’t say that his decision to go with Sony was based around anything about the company’s capacity to serve him better than any other label. It was simply because Sony Music CEO Doug Morris personally took the time to reach out and meet with Garth on a number of occasions, showing that he really wanted to superstar on the label. Garth almost seemed to allude in his remarks that he was there for the taking of anyone who showed enough interest, and Sony Music was the only one who did so to any significant degree, or at least that is how it would appear. Garth was signed with Capitol Records Nashville for his initial run before his retirement.
So we now know who the big winner was for the Garth sweepstakes. But who was the biggest loser? Though it wouldn’t be fair to characterize every country label who could have signed the country icon as a loser, that is certainly what you could call Scott Borchetta’s Big Machine Records in the situation. Why? Because they had the biggest stake in the Garth sweepstakes, arguably a much bigger stake than either Sony Music Entertainment or RCA Nashville did, because of Big Machine’s joint venture with the radio world’s Cumulus Media called NASH Icons.
The idea behind NASH Icons is to take the class of country stars that launched their careers 25 years ago, and give them a new home. Garth Brooks isn’t just the spearhead of that Class of ’89, he is the centerpiece of it, and his sales match all the other artists of that era combined. If it wasn’t for Garth, a venture like NASH Icons couldn’t exist, and now they’ve lost the opportunity to sign the era’s biggest fish to the new imprint.
In late May, Cumulus Media CEO Lew Dickey said that Scott Borchetta and Big Machine were aggressively looking to sign artists from the NASH Icons’ 25-year “classic” era, and named Garth specifically as one of their hopeful signees. Lew Dickey said to expect an announcement “in the next 30 days.” It has now been over six weeks, and the only NASH Icons announcement that has been made was for the imprint’s General Manager Jim Weatherson. Garth had worked with Big Machine in the past, though briefly.
Meanwhile questions linger of which artists from the 25-year targeted era are even available to sign to the NASH Icons label. The three other names floated by Cumulus CEO Lew Dickey as potential NASH Icons signess were Alan Jackson, Shania Twain, and Faith Hill. Alan Jackson appears to still be signed with EMI Nashville, hypothetically making him untouchable by NASH Icons. Jackson also just announced a big 25 Year anniversary tour, with no mention of NASH Icons being in the picture. Shania Twain has been telling media outlets that she is working on a new album, but it appears she is still signed with Mercury Nashville. Shania would be the other big fish to land, right below Garth. Faith Hill likely still owes Warner Nashville an album as well, and though Dwight Yoakam wasn’t rumored as a NASH Icons artist, he certainly comes from that era, an it was announced on Monday he had re-signed with Warner Brothers. Though contracts can always be bought out and other deals can transpire, it appears that the vast majority of the NASH Icons era artists are currently locked up.
Big Machine, Cumulus Media, and NASH Icons are no doubt taking the long-term approach to this endeavor, and even though they may not sign any big fish right out of the chute, they may be taking the “If you build it, they will come” attitude. The venture isn’t set to officially launch until 2015, and the label is just one part of the partnership, with a “classic” radio format as the other.
READ: Are Cumulus Media’s NASH Plans Serious, or Just Sizzle?
Missing out on Garth in no way spells doom for NASH Icons, but signing Garth would have undoubtedly established the venture as a major force in the country music landscape, and may have stimulated the flocking of artists to the imprint, and the format split of country into two radio formats that is expected to transpire by some when NASH Icons launches. One of the very first radio stations to adopt the new format started off by stunting as GARTH-FM, playing only Garth songs, emphasizing the sway the star will have on any new “classic” radio format.
NASH Icons could still turn out to be very successful, but as it stands at the moment, they have no dance partners, at least when it comes to artists.
Anyone heard from Clint Black recently?
July 14, 2014 @ 11:46 am
Fascinating. I must say I am quite surprised that Borchetta didn’t reach out to GB, if indeed he didn’t.
I would say that I’d be interested to see if George Strait would be interested in the NASH Icons venture, but if I remember correctly he signed another five-album deal with MCA Nashville about the time he announced his retirement from touring.
July 14, 2014 @ 3:05 pm
I don’t think George Strait will ever leave MCA, it’s the only label he’s been on. Lot of loyalty there on both sides.
July 14, 2014 @ 3:20 pm
Oh, I absolutely agree and don’t see any problem with that. They’ve done right by him from the very beginning, and he in turn lends a huge amount of gravitas to them (although Sam Hunt is still a fraud). I don’t know if the original plan was to play only artists signed to Big Machine, but at this point that would be incredibly foolish. And even if, say, Garth, Dwight, AND Clint Black got on with Big Machine, I just can’t see the NASH icons format succeeding without the likes of Strait, considering so many of his greatest successes came right smack in that time period.
July 14, 2014 @ 3:48 pm
Borchetta: “Eh, Brooks looks alright………….but he ain’t as hot as Tim McGraw!” 😉
*
Just kidding! 😉
However, it is interesting, given Borchetta’s reigning reputation as one of the savviest businessmen in Nashville, that even his limitations are on full display in failing to seal the deal here.
July 14, 2014 @ 12:22 pm
I’ve said this before on here, this entire Nash brand experiment is doomed to fail.
It’s putting the cart before the horse. There’s already a mainstream name for this type of music and genre, and it’s Country. There’s zero market need to add another label on top of this.
It would be like if some corporation tried branding all of the Rock properties they own as Rolling Stone.
Rolling Stone magazine is a huge property, yet throughout it’s entire lifespan it has had little if any market presence outside of a magazine stand. There’s no Rolling Stone TV shows, or radio stations. Every so often you might see a Rolling Stone compilation disc (of an already existing artist) but those never go anywhere. Same thing happened when VH1 tried expanding their ‘Behind the Music’ brand into record stores. And this was in 2000 when CD sales were as high as they’d ever been and Behind the Music was one of the top shows on cable.
And now this Nash Icons brand is faltering. They haven’t even made Nash a brand and they’re already trying to expand it into an Icons line. I get what they’re trying to do but with out at least establishing Nash as a viable brand they’ll never be able to get anyone to care about ‘Nash Icons.’
July 14, 2014 @ 2:52 pm
Couldn’t agree more. I thought the Salon piece that called Sturgill the Radiohead of country said it well:
It”™s a strange conundrum: Why do we allow rock music to evolve in a separate sphere from its genealogy, yet get so caught up in genre-tagging when it comes to country? The fact that Simpson and Carrie Underwood can exist under one umbrella is too taxing a thought for some, whereas Coldplay and the Black Keys are both easily called rock bands, despite huge gaps in their style. It”™s part of the reason we”™ve designed the vague, splintered category that is “Americana” ”“ one that contains the likes of Rodney Crowell, Jason Isbell and yes, Simpson. In our old rulebook, they would have just been called country.
What especially galls me is the arbitrary 25 year limit. Some would argue 25 years ago is when the slippery slope started.
And besides, geezers like me are the ones buying whole albums. But I drink (and spend more for) IPA’s and craft beers. They aren’t the advertisers in every other song or for 20 minutes of the radio hour. Too bad, cuz I’ve got the bucks. And this site, not radio, has cost me quite a few of them!
July 14, 2014 @ 3:07 pm
The fact that Simpson and Carrie Underwood can exist under one umbrella is too taxing a thought for some, whereas Coldplay and the Black Keys are both easily called rock bands, despite huge gaps in their style.
Well, it’s been argued that the phenomenon that allows Coldplay to be called a rock band is pretty much what killed rock music, i.e., allowing “rock” to be the catchall term for “non-country music made by white people” or however you want to phrase it. That Salon article was really good, but that quoted piece was what prompted me to tell my wife, “Salon is better than Rolling Stone when it comes to music, but not by much.”
And I absolutely agree about the 25-year limit, and with pretty much everything Tubb said.
July 14, 2014 @ 4:03 pm
That’s not entirely fair for Coldplay, however.
More recently, yes: their two most recent albums “Mylo Xyloto” and “Ghost Stories” obviously owe markedly more to pop and adult-alternative than rock and roll. Much like Train, they’re thinking and being marketed more like a pop group now.
However, there have been stages in their commercial evolution where I feel they exhibited some genuine touches of rock influence. “Viva La Vida or Death & All His Friends” is the most surefire example. You had the shoegaze-styled vibe of “Chinese Sleep Chant”. You had nods to U2’s commercial golden age (it was produced by Brian Eno, after all! 😉 ) on “Cemeteries of London” and “Lost!”. “Violet Hill” was like a fusion of Chicago with heavy, distorted guitar riffs. And when you lend an ear to the whole of the record, I got the impression that they listened to plenty of My Bloody Valentine, Elbow, Echo & the Bunnymen and other related groups………and they basically regurgitated pinches of those influences for mass consumption.
I know Coldplay are among the most divisive groups in all-genre music today behind only Nickelback, arguably…………and thus it is absolutely tempting to dismiss them entirely. But while I would agree they are an act with more than its fair share in opportunism, I also don’t at all doubt many of their influences are rock-based, and they’ve worn them openly on their sleeves here and there throughout their career. They are primarily a pop group, in my eyes, but a more eclectic mainstream pop group that tries a little harder than most.
July 14, 2014 @ 6:03 pm
Pop is not a genre. It is used as a catch-all phrase for whatever type of music is popular during a given period.
For example, when we talk about country-pop, we are really using it as a shorthand for country-rock and/or country-rap.
It is also important to note that the nature of pop itself changed significantly over the last decade. In the early years of the decade, rock (especially of the post-grunge variety) was still a powerful force in mainstream music. Bands and singers like Matchbox 20, Hoobastank, Green Day, Nickelback, and Avril Lavigne experienced the peak of their popularity at this time. By the end of the decade, though, the rap-techno-electronic combination had established complete dominance in pop.
July 14, 2014 @ 7:21 pm
I’m not sure is would say “pop is not a genre” with such absolutism. It can be used to characterize a genre in certain cases.
July 14, 2014 @ 10:05 pm
Trigger,
My point is that the definition of pop is a function of time. Right now, pop is hip-hop/techno/electronic music. 40 years ago, pop was classic rock. 40 years before that, it was jazz.
July 14, 2014 @ 10:16 pm
Broadly speaking, I would segment pop music over the last 100 years or so into 40-year periods, each including 30 years of dominance by one genre and 10 years of transition:
mid 1920s – mid 1950s: jazz dominant
mid 1950s – mid 1960s: transition from jazz to rock (stimulated partly by invention of solid-body electric guitar)
mid 1960s – mid 1990s: rock dominant
mid 1990s – mid 00s: transition from rock to hip-hop/techno/electronic (stimulated partly by invention and advancement of digital beats)
mid 00s – current: hip-hop/techno/electronic dominant
July 14, 2014 @ 11:09 pm
I don’t deny that EDM and Rhythmic music are leading forces in pop music at the moment.
That said, pop music seems to be akin to a weathervane in a sandstorm at the moment. I can’t immediately recall the last time I’ve seen the Mainstream Top 40 chart this volatile and indecisive in terms of trends than I’ve seen in even these past four months alone.
I mean, you’ve got a frickin’ Canadian reggae trio (MAGIC!) likely to top the next edition of the Billboard Hot 100. You have Nico & Vinz: whose breakout hit has some electronic elements but owes just as much to a modern read of Peter Gabriel and Afro-beat than that. Even Enrique Iglesias is amidst yet another North American commercial comeback with a Spanish-language single “Bailando” that is an intense departure from his EDM trend-chasing and again embraces his Latin influences.
It’s a much less predictable and fascinating time to chart-watch than at any time between 2004 and 2009, that’s for sure.
July 15, 2014 @ 9:08 am
They are primarily a pop group, in my eyes, but a more eclectic mainstream pop group that tries a little harder than most.
I’ll have to take your word for it. Their style never was my thing, though I know it’s all a matter of taste. I once observed that Coldplay was for those who think U2 is too edgy. 😀 As withy FGL and country, though, it deserves to be asked just how inclusive the genre can be before there’s just not any point in it anymore.
July 14, 2014 @ 5:29 pm
I have long been a fan of Coldplay. In my opinion, their early work (from the first half of the last decade) exemplifies high-quality soft rock.
July 14, 2014 @ 5:44 pm
Eric,
What do you think of America? In my opinion they were the first, and maybe, perhaps, the best, soft rock band. Holiday and Hearts are great albums…
July 14, 2014 @ 5:51 pm
Of course their debut was great, too. In the middle sentence above, I apologize for my excessive use of qualifiers and commas. My wife, who is an excellent editor, accuses me of comma over-use and murky language, where I always leave myself several “outs” and plausible deniability. Its just my nature…..
May 14, 2023 @ 11:59 am
Garth brooks is a glorified kareoke singer that knows how to work a crowd! That’s it to a tee! He doesn’t write, his singing is mediocre, the only thing of talent are the songs that his successful songwriter wrote and he only has those songs to keep him afloat!!! He can’t come up with a no 1 hit now, he is limited and can’t keep up with today’s talented kids in country!!!!
July 14, 2014 @ 2:23 pm
Killing Time is probably my favorite radio country song from that era. I’d like to see Clint Black do another tour.
July 14, 2014 @ 9:26 pm
You’re in luck then: http://clintblack.com/tour
July 14, 2014 @ 2:51 pm
What about Dwight? He’s stayed fairly relevant with all of his acting, touring and new music. Why aren’t they looking to him for a start?
July 14, 2014 @ 3:21 pm
Well like I said above, he just re-up’d with his current label, so my guess is it will be years before he comes available. Who knows if they pursued him or not. NASH Icon’s is looking like they are about six months behind the curve here. A lot of these artists have recently signed new deals, and it could be years or a decade before they will come available again.
July 14, 2014 @ 10:30 pm
As a traditional country listener, the thought of Shania Twain being included in a classic country format is, frankly, scary. But at the same time I’d guess that many of Garth’s fans are excited to see him make a comeback, and that most of her fans have moved on. Her music does not fit the country “icons” format, but she is too old to compete in today’s pop market. Her image also falls within the ambiguous middle ground between the liberated feminism of Madonna and the demure femininity of Taylor Swift. I’d be surprised if she makes a big comeback.
I’d be curious as to your thoughts on whether Shania will ever release another commercially successful (i.e. at least platinum) album or if the train has left the station. Also where would you put her music on the country vs pop spectrum, compared to today’s mainstream country artists?
July 15, 2014 @ 7:30 am
Well last time I was in Wilmington (Coastal NC – big filming industry down there) I heard that he’s been down there filming something. I ran a quick search on the ol’ google, and which quickly confirmed that this is true, apparently it’s something called under the dome
“The most recent story comes from Under the Dome. In season 2, you will be introduced to Lyle (Dwight Yoakam). The producers decided to use a location for “Lyle”™s Barbershop,” owned in real life by William Graham, who has been in business for more than 52 years.”
So there’s that, maybe he’s too busy with the filming to really focus on other things at the moment…
July 14, 2014 @ 4:09 pm
If indeed we need a savoir for traditional country music, I would say Garth had much more a chance for effectiveness than Eric Church ever will!
July 14, 2014 @ 4:37 pm
I enjoy Church for what he is: Rock with traces of country. The first time I heard My Home Town I was reminded of the ’65 era Moody Blues’ Go Now, their first US hit.
But I don’t remember them talking so much.
July 14, 2014 @ 10:34 pm
I have a hard time thinking of Church as an “outsider”. Yes, I do know many individuals who are outsiders – but they are not celebrities, they are not signed to a major record label, and they don’t have a million fans.
July 14, 2014 @ 8:14 pm
This weeks Country Aircheck article “Revisiting the 90s”
https://www.countryaircheck.com/pdfs/current071414.pdf
July 14, 2014 @ 9:11 pm
I asked Trigger this on twitter earlier today and I wanted to get y’all’s take on this: can you imagine Garth Brooks being the cause of the Wade Bowen’s and Jason Isbell’s of Country Music to get major radio airplay to the point of them having actual hits?
July 15, 2014 @ 2:09 pm
I hate to say it, but no I don’t…I see this helping some more traditional artists, in the vein of an alan jackson, or George Strait, Maybe Randy Travis or some of those guys from the 90’s, but I’m not to sure how much red dirt artists would be able to capitalize on it. I suppose it depends on the music Garth makes!
July 14, 2014 @ 9:39 pm
I was reading this article, it brought to mind Clint Black. Then I saw him tagged, then I read the last line! The man hasn’t had an album of originals since 2005, “Drinkin’ Song and Other Logic,” which I always thought was pretty strong. That was one of the last Nashville albums I bought before migrating to the “red dirt” type of music. I’d be buying if he put anything out. The man had written (or co-written) and released “Killin’ Time,” “Nobody’s Home” and “A Better Man” by the time he was 27 years old for Christ’s sake! He has as much to say as George Jones or Hank Williams or any other of the old greats if you ask me.
July 17, 2014 @ 10:21 am
Amen, sir. He’s a masterful songwriter, keeps it mostly traditional and has such a likable demeanor that it’s hard to hate anything he does. It’s sad that he’s lost most if not all of his prominence in the years since his contract with RCA expired. Failing to renew that contract or sign a new one with another major label afterwards was his biggest mistake as far as his career is concerned. I appreciate his desire to control his material and only record songs that he himself writes or co-writes, but it ended up backfiring on him when his label Equity shut down in 2008. The fact that they were independent also killed his radio appeal since they just didn’t possess the funds or partnerships to get his stuff on the radio. Supposedly he was planning an album for release in 2008 when Equity shut down but that didn’t happen for obvious reasons. Several articles and interviews have been posted since then concerning a new album from Black and there seems to be no timetable. You can find articles concerning the subject that were posted in pretty much every year up to 2014 (here’s the most recent one: http://archive.coloradoan.com/article/20140206/ENTERTAINMENT04/302060065/Country-artist-Clint-Black-returns-new-album-acoustic-tour).
It’s really a shame, because his music is always likable and that factor might be enough to help him jump start his career again if he gets the right label in his corner. This might be sacrilege, but I hope he DOES sign with Big Machine; with Scott Borchetta, you can be sure he’ll do everything in his power to make a project a success. Any other label would probably treat him like a legacy act and not push his album too much; Borchetta would. Regardless, it’s a shame that he’s been absent for so long both because it’s likely done irreparable damage to his career as well as the lack of new music from him. And his label’s closure and the lack of a new contract in the years since have probably caused him to shelve a few of these albums that were in the oven at the time he did interviews. It’s my presiding theory that he hasn’t been sitting on the same twelve songs since 2008, so there’s probably a good bit of material in the Black vaults that we’ll never hear.
July 17, 2014 @ 10:28 am
Spoony: And by the way, if you’re just itching for new material from the man and can stomach re-recordings, he issued a Cracker Barrel exclusive CD in 2013 by the name of When I Said I Do (which, oddly, is also listed on iTunes for purchase). http://crackerbarrel.com/music/music-news/clint-black-aug-5/ I haven’t had the chance to sit down with my copy for a critical listen but it doesn’t sound bad from what I’ve heard. Despite the article’s lack of information, I personally verified that each of the eleven classics are all newly recorded by comparing the opening 30 seconds of each track to the originals. Some of them are arranged quite differently while others take keen listening to pick out the changes. I’ve yet to experience hide or hair of the three “new” tracks, though one was issued as a digital single a few years ago.
Trigger: Assuming you weren’t aware of it before or just hadn’t mentioned it, might we get a review of this album? Clint Black isn’t mentioned often around here and I’d love to get your opinion on some of his material, re-recordings or not.
July 17, 2014 @ 10:39 am
And on that note, Trigger, Killin’ Time or D’lectrified would be great candidates for a future vintage album review.
July 17, 2014 @ 10:45 am
My vote is for Killin’ Time, one of the greatest albums ever.
July 17, 2014 @ 11:28 am
I agree. But Clint has had other good albums as well, if even the praise isn’t as unanimous as it was for Killin’ Time. Nothin’ But the Taillights is another that I’m partial to myself. However, I was a kid when he was big so I wouldn’t begin to know what the general critical consensus for his other albums are. Everybody looks back at rock and pop but the only country reviews you ever find are ones that were written at the time (and that’s assuming you can find them at all as they tend to be from before the internet with Black and others from this era). That’s why I enjoy Trigger’s vintage reviews so much. I used to hate hindsight reviews because they tend to be less objective, in my experience (if it’s a classic, the review better be positive and ditto if it was a dud). However, Trigger’s are always so insightful and fairly objective even when you know he loves the music in question. It’s less about pleasing fans and more about the history contained therein and what it represented at the time, as well as putting it under the microscope as if it were a new release. THAT is how a hindsight review should be written.
July 17, 2014 @ 11:27 am
All these requests for album reviews Acca. I appreciate your zeal for finding out my opinion, but an album review on average has usually 5-7 hours of time spent on it from listening to research to writing and proofreading, and so I just can’t review everything, especially when so few people actually want to read them. But I do envision Clint Black being a future thread here, especially with the resurgence of this 25-year window.
July 17, 2014 @ 11:41 am
The thread would be nice to see and I’ll be looking for it, along with one for Big & Rich when their new album finally drops (of course I’m not holding you to it but given our previous conversations I consider it to be at least within the realm of possibility at this point). And sorry about posting so many requests, I’m not trying to badger you. Think of them more like suggestions, despite my naturally pushy demeanor (which isn’t intentional, I promise you). It’s also partially the result of my own listening habits. I keep a book in which I rate each of the albums I listen to, track-by-track, according to how much I like them. I then assigned a star rating to each one which isn’t dependent on the number of tracks I like but moreso what I think it deserves based on the artist’s history, the quality of the music, etc. like you do, I’m sure. At the moment I’m binge-listening to Clint Black’s entire discography and I’m enjoying it a lot more than I remember the last time I gave it a try. I’ve always liked him but the change in my listening preferences (thanks in no small part to your site) has caused him to become one of my favorites. This happens with a lot of artists for me and consequently I have them on the brain, hence why I tend to harp on them for a few weeks in every comment and then go on to someone else (with the obvious exception of B&R, of course).
So, long story short that’s where all of this comes from. I’m fortunate enough to be able to use a computer and listen to music while at work and I just got through with Nothin’ But the Taillights, which I thought was excellent and is very underrated. Again, not requests or demands, just suggestions. It’s sort of like I’m fishing and keep casting, looking for that one spot where I’ll get a bite. I wouldn’t want you to review just the stuff I want to see because it’s decidedly different from a lot of the quality material you shine a light on. Most of it is mainstream as well so that would be a disservice to the independent artists you champion. I know you’re busy and that there’s not a whole lot of chance that what I suggest will happen but I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least make you aware of it.
July 14, 2014 @ 10:44 pm
Faith Hill coming back as a “Nash Icon” while Tim is still a current mainstream artist would seem to be a big stretch. In my opinion she did not distinguish herself enough artistically to merit “icon” status. I don’t think she belongs in the same category as Reba, or the Dixie Chicks for that matter, based on the music she recorded. She’s more like an older Carrie Underwood, at best.
July 14, 2014 @ 10:54 pm
I would be fine with radio stations playing Faith Hill if this is the type of song they feature:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvkMm_nXZdY
July 15, 2014 @ 3:39 pm
That one is my favorite of her’s, along with maybe “If My Heart Had Wings.”
July 15, 2014 @ 2:25 am
This may sound harsh, but Faith Hill is the single most overrated, anonymous country music superstar of the past twenty years in my view (that’s right: even edging Rascal Flatts).
I’ve argued before in a previous thread discussion why I believe this to be the case, and won’t reiterate my entire point here…………..but in a nutshell I’ve always studied her as a trend-chasing, decidedly faceless singer who, in spite of having a strong voice, nonetheless laps up most anything Music Row throws at her and lacks any sort of identity that separates her from the others as an entertainer. Not to mention that she has repeatedly chosen to cut some terribly written material.
Nowhere is all of the above most blatantly apparent than on “Fireflies” and its lead single “Mississippi Girl”. She had been coming off of a commercially underperforming release (“Cry”) and so…………..what does she do? She releases a PR release put to song desperately reassuring many of her disenchanted fans who thought she had sold out to Adult Contemporary radio that she was as country as ever, and sought out John Rich and many of the most formulaic hitmakers at the time to complete what sounds much more like a written-by-committee public service announcement put to music than a genuine album from a recording artist.
Even “American Heart” sounded calculated and opportunistic to me: like she thought she could capitalize on the economic discontent of many Americans but, rather than cut something like “Cost of Livin'”, basically offered yet another auditory Hallmark card replete with “Hang In There!” motivational poster cliches sprinkled with slices of the same imagery nodding to blue-collar Americana that you expect to see in political ads.
*
Again, I know this will sound harsh to some of you…………….but there’s no country superstar in the past twenty years that I can say is as anonymous and faceless as Faith Hill.
Now, I already know what some of you are going to say next. You’ll interject: “Hey, what about Rascal Flatts? Or Florida-Georgia Line?” Well, I’ve never been a Rascal Flatts fan at all, and the vast majority of their material is quite forgettable and banal. Yet, at least it can be admitted they have influenced many newer groups, and they also have a small handful of individual songs that I do genuinely like. As for Florida-Georgia Line…………….well, they haven’t released their sophomore album yet, but as terribly annoying as they are in the most part………at least they have a recognizable (for all the wrong reasons though) vocal and Joey Moi’s touch makes their music just as much catchy and hooky as it is shallow and juvenile. At least you can identify a Florida Georgia Line song when you hear it.
But can the same be said for Faith Hill? At least I can’t. It all sounded like well-sung but banal, interchangeable Adult Contemporary. The biggest compliment I can give her as of late is that she harmonizes well with her husband over his current single “Meanwhile Back At Mama’s”.
July 15, 2014 @ 8:28 am
Noah, great points, I could not have said it better.
July 15, 2014 @ 11:34 am
I really like this song as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCmsZUN4r_s
July 15, 2014 @ 11:49 am
My first thought was that Garth and Scott probably dislike each other intensely.
July 15, 2014 @ 11:22 pm
Eric, I have to disagree here. I think the song “Breathe” was very pop and the video seemed to be an attempt to compete with other highly sexualized videos in the late 1990s. “Breathe” was the last exit on the highway before “Cry”.
I agree that “Take Me As I Am” was one of her better songs. But it was not particularly original (early Faith Hill songs aren’t stylistically very different from early Carrie Underwood songs, in my opinion) and her music career since then has not been very consistent with the message of the song either.
July 18, 2014 @ 1:13 pm
You know, I actually thought “Mississippi Girl” and “Like We Never Loved At All” weren’t bad. Yeah, the former is a forerunner of the laundry list songs of today but at least it has a theme and somewhat of a story. The latter I consider to be very good. But you’re right about the “songwriting committee” comment. I think John Rich is a good writer but he writes so much with so many different people at any given time that I think he stretches himself too thin and his best ideas are used too much. For instance, “Like We Never Loved At All” has basically the same theme as Big & Rich’s new single “Look At You.” Not that songs aren’t allowed to be similar but when they’re from the same parties one starts to take notice. Hence why every radio personality using the same writers in 2014 is a problem (ironically John Rich isn’t a part of that committee anymore).
July 14, 2014 @ 11:23 pm
Well some of the big hitters are definatley off the table but there’s still a good list of artists who were hit makers that aren’t yet committed to a label.
Here’s a quick list of artists Scott may pursue:
Clint Black
Travis Tritt
Lorrie Morgan
Pam Tillis
Aaron Tippin
Sammy Kershaw
Kathy Mattea
Joe Diffie
Tracy Lawrence
Clay Walker
Ronnie Dunn
Tracy Byrd
Trace Adkins
Collin Raye
Billy Dean
Tanya Tucker
Mary Chapin Carpenter
Lone star
Alabama
Mark Chesnutt
John Anderson
Martina McBride
LeAnn Rimes
Dixie Chicks
Wade Hayes
Rhett Akins
Rick Trevino
Billy Ray Cyrus
Mark Wills
Jo Dee Messina
Chely Wright
Terri Clark
Steve Wariner
Some of these are a lot bigger than others and would
Therefore be more appealing to sign but they all were hit makers of a sort and they all have fan bases that would support them.
Alabama
Clint Black
LeAnn Rimes
Pam Tillis
Travis Tritt
That would be a strong lineup that would be a great start to a label. It could be almost any combination of the artists I listed though.
July 15, 2014 @ 2:56 pm
I’d also add Clinton Gregory to that list, he did pretty well in the 90’s for being on an independent label.
Still making new music just like the rest of that list, and getting ignored by radio.
July 15, 2014 @ 3:36 pm
Nick Brown: Clinton Gregory – love his songs “Play, Ruby, Play” and “If It Weren’t For Country Music (I’d Go Crazy).”
Jordan Stacey: I would add a few others to that great list:
Hal Ketchum
Shenandoah
Diamond Rio
James House
Doug Stone
Clinton Gregory
Restless Heart
Suzy Bogguss
Sawyer Brown
Lee Roy Parnell
John Michael Montgomery
Neal McCoy
Confederate Railroad
BlackHawk
Little Texas
Ken Mellons
Wynonna Judd
Patty Loveless
Paul Overstreet
John Berry
David Ball
McBride & The Ride
July 18, 2014 @ 1:14 pm
Clay Walker is signed to Curb Records. Somehow I doubt they’d let another Tim McGraw situation play out.
July 15, 2014 @ 6:13 am
I wonder if Big Machine’s lack of promotion on the last two Trisha Yearwood releases played in to Garth not partnering with Big Machine again. They were her strongest (IMO) releases and they got little promotion aside from her telly appearances. I would be happy to have a classic format with no Twain, Swift, Rascal Flatts or Luke Bryan ever.
July 15, 2014 @ 1:58 pm
I think you hit the nail right on the head.
July 17, 2014 @ 4:17 pm
How about Carrie Underwood. Scott Borchetta would be happy to add Carrie Underwood to his Big Machine Label Group as long as Carri Underwood might resign her Sony label. That way, Carrie Underwood will move to Big Machine Records and make pop music as her next evolution of her music during her career. That would be awesome. Scott Borchetta will be so happy if Carrie Underwood moves to Big Machine Records and make pop music there. 🙂
July 19, 2014 @ 12:14 am
I finally found that article that I keep referencing about Clint Black, label negotiations and radio: http://www.examiner.com/article/clint-black-s-guitar-compadre-confirms-upcoming-album-and-country-radio-dilemma
Trigger, you might throw it up in the newsfeed for those of us that are interested.
July 19, 2014 @ 12:20 am
I don’t link to examiner.com articles. Examiner.com is a scam on both writers and readers. Too bad if there’s some good information there because nobody will see it, and nobody will find it through search engines because Google hates examiner.com too.
July 21, 2014 @ 12:19 pm
Hmm, didn’t know that. Ironically I happened to find it with Google, but only after an hour or two of searching for a recent article about Mr. Black. So should I just assume that none of the information in the article is accurate? Or is it just a bit yellowed?
July 21, 2014 @ 12:34 pm
Not saying it isn’t accurate at all. It’s just not something I’m going to link to.
July 21, 2014 @ 12:41 pm
I respect that and I apologize for my ignorance of the Examiner’s reputation. That said, do you have an article you could cite for me or simply just give me a summary of what makes the site so hated? I assume otherwise you might have actually thrown the link up if it were Billboard or something. I’d like to know what the deal is with them.
July 20, 2014 @ 7:55 am
Borchetta’s comment on Garth and Sony http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6165534/garth-brooks-new-record-deal-tour
July 21, 2014 @ 8:26 am
In my opinion Record Labels are Record labels so the difference is they all carry different singers if NASH will be fine without Garth Brooks then they’ll be just fine plus Garth Brooks is famous for heaven sakes he’s been popular since his first album back in 1989, then years later he is still after he retired and as of now today he is popular! So what I’m trying to say is every celebrity is popular even if they die of an old or a health problem they’ll always be famous because people will remember them for being who they were and what they did.