The Marginalization of Taylor Swift Producer Nathan Chapman
In November of 1994, then President Bill Clinton and his Democrat Party suffered a historic and debilitating defeat to Republicans in the mid-term elections that would later be known as The Republican Revolution. Led by Newt Gingrich, Republicans picked up 54 seats in the House of Representatives and 8 in the Senate, gaining solid control of both houses of Congress in an election that was seen as a wholesale rebuke of Bill Clinton and his policies.

Bill Clinton, reeling from the election, did something unprecedented to recover politically. Behind the back of his long-time aids, most importantly his Communication’s Director and Senior Adviser George Stephanopoulos who’d been with Clinton since his early days in Arkansas, Clinton hired a Republican pollster named Dick Morris to secretly regain his political footing. Clinton was initially so embarrassed of hiring Dick Morris, he had a code name, “Charlie,” and while the rest of Clinton’s staff worked on writing Clinton’s 1995 State of the Union speech in the conventional manner after the big midterm defeat, Clinton himself was hiding out with Dick Morris in the residential portion of the White House writing the speech that he would ultimately deliver.
Dick Morris was the mastermind of “triangulation,” which was a way to appeal to as many voters as possible while giving little regard to political ideology. It was all about winning. Soon Dick became one of Clinton’s chief advisers, and was Clinton’s campaign manager for the election in 1996. According to George Stephanopoulos, over the first nine months of 1995, nobody had more power over the President than Dick Morris. Stephanopoulos also said he “despised” Dick Morris. Despite Stephanopoulos being considered one of the key figures behind Bill Clinton’s success, he was marginalized in the Administration by Morris. In 1996, Stephanopoulos quit the Clinton White House.
If there was a parallel in the music world, about the only difference between what George Stephanopoulos was to Bill Clinton, and what producer Nathan Chapman was to Taylor Swift is that when Nathan Chapman began to be pushed aside, Taylor Swift wasn’t in the midst of defeat, she was riding an overwhelming wave of financial and industry success.

Nathan Chapman is a session musician, songwriter, and record producer. If you wanted to point to one individual behind the sonic success of Taylor Swift, it would be him. The first record Chapman ever produced was Taylor Swift’s first, self-titled release in 2006. Swift picked Chapman because he produced her first demos when Swift was only 14. He believed in her when nobody else did. Since then Chapman has been the primary producer on every one of Swift’s albums. He also plays much of the music that makes it onto Taylor Swift records: drums, acoustic and electric guitars, piano and keyboards and synthesizers. Nathan has won 2 Grammy’s, a CMA, and ACM Award as Taylor’s producer, and been nominated for several more. If you hear a Taylor Swift song, you’re hearing just as much of Nathan Chapman as you are Taylor Swift….except to when it comes to Taylor’s last album Red.
Despite the partnership of Nathan Chapman and Taylor Swift creating arguably the most successful modern country artist, with sales beating every other country star and winning Taylor two CMA Entertainer of the Year awards, apparently this was not enough to appease Taylor’s label owner, Scott Borchetta. During the recording process of the Red album, Scott Borchetta inserted himself into the production—something he’d previously prided himself in staying out of aside from his role as an executive. Borchetta suggested that Taylor Swift needed help beyond Nathan Chapman.
“I said, ‘You know, this song isn’t working yet.’ They both looked at me (Swift and Nathan Chapman) with a blank stare. “The chorus isn’t elevating like it needs to. Where you’re wanting to take the song, it’s not going there. It needs a Max Martin type of lift.””¦ At that point Borchetta called Martin. Both Borchetta and Swift agree that it was a turning point for “Red”.
It was the Dick Morris moment in Taylor Swift’s career. Borchetta, feeling that Taylor’s success could even be greater than her already world-beating status, reached out to two Swedish producers from the pop world—Max Martin and Shellback—renown for cutting mega hits that appeal to the widest possible audience for bands like the Backstreet Boys and ‘N Sync. They were the parallel in the music world to Dick Morris and the “triangulation” theorem.

Max Martin and Shellback were not just brought in as producers, but co-writers for Taylor Swift’s songs. Though the partnership only resulted in three tracks for the album Red, it included the album’s two biggest singles by far, “We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together,” and “I Knew You Were Trouble.” The Max Martin/Shellback material made up three of the album’s first four singles, while many of Swift’s original Red songs that she penned solo stayed shelved.
“I see myself as kind of this girl who writes songs in her bedroom,” Taylor recently told the Associated Press. “You can kind of dress it up all you want…but I’m always going to be a girl who writes songs in her bedroom in my own personal perception of myself.”
This type of simplicity in approach was what built tremendous loyalty among Taylor Swift’s fans. She wasn’t an artist on a pedestal. She was real; someone they could relate to. But the Max Martin/Shellback material was completely counter-intuitive to Taylor’s “writing songs in her bedroom” image, both in style and approach. The songs also pushed the boundaries of what music sold as “country” sounded like, with “We Are Never…” being a decidedly bubblegum pop song, and “I Knew You Were Trouble” featuring a dubstep beat.
Taylor Swift also told the AP about her next album, “It’s too early to tell who are going to be my predominant collaborators, but I do know that my absolute dream collaborators were Shellback and Max Martin on the last project.” By all accounts, Max Martin and Shellback came into the album-making process near the end of Red, when Scott Borchetta was not hearing the type of radio singles he wanted. With Swift’s next album, Max Martin/Shellback collaborations, or rough equivalents from other well-known pop producers could be the predominant direction of the material, with most of the vestiges of the adolescent Swift as songwriter and co-producer falling away.
Meanwhile Nathan Chapman must be wondering what else could he have done. It is very likely he will still be involved in Swift’s album making process for her new record in some capacity, but his role as the man behind Taylor Swift’s sound, and her initial success through making music that was simple, yet substantive, appear to be over. Just like George Stephanopoulos, Nathan Chapman has been left in a lurch when the thirst for wide appeal overruns principle.
November 1, 2013 @ 9:59 am
Why are you surprised by this? She is a pop singer who sells pop music to teenage girls. Country music fans were a stepping stone, a bridge to cross on the way to the promised land. And she isn’t even the first Nashville singer to follow this path, her idol Shania Twain had already done that way back in the 90s.
November 1, 2013 @ 4:11 pm
And she isn”™t even the first Nashville singer to follow this path, her idol Shania Twain had already done that way back in the 90s.
Not true because Shania is country/pop and didn’t go synthesized or bubblegum teen pop like Taylor and Britney. Martin and Shellback were chosen because they produced Britney’s teen pop albums. A big deal was made about this in the beginnings of Red. Taylor also named Britney as an idol, making a big deal about her Britney poster.
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00021514.html
Which bubblegum pop producers did Shania ever use? If she’s ever made a bubblegum pop song no one has heard it. Songs like We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together Again are waaaaaaay too pop for country fans and we hate them on country radio. Why release your most pop and annoying song to country radio? No country artists have gone as pop as Taylor and that totally works for her and her fans but it sucks that some country artists who don’t do pop nearly as well and should stay country are trending in that direction. Keep it country guys.
November 2, 2013 @ 6:45 am
“Which bubblegum pop producers did Shania Twain ever use?”
Her husband, Mutt Lange.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_John_%22Mutt%22_Lange
November 2, 2013 @ 7:22 am
From the list of albums he’s produced, I’d say mainstream rock producer is more like it.
November 2, 2013 @ 1:28 pm
Correct, Mutt is no bubblegum pop producer at all. Someone needs to listen to Shania’s albums and Red back to back. With Up! Shania went more pop than her previous albums with but it’s not nearly as pop as Britney’s albums or Red with all that heavy synth and bubblegum. Shania has no We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together Again.
November 2, 2013 @ 9:24 pm
Shania recorded a lot of light, fluffy bubblegum pop in her later albums. In spite of the separate “red” and “green” CDs, “Up!” was mostly a straight up pop album with very little country influence. It was so pop heavy that most of the singles released from that album did not even make it into the top 10 on the country charts. Shania also had a big following among teenage girls, and she was clearly trying to project an image that was younger than her age, to attract the young listeners.
I did read her autobiography as well, and what struck me the most was how little she had to say about the direction of contemporary country music and her influence on the genre. I got the impression that she thinks the country category is just an inconvenience and that she wanted to think about it as little as possible once she made it in pop music.
November 3, 2013 @ 12:31 pm
Even so, Up! didn’t go as pop as Red. Listen to the differences in the production, music, and use of synthesizers. Even just vocally Shania sounds more country and is a better country singer, whereas Taylor sounds more pop and is a better pop singer. That’s more obvious when listening to Shania’s earlier, more country albums. Musically, the songs on Up! are most similar to Begin Again, the most country song on Red, and not all all like We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together. Red is closer to Britney than Shania and even shares the same teen pop producer with Britney.
It was so pop heavy that most of the singles released from that album did not even make it into the top 10 on the country charts.
Well three singles made top 10 and two more made top 20 on Billboard Hot Country. I wish country radio stuck with that pop blocking instead of encouraging it including special deals to play pure pop songs to #1 now. By today’s country music standards or lack thereof, the entire Up! album is incredible country/pop.
November 3, 2013 @ 6:06 pm
Shania’s songs had more country window dressing than Taylor’s, but the themes of many of her songs were not country at all. A little bit of token fiddle here and there does not make a song country. For example there was nothing country about the subject of her first single on “Up!”, “I’m Gonna Getcha Good”. Many of the singles from her earlier album “Come On Over” such as “That Don’t Impress Me Much” were not country either. And unlike Taylor who has focused more recently on pop radio releases, Shania tried to push most of her pop sounding songs onto country stations.
I actually found Shania’s attitude towards country music and its fans to be much more disrespectful. In Taylor’s case it comes across more as “I’ve changed” than “I don’t care”.
November 3, 2013 @ 7:01 pm
Shania”™s songs had more country window dressing than Taylor”™s, but the themes of many of her songs were not country at all. A little bit of token fiddle here and there does not make a song country.
True but no country instrument at all and music that is all or mostly synthesized makes a song more pop and less country. Forget about the lyrics and just listen to the music and production. That’s the main difference between Up! and Red. There isn’t a song on Up! with music or production as pop or bubblegum as We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together.
And unlike Taylor who has focused more recently on pop radio releases, Shania tried to push most of her pop sounding songs onto country stations.
Most of the singles Taylor pushed to country radio after her debut album are teen pop and Shania never sent anything as pop as We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together Again to country radio. Clear Channel didn’t even have that promotional deal back then.
November 2, 2013 @ 2:47 am
You’re underestimating Swift if you think she only sells music to teenage girls. Acts like One Direction and Justin Bieber appeal primarily to teenage girls. Swift sells millions more albums than both of those acts combined. She appeals to teenagers, college students, 20-something hipsters, soccer moms and grandparents.
Not only are you underestimating her commercial appeal, you’re underestimating her talent. Also, dismissing teenage girls’ tastes as juvenile is sexist and boring.
November 2, 2013 @ 2:00 pm
I don’t think she sells music only to teen girls but from what I’ve seen the vast majority of her fans are preteen and teen girls and more so than any country artist. They and their parents who drive them around and pay for their music make up most of her concert audiences. That’s why it made sense for Taylor to go bubblegum teen pop while she and her fans are still young enough to like it, added to the fact that she’s going for pop airplay and huge international sales and country isn’t as popular outside the US. Shania’s songs were very different and more appealing to older folks too, like most country songs.
“The seven-time Grammy winner’s two-hour show goes heavy on theatrical elements, much to the pleasure of the crowd of young women and girls, many dressed in signature Swift outfits and waving their sparkly wands in the air.”
“There was no encore, despite the teen crowds’ pleading screams.”
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/taylor-swift-finds-love-los-609674
“I think my girls, and the thousands of other pre-teens in the arena, truly danced, and sung, and shouted, and screamed from their hearts last night.”
http://www.confessionsofaparent.com/3-discoveries-i-made-about-pre-teens-at-the-taylor-swift-concert/
November 2, 2013 @ 2:02 pm
Grace, undoubtedly most of the soccer moms and grandmothers you describe are buying the songs for their daughters and granddaughters. Ok, maybe her fan base is a little broader than teenage girls – she probably gets lots of 8 year old girls who have her songs stuck in their young heads, and the occasional early 20s sorority girl who is desperate for romance and spends more time breaking up with boyfriends than studying.
And no, there is nothing sexist about saying that teenage girls have juvenile tastes. Teens (at least the under 18 crowd) are juveniles by definition, and most of them have juvenile tastes because they have not had time to grow up, make a living, support themselves, or experience the things that most adults have experienced in life.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:25 pm
“the occasional early 20s sorority girl who is desperate for romance and spends more time breaking up with boyfriends than studying”
What about the occasional male grad student in his early-to-mid 20s?
I guess that doesn’t fit your stereotype of a Taylor Swift fan.
November 3, 2013 @ 11:13 am
Wait! So now that technically I’m a 21yoF, about to start grad school. Not a sorority girl (far from it, since I’m not too fond of people), that means I can’t and shouldn’t be a Taylor fan? 🙁
Why the stereotype? 🙁
Another question, why the disdain for teen girls? 🙁
November 1, 2013 @ 11:33 am
Some of Taylor’s recent comments have left me wondering whether she has any commitment to sonic principle whatsoever. It seems to me that the only important aspect of the song to her are the lyrics, and it would not matter whether the musical arrangement is rap, classical country, or anything in between.
November 1, 2013 @ 10:04 pm
She’s just representing ppl in her generation, these days what matters the most is the quality of the music instead of which genre one belongs to. What’s so great about ‘Red’, for me personally, was how it still sounds like Taylor (sans the 3 Pop singles, sent to Pop radios) while she’s playing ‘dress up’ sonically. Plus she’s still in her early twenties, so if she wants to play around, now is the time for that.
Though with all that, I have mixed feelings with Chapman being pushed aside. While I find his production can be too simple at times, but I love how he still tries to record stuffs via analog recording. And like Trig said there, simple, but substantive. Then there’s nostalgia with his production.
November 2, 2013 @ 12:11 am
The simpler the recording, the better. In my opinion, Taylor’s best album sonically was her self-titled debut.
November 3, 2013 @ 11:40 am
Matter of taste, I guess. I prefer the sonic on ‘Red’ (sans MM tracks); Jeff Bhasker, Dan Wilson, and Nathan Chapman did a really great job there. The rest are alright-ish, with MM taking the crown for the worst. MM is great as a pop producer, but he ain’t shit when you get him to try blend his style with other artists. ‘Trouble’ is a great tune though, that’s the furthest I’d compliment him.
Also I liked a lot the sonic on ‘Speak Now’, even with its ‘shiny’ mixing.
And I agreed with Trigger that Nathan should be an executive producer for LP5, and keep Scotty Bee far, far away from the project.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:11 am
Taylor’s main focus is on lyrics and melody. Anything else are not as much priorities for her as those two.
November 1, 2013 @ 11:42 am
By the way, the Dick Morris comparison is perfect!
November 1, 2013 @ 1:09 pm
Good job at making me feel sad about not only a pop country guy, but also a political guy, heh.
November 1, 2013 @ 1:57 pm
I think this was bound to happen, due to pop culture trends and their effects on Taylor’s fan base as they go through different stages of adolescence.
It could have been hard to continue to please all of her fans by sticking with her earlier style. The simple songs that appealed to a shy 12 year old girl and her mom might not appeal to hip, sexually liberated 18 year old college students, for example. Her early songs were widely considered to be appropriate for 10-15 year old tweens, but girls in major cities face a lot of peer pressure to lose their innocence when they reach their late teens and beyond. I don’t think it would be “cool” for 18-22 year olds in New York or Los Angeles to be listening to Taylor’s early hits in public places, for example.
In recent years popular culture has become more urban, more hip hop, and more liberal. Country music is not a good fit for these trends. Neither is the conservative image Taylor presented early in her career. I think Taylor and Borchetta had to deal with these trends as many of her fans aged out of the tween demographic, and they took the commercially advantageous path. She already held onto “simple, young, and innocent” for as long as she could have, until she was 21. If she wanted to play to only country audiences, maybe she could have stuck with that persona until she was 25, but clearly she had bigger dreams than that.
November 1, 2013 @ 5:43 pm
Taylor’s whole persona early on was in going against what was considered “cool”. She appealed to the introverts.
Maybe her own personality has changed? She herself is no longer the shy suburban girl, but rather the hip urban woman with tons of celebrity friends. Unfortunately, this has caused her musical style to suffer.
November 2, 2013 @ 9:38 pm
She is fundamentally a pop singer, not a country singer. Pop singers want to attract the largest possible audience. They want to be mainstream and they want to be the “cool” people. The country fans and the introverts were stepping stones to help her reach her ultimate destination in pop music.
Also by 2011 Taylor’s public image had become very conservative. She became a lightning rod for the feminists on the left, while conservative commentators and politicians were singing her praises. There were people on both sides of the political spectrum who wanted to see her as a right wing culture warrior (which she never was – I’d guess she’s a Democrat like most of the other “cool” celebrities). This wasn’t a big deal when most of her fans were tweens, but as the fans get older and become socially conscious her conservative image could have become a career limiting factor. She seemed to be consciously trying to change her image in 2012 (straightening her trademark curly hair, cutting back on the sparkly dresses, and adopting more of a pop persona).
November 2, 2013 @ 10:35 pm
“She is fundamentally a pop singer…The country fans and the introverts were stepping stones to help her reach her ultimate destination in pop music.”
If you go to Youtube and listen to her obscure early unreleased songs, you will find that they are almost entirely country and focus on the theme of being an outsider to “cool” society.
As I said, the main issue is that she is no longer the outsider that she used to be. Since the release of her first album, she has become a celebrity, gained close celebrity friends, and moved from Hendersonville to Downtown Nashville. I would point to these changes as the source of the shift in her music, not some desire to chase trends.
November 2, 2013 @ 11:11 am
I actually thought that Chapman rose to the challenge of evolving Swift’s sound on the few songs he produced on “Red.” The song “Starlight” shows tremendous evolution, and so does “Stay, Stay, Stay” to some degree. In my opinion, nobody knows what goes into Taylor Swift’s sound better than Chapman. The Max Martin tracks just simply came across a jarring from what fans had become used to hearing from Taylor Swift. They are also at the heart of the whole “all she ever does is sing about her ex’s” argument.
November 1, 2013 @ 2:36 pm
Sorry Triggerman…ya lost me at “TAYLOR SWIFT”on this one. Just cause pre-schoolers get another year older and wiser than their grannies diapers and accidentally fall into puberty…don’t mean I want to read about who made them pamper proof.
November 1, 2013 @ 2:55 pm
This is my favorite read here….I love the blending of politics, Taylor, and all things Country.
I get it. Thank you.
November 1, 2013 @ 8:11 pm
No, there is no blending on Taylor and all things country, because she isn’t, and never was, country.
November 2, 2013 @ 12:14 am
Are you defining “country” as a lifestyle or a musical style. If the latter, then Taylor”™s first album was very much country. It was more country than basically everything on country radio right now.
November 2, 2013 @ 2:14 pm
Are you defining “country” as a lifestyle or a musical style. If the latter, then Taylor”™s first album was very much country.
Eh, it was all country/pop with no pure country songs but easily her best and most country album.
It was more country than basically everything on country radio right now.
True it’s more country than most of what’s on country radio now in 2013 and there’s the rub. Please take us back to 2007 or just 2011 because mainstream “country” music in 2012-2013 sucks tenfold thanks to the industry pushing and going pop after Taylor did. If she didn’t go pop I bet there would be no That’s My Kind Of Night and other pop songs like it from country artists. Some of them are on the same label as Taylor, either Big Machine or Universal, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence either. I think the labels said something along the lines of record this pop or else…
November 2, 2013 @ 3:28 pm
I don’t see why Taylor should be blamed for today’s stranglehold of frat boy songs over mainstream country music. Her songs are not even remotely similar to the sexualized, laundry list, country-rap that dominates country radio right now.
November 3, 2013 @ 12:46 pm
I don”™t see why Taylor should be blamed for today”™s stranglehold of frat boy songs over mainstream country music. Her songs are not even remotely similar to the sexualized, laundry list, country-rap that dominates country radio right now.
Oh I’m not blaming anyone, just telling it like I see it happening. ALL female country artists’ lyrics are far better than bro country lyrics. I’m not referring to the lyrics much but the music in songs like My Kinda Night is very pop like the Red album. Taylor didn’t make all the bro country boys use the same writers but I doubt the music in some of those and more songs would be so pop if she didn’t go so pop first. Radio has said they want to keep her on country radio because of all the teens she added to it and they stated a growth percentage, I’m thinking it was 17% but I doubt 100% of that growth is just from her.
It seems that the big labels asked artists to go more pop for the same reason, to sell pop to those teen fans Taylor brought in. Teens love pop and rap. As a sales leader, maybe she is seen as a huge influencer and others are playing follow the leader. So her going pop started the trend of country artists and radio going more pop, also driven by Billboard changing their Hot Country chart to include pop airplay when Red released and Clear Channel cutting special deals to play pop songs on country radio, then more country artists started making their country songs more pop and releasing pure pop songs. See how the timing fits? Big Machine used to point out that Taylor brought new fans to country, ok great so keep the music country so they stay in country, otherwise you’re bringing them or sending them back to pop. I like when country artists bring new fans to country and stay country.
November 2, 2013 @ 12:14 am
Are you defining “country” as a lifestyle or a musical style. If the latter, then Taylor’s first album was very much country. It was more country than basically everything on country radio right now.
November 3, 2013 @ 3:35 pm
I don’t fault Taylor Swift for going all-out pop… I’ve always felt she is a pop singer in country clothing, and that compared to other pop artists she isn’t that bad. Doesn’t mean I like her music (I don’t, either the ‘country’ or pop stuff), but her moving to pop should have happened a long time ago. I do find it dishonest she insists on retaining the ‘country’ label and pushes songs that aren’t country (like ‘Red’ and ‘WANEGBT’) to country radio. I think by next album she’ll abandon country entirely, sell a ton of copies and have a ton of pop hits, but that’ll only last a couple more albums before she inevitably pulls a Faith Hill and ‘comes back’ to country, while insisting she never left.
November 4, 2013 @ 2:14 am
I don’t think Taylor will pull a Faith Hill and try to return to country. Most of her fans will either eagerly follow her into pop, or age out of her music. There won’t be enough fans to return to in country. You won’t hear a single from her like Faith Hill’s “Mississippi Girl” apologizing for crossing over into pop. Faith Hill had a husband in country music to come back to. Taylor has young fans who listen more to pop than to country. I think this crossover is a one way street.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:11 am
Chapman has gone on the record to say that he encouraged Swift to branch out:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2012/10/17/taylor-swift-red-interview/1637307/ I’m sure he’ll still be involved in LP5. He was at Taylor’s Nashville shows in September, for example. I like Nathan’s work but I’d like Taylor to continue to experiment. I really want a live-sounding, 70s singer-songwriter record from her. I’d like her to try working with Ryan Adams and Vince Gill. Both have spoken highly of her and would be willing to do it, I think.
The Max Martin songs served their purpose. They received critical acclaim and, most importantly for her label, greatly boosted her overseas fan base. It seemed like a natural progression. Taylor grew up on Britney and the Backstreet Boys, Kelly Clarkson and Pink. Max Martin is part of her songwriting DNA. I’m now ready for her to move on to something new but, judging by her recent quotes, she’s going to work with them again.
The marginalisation of Liz Rose upsets me more than the marginalisation of Nathan Chapman. I don’t understand why Taylor chose to write with songwriters who are less talented than herself (Ed Sheeran, Gary Lightbody) on Red. But again, Liz Rose was backstage at a Texas show on the Red Tour so there’s a strong change that her work will appear on LP5.
November 2, 2013 @ 11:22 am
The marginalization of Liz Rose happened with “Speak Now,” and happened with Taylor choosing to write her own material all by herself. One of my governing principles about music is that artists are always at their best artistically when they are true expressions of themselves, and so in the case of no longer writing with this, I see this as the “growing” that is in a healthy direction, as opposed to bringing in people to help write and produce her mega pop hits.
Of course Chapman is going to stay positive about the relationship. It has made him lots of money, and I’m not opposed to Swift or anyone else bringing in new blood. I think what might be best is if Chapman assumed the Executive Producer position, and got Borchetta out of the picture. Chapman could still keep an eye on the consistency of Swift’s sound, without having to be a part of every track individually. “Red” feels like such a patchwork because there was so much random collaboration.
I thought the Ed Sheeran collab was not half bad, and felt like on of the heartfelt moments on “Red.” The Gary Lightbody one felt like a grab for attention, and a payoff for her Swedish producers.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:04 pm
I don’t know, I agree with Grace about the marginalization of Liz Rose and not adding more country writers to the mix. Liz was the writer behind her debut and those are her best songs. Taylor isn’t such a great writer that she can write every song on an album and every one be better than every song available from other writers. She’s good but no one is Dolly and it’s good to work with other writers. It’s common for some artists to demand writing credits on every song even if it’s just for one word. That’s to go for more acclaim, awards and money so they don’t share royalties with other writers, and it may be the case with Taylor. She’s obviously very sales and money driven and so is her label.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:40 pm
This point has been addressed so many times that it’s getting tiring. According to Liz Rose herself, her role is largely as an editor of songs that Taylor wrote. In “All Too Well”, for example, Taylor originally wrote a 10-minute song which was cut down to 5 minutes by Liz Rose. Secondly, there isn’t a significant difference in writing style between songs that Taylor wrote by herself and songs that Liz Rose co-wrote.
Therefore, until you can provide evidence to the contrary, the assumption should be that Taylor did most of the work on the co-written songs.
November 3, 2013 @ 1:48 pm
I’m not assuming either way. I think it’s obvious Taylor wrote more than one word on most or every song but I’m not sure she didn’t go for more writing credits at some point and it’s a common practice in Nashville. Her name is on every song on every album. Do you have evidence that she did most of the work on all the songs she co-wrote? Did she write the most of the lyrics, music, or both? If she did most of the writing, why get any co-writers and why do Liz and others have credits on 8 of 11 songs or 11 of 14 including bonus tracks on her debut? If she’s that good why did she need an editor? What about her other co-writers, did they say they were largely just editors? Two “editors” for one song doesn’t make sense. Brian Maher and Liz Rose on Mary’s Song. Robert Ellis Orrall and Angelo Petraglia on A Place in This World and I’m Only Me When I’m with You. Brett James and Troy Verges on A Perfectly Good Heart. Martin and Shellback on I Knew You Were Trouble, 22, and We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together. Ed Sheeran and Patrick Warren on Everything Has Changed. Jacknife Lee and Gary Lightbody on The Last Time. Hillary Lindsey and Liz Rose on Fearless. She has many “editors.” Was John Rich just an editor on The Way I Loved You?
Who wrote what is all beside my point that Taylor could make better songs if she works with Liz more and branches out to additional *country* writers along with going back Nathan for producer. Take Miranda for example, she’s one of the best writers in Nashville yet she doesn’t have a credit on her best song, The House That Built Me. So even though she’s a better writer than Taylor she didn’t insist on a writer credit on every song. The best artists find and record the best songs whether or not they wrote them, while others go for more writer credits. If you’re making an album and can choose between a song you wrote and a rare, better song like The House That Built Me, choose House. I hope no one doubts House is far better than We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together and better than the best songs on Red.
Also consider that anyone with Taylor’s huge sales gets higher priority or first pick of the best songs from the best writers because those writers stand to make a lot more money from her sales. So as far as making quality music goes it makes sense for her to continue to work with great *country* writers and producers. I don’t see Martin, Shellback, etc. as great writers or producers but this is a country site and I’m not a bubblegum teen pop fan. Maybe they are the best in that genre. Pop is more about quantity than quality.
November 3, 2013 @ 1:58 pm
Here is a useful article on this subject:
http://www.songwriteruniverse.com/liz-rose-123.htm
November 2, 2013 @ 4:03 pm
I’m not saying that Taylor Swift shouldn’t use Liz Rose or any other songwriters. What I am saying is that she ended the Liz Rose era by deciding to write all the songs herself. This is different than having pop producers foisted upon you by your label president.
November 3, 2013 @ 2:03 pm
It’s also possible her label decided or encouraged her to write more songs herself and get credits on every song so they could brag about it to the media and awards voters as a selling point. They have always used that sort of media hype, a recent example being the FGL Cruise record breaking ad to country radio, and even used to state that Taylor “wrote every song” on her debut instead of correctly stating “co-wrote” like every other artist with co-writers did. Her label president foisted Martin and Shellback upon her and they co-wrote a few songs so apparently he foisted producers and writers upon her.
November 3, 2013 @ 3:05 pm
To Chris:
This type of uninformed speculation is what truly annoys me when it comes to Taylor Swift. You first cast doubt on how much of the co-written songs that Taylor wrote, ignoring the fact that even Kacey Musgraves and Brandy Clark used co-writers throughout their albums. You even ignore Liz Rose’s own comments about the nature of their writing partnership.
And now you are claiming that she and her label want writing credits on the album simply for awards. Here, you ignore the fact that back when she was 14 or 15, Taylor specifically rejected a big record deal with RCA because they wanted her to sing other people’s songs. In fact, she started out as a professional songwriter for Sony when she was just 13. Given all of this, does it not make sense that all of the songs on her albums are written or co-written by her because that’s the way she wants it to be?
Furthermore, since when has the prestige of self-writing one’s songs garnered singers any extra publicity or awards? Country music, in particular, has always used professional writers. Almost all George Jones and George Strait songs, and the overwhelming majority of Waylon’s 1970s songs, were not even co-written by them.
November 3, 2013 @ 6:45 pm
Eric, I haven’t ignored any of that.
Kacey Musgraves and Brandy Clark used co-writers throughout their albums.
But I haven’t seen their publicists claim they “wrote” every song on their album themselves for albums they didn’t.
And now you are claiming that she and her label want writing credits on the album simply for awards.
That’s not what I said. It’s just one reason some artists want more credits and since when does “possible” = “claiming”?
Given all of this, does it not make sense that all of the songs on her albums are written or co-written by her because that”™s the way she wants it to be?
Of course that’s possible and if true begs the question, why does she want it to be that way when there are some better songs available? Miranda is a better writer but doesn’t have a credit on every song on four albums.
Furthermore, since when has the prestige of self-writing one”™s songs garnered singers any extra publicity or awards?
Big Machine publicized it very well and she’s always been up for awards. Why do that if it didn’t help? It was one of their main points and everywhere during her debut era. At the same time, publicity for other artists stated that they “co-wrote” their songs. The industry does give artists extra credit for writing, playing an instrument, and producing when it comes to radio, awards and such. I’ve heard people in radio talk about it and I’ve seen the industry refer to artists who sing, write, play, etc. as a “triple threat” like this lady talks about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WrKlLAL1EA
Maybe you ignored my bigger point:
Who wrote what is all beside my point that Taylor could make better songs if she works with Liz more and branches out to additional *country* writers along with going back Nathan for producer.
What do you think about that? I totally agree with “The simpler the recording, the better. In my opinion, Taylor”™s best album sonically was her self-titled debut.”
November 4, 2013 @ 12:40 am
“Of course that”™s possible and if true begs the question, why does she want it to be that way when there are some better songs available?”
Maybe for the same reason that many underground artists do not use much outside material in his albums: a desire to be authentic. Of course, I disagree that singing other people’s songs takes away from one’s authenticity, but keep in mind that Taylor has always been a songwriter first and foremost and that her opinion is probably different from mine.
November 2, 2013 @ 4:28 am
“Taylor Swift wasn”™t in the midst of defeat, she was riding an overwhelming wave of financial and industry success.”
Speak Now was a great success by most standards but it didn’t produce any big radio hits. She was finding it hard to get airtime on country radio, compared to male stars of her stature. Her label had to push ‘Mean’ at country radio. Country radio started to turn its back on Taylor before she went full-on pop. Taylor is nothing if not driven and ambitious and I’m guessing she didn’t like a string of under performing singles and so turned to Max Martin. If she had stayed on the same path, there’s no way ‘Red’ would have sold 1.2 million copies first week – that was largely thanks to the Max Martin input.
“The songs also pushed the boundaries of what music sold as “country” sounded like, with “We Are Never”¦” being a decidedly bubblegum pop song, and “I Knew You Were Trouble” featuring a dubstep beat.”
‘Trouble’ was a pop-only single and wasn’t released to country radio. In fact, only two songs in the whole era were specifically marketed to country radio – ‘Begin Again’ and ‘Red’ – and neither of them were smash hits. I’m interested to see what the Vince Gill/ Alison Krauss duet sounds like. Taylor often looses her nerve during prestigious performances and ‘Red’ is one of her weakest songs, lyrically.
November 2, 2013 @ 4:42 am
“In fact, only two songs in the whole era were specifically marketed to country radio ”“ ”˜Begin Again”™ and ”˜Red”™ ”“ and neither of them were smash hits.”
This is what frustrates me the most about Taylor right now. She has put most of her focus in promoting her pop songs while not even releasing the most substantive songs from her album. In my opinion, she is making a major mistake by not releasing “Treacherous”, “Sad Beautiful Tragic”, or “All Too Well”. Those songs would immediately boost the overall quality of country radio.
November 2, 2013 @ 11:24 am
I agree, I think radio was troubling to Scott Borchetta, and I have always believed that was at the roots of bringing Max Martin/Shellback in. But what Swift was also proving was that radio didn’t matter. She was still the top-selling artist in “country.”
November 2, 2013 @ 12:06 pm
The thing about Swift and radio is that her songs have tested more and more extreme as time goes on. They often have high ‘very strong dislike’ numbers and also have very high rates of burn which often leads to her songs racing up the charts then peaking short of the top and then quickly falling off the chart. She has almost become like the New York Yankees in that she has a huge fan base that loves everything she does and a large and maybe growing segment who can’t stand her music and dismiss it out of hand. This is a major problem going forward I would think for Borchetta because the first number probably won’t get larger as her core young fans age.
I think this was one of the reasons for the popward shift to the Martin/Shelback songs. But I am a big believer in when you try to please everybody more often than not you end up pleasing nobody completely and end up with a scattershot mess like ‘Red’. It may be time to for her and her Borchetta to choose a direction and go with that.
November 2, 2013 @ 1:41 pm
Scotty, you raise a good point. I was thinking that each major metro area should have a separate radio station just for Swifties so that nobody else has to hear her songs all the time.
I think of Taylor’s fan base as a sorority with millions of members, the girls who wear sparkly dresses and make hand hearts and try to figure out what the secret messages in her albums are about, and who spend hours obsessing over trivial Taylor stuff that is completely irrelevant to the rest of the world.
November 3, 2013 @ 11:26 am
“I think of Taylor”™s fan base as a sorority with millions of members, the girls who wear sparkly dresses and make hand hearts and try to figure out what the secret messages in her albums are about, and who spend hours obsessing over trivial Taylor stuff that is completely irrelevant to the rest of the world.”
Hey! I’m part of that “sorority”! 😀
But……. I don’t wear sparkly dresses or make hand hearts…. Though I do like to fool around about those trivial stuffs, but most of the time, I just like to read the lyrics sheets, examining the layered vocals and productions, basically just trying to find new details that I missed on previous listens. Is that a bad thing? 🙁
November 2, 2013 @ 2:46 pm
Speak Now was a great success by most standards but it didn”™t produce any big radio hits. She was finding it hard to get airtime on country radio, compared to male stars of her stature. Her label had to push ”˜Mean”™ at country radio. Country radio started to turn its back on Taylor before she went full-on pop.
Because she started remixing songs for pop radio with her debut album then went pop with Speak Now. Her second single Teardrops On My Guitar was her first remix. I remember flipping through stations in 2007, hearing it on a pop station and thinking oh no, this is disappointing and not as good as the original. Mean went to country radio because it’s the most country song on Speak Now. The rest are pop or pop/rock. So based on what you said, for her second album she could have stuck with country/pop like her debut and had no trouble at country radio. She went pop and started working pop radio for bigger pop airplay and international sales. It’s harder to play both sides of the fence and country radio has given her more help and leeway than everyone else, even playing a bubblegum pop song.
In fact, only two songs in the whole era were specifically marketed to country radio ”“ ”˜Begin Again”™ and ”˜Red”™ ”“ and neither of them were smash hits.
We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together Again was released to country radio including a special deal with Clear Channel, which is why it got played as much as it did. One man at the top says play this song and a bunch of stations have to play it.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:13 pm
But you are skipping over her second album, ‘Fearless’ and this featured ‘Love Story’ and ‘You Belong With Me’ which were her first two tastes of widespread pop success (#4 and #2 hits). This is when the love affair between her and country radio began to sour as she began to get much more out of genre attention from the likes of MTV. It didn’t happen immediately but you can see the hits after that fit my earlier description of fast rise quick disappearing on the country charts. Country radio is very provincial they don’t like to share their artists.
And she has always been pop/country she just leaned more country at first and now leans way more pop in my opinion. Maybe 60/40 country at first now maybe 30/70 pop.
November 3, 2013 @ 2:29 pm
My bad I did skip her second album. Like Speak Now, nearly all of the songs on Fearless are less country and more pop than her debut album and are too pop for many country radio listeners who don’t want to hear teen pop. Even the music in Begin Again is more country than most of the Fearless and Speak Now singles. From her debut to Fearless, she made a quick transition from remixing country/pop songs for pop radio to recording original pop songs that don’t need remixing to get more pop radio airplay and expand overseas.
Country radio is very provincial they don”™t like to share their artists.
Or is that more about keeping country radio country? Seems like it used to be until recent years.
November 3, 2013 @ 2:37 pm
I think it did used to be about keeping it country but also the sharing thing. Think of an ad ‘You are listening to WTF your home for Taylor Swift’ but now the fine folks at WTF are just one of many homes for Taylor Swift along with the top 40, adult top 40 and AC stations. Doesn’t sound quite so special.
November 2, 2013 @ 4:41 am
“In fact, only two songs in the whole era were specifically marketed to country radio ”“ ”˜Begin Again”™ and ”˜Red”™ ”“ and neither of them were smash hits.”
This is what frustrates me the most about Taylor right now. She has put most of her focus in promoting her pop songs while not even releasing the most substantive songs from her album. In my opinion, she is making a major mistake by not releasing “Treacherous”, “Sad Beautiful Tragic”, or “All Too Well”. Those songs would immediately boost the overall quality of country radio.
November 2, 2013 @ 1:26 pm
Where is the “substance” that people claim to hear in Taylor’s music? I find the themes of most of the singles she has released throughout her career to be very repetitive. Most of the songs are about crushes on boys, or about breakups that she describes from an immature perspective. It also seems that many people praise her music because they want to be protective of her, e.g. they think she’s a sweet little girl and they don’t want to hurt her feelings.
November 2, 2013 @ 3:31 pm
The overwhelming majority of songs by the vast majority of artists are about love. Hank Williams and George Jones sang “repeatedly” about love. Would you label them as “unsubstantive”?
November 3, 2013 @ 5:16 pm
Not all songs above love are equivalent. For example, there is a big difference in maturity between “He Stopped Loving Her Today” and “Sparks Fly”.
November 3, 2013 @ 3:48 pm
How can anyone write and talk seriously about an “artist” who
comes up with the song title
“we will never ever get back together”
If that isn’t written for a fourteen year old, nothing is.
There is nothing I’ve heard from her that I would listen to twice.
November 4, 2013 @ 9:48 am
The only song of hers that has a decent musical feel to me is “Teardrops on My Guitar” (it at least SOUNDS moderately country), but I would never listen to it with the lyrics because they suck. If I feel like it I might listen to a karaoke version because I feel like if this were from a different artist with better lyrics, it would be a really good song.
November 4, 2013 @ 11:53 pm
The dichotomy of Taylor Swift:
Her lyrics (and her voice) have improved over the years, while her sonic taste has declined (as least in my opinion).
December 4, 2013 @ 2:37 am
As a TS listener, this is what taylor is:
she started out loving country. she probably still has a heart for country music, but somewhere in between her first and 2nd album, she got a taste of fame (ahem..kanye wet, joe jonas, vmas, grammys, etc.), so that’s when her taste for pop music began to increase. she is not stupid at all, she knows that sticking with country music would never bring her the worldwide fame she has today. I’m not from the US, so let me tell you this now, barely any of the radio stations played her songs from speak now or fearless or taylor swift (with the exception of YOU BELONG WITH ME and Mean). We have no cointry music radio stations here, so I can honestly say she knew country music was not gonna win her more VMAs or a victorias secret performance.
Let’s remember that Tay is smart. Girl scored straight As in school. So in case anyone assumes scott burcheta is the sole decision maker in her sonic direction, you’re probably very wrong. Look back at speak now, she wrote the whole album by herself. I’m pretty sure it’s crystal clear that pop music is where she is heading/at. Unfortunately for her, she has never been 100% capable to write a super catchy pop song. Don’t get me wrong, I think she’s verg talented. she writes pretty cool music, but listen to her previous pop tunes, none of them were even as close to WANEGBT or 22 or IKYWT, and she knew that. Fortunately for her, her label enlisted the help of Max Martin and Shellback. What is interesting is how during interviews for her Ref album, she talks about how she picked up the guitar and started writing WANEGBT/TROUBLE/22, hinting she was behind the sound and artistic direction of the songs. THIS is what ticks me of about her. I love her, but let’s be frank, we’ve heard her songs before the 4th album, and her writing is very different. Her label wants her to be more pop, while maintaining her girl next door persona. The Unique selling point for tS has always been her writing her own songs. They could never hide the fact that she enlisted the help of Martin and Shellback, but they could always make it seem as if she was the primary writer, the one behind the music.
I still think Taylor loves country, but she is far from in love with it as she once was. Fame and money are two too enticing possibilities to give up. After her album red, I’ve noticed a spike in her popularity in my country. I highly doubt she’ll ever go back to what she once was after experiencing her popularity with red. Taylor is undoubtedly still a girl who loves song writing in her bedroom, but she’s also the girl who loves selling out arenas and being on top 40 radio as well as the girl who gets to perform at lingerie fashion shows.
She and her record label are too in love with the prospect of being bigger than katy Perry or madonna, whether or not it loses her a few old fans who loved her for her old persona and music. just saying. I don’t dislike her, I like her either way, but she seems more forced than driven like she once was.
December 5, 2013 @ 2:35 am
“…but let”™s be frank, we”™ve heard her songs before the 4th album, and her writing is very different.”_
Have we? “We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together” isn’t very different at all from “Permanent Marker” in terms of melody. The PRODUCTION is certainly different, but then, if Swift could never have gotten that sound on her own, Martin and Shellback couldn’t have written such good lyrics on their own (or with anyone on their extensive list of previous collaborators).
_”I love her…”_
Sure you do.
December 5, 2013 @ 2:23 am
Considering that the playing, arrangements, and production are the weak links (as opposed to the tunes, words, and lead vocals) on Fearless and Speak Now, and that Nathan Chapman’s productions are certainly the weakest on Red – Max Martin’s style is, of course, a completely different thing, but compare the tracks produced by Dan Wilson and Butch Walker – would that he had been marginalized SOONER and MORE COMPLETELY.
A ruthless wish, maybe, but then, artists need a degree of ruthlessness in order to make the best possible music.
December 11, 2013 @ 3:52 am
oo. a swiftie we have. Permanent marker was so different from WANEGBT. Are you familiar with Shellback and Martin? it’s blasphemy to say martin, the same man who has been writing hits since the 90s (“it’s my life”, “I kissed a girl” “larger than life” “backstreets back” “3” by Britney spears “so what by pink” “whatya want from me” by adam lambert “california gurls” and SO MANY MORE).. The guy is basically the most seasoned pop writer of this generation. so to say he couldn’t have without swift is super laughable. Taylor is a good writer, but better than martin? maybe not. Love story is ts. stay stay stay is ts.. not WANEGBT or trouble. She contributed for sure, no doubt. . but she takes in way too much credi than she deserves for those hits. THAT is swifts selling point. That has ALWAYS been her USP. She knows it. her record label knows it, and so does martin and Shellback. There are a million songwriters out there, her record label wants to sell her as the best, even if it means making it sound like she overshadowed martin and Shellback in the writing process. Martin and Shellback wont mind. To them, a hit is a hit, a paycheck is a paycheck.
ps. I do like TS, I’ve been to every tour of hers, have all her albums and have met her at a greet and meet,. Have you? doubt it. Just because I’m a fan, it doesn’t mean I’ve to blindly worship everything she does.
December 12, 2013 @ 8:55 am
A reply! I wasn’t expecting that. Well, it looks like it’s just you and me.
_”Are you familiar with Shellback and Martin?”_
More so than you, probably.
_”The guy is basically the most seasoned pop writer of this generation. so to say he couldn”™t have without swift is super laughable.”_
Not just laughable, but super laughable! Having established that I’m talking with a psychological twelve year old, let’s continue.
To say that Max Martin has never previously worked on a song with lyrics as good as “We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together” isn’t “laughable”, and doesn’t deny any of his considerable talents, it’s simply true.
_”Permanent marker was so different from WANEGBT.”_
No it isn’t. Besides their sharing the same general quality of being poised somewhere between power pop and nursery rhyme, the parallels between various details of the two tracks are downright remarkable; similar irregular phrasing in the verses, becoming more conventional in the pre-chorus; same hook at the beginning of the first chorus (the words “x” and “we” held for the full length of the downbeat over the same two half beats on, two half beats off riff).
_”ps. I do like TS, I”™ve been to every tour of hers, have all her albums and have met her at a greet and meet,. Have you? doubt it. “_
Let’s suppose I believed you. (I don’t.) And let’s suppose I didn’t have any of her albums, had seen none of her tours, and had never attended one of her meet and greets. (I own Speak Now and Red, illegally downloaded the rest, saw the Speak Now tour, and wouldn’t go to anybody’s meet and greet if you paid me, but of course you have no way of knowing if any of that is true.)
All that would suggest about me would be that I was more likely to be a disinterested party. And all your assertions suggest about you is that you’re fickle as well as uninsightful and disingenuous.
January 23, 2014 @ 5:13 am
People. They keep on commenting, saying things about a subject they hardly know. I suggest you shut up if you don’t know anything about Taylor’s life, career, and fans.
Oh and, this message is from a LOYAL fan to Scott Borchetta, the label owner. I HOPE YOU READ THIS ONE, SCOTT, AND WHOEVER WANTS TO CHANGE TAYLOR’S MUSIC.
We are a fan. I am a fan. I fell in love with Taylor’s music back in 2008 and remained a loyal fan up to now (2014). She is the ONLY artist I remained listening, idolizing, and supporting. Why? Because I saw her NOT a girl who wants attention, popularity or any selfish thing. I saw her as the girl in a dress, who plays guitar, and writes her OWN song. I’ve known her as the girl who was barely acknowledge by other people, who have her sad and lonely moments in life but remained strong and get over it by writing them in a song. I felt, rather than saw, her sincerity through her music. I felt like I wasn’t alone. I found an artist who can do her own thing despite what other people think or say. I found an artist who is making a REAL music, rather than be popular, feel loved, and earn billions. She does her own music, show her real self, and stand for it and yet she has STILL able to earn billions of money and fans, be loved, became popular, and receive a lot of awards. She didn’t do things that isn’t her just so people would love her. She didn’t pretend to be somebody else. Tell me, people, won’t you be like her? To become a role model? From bottom to top, yet still be yourself? Can you do that? No. All you know is to ruin someone’s name, dream, and life. Are you tired of your boring life so you attack other people?
You only see her as the girl who writes and sings break up songs. You only see that because you don’t know the rest of her songs! She wrote wayy lot of songs that aren’t about break-ups or heartbreak. She writes about the reality of love. Life. Struggles. Dreams. Family. You didn’t know that because you CHOSE to see the negative of a person–the things that untrusted people say. Now try to listen to all of her songs. Even the unreleased ones (which are circulating around the internet). And come back to me and tell me that she only knew how to write a break-up song. One more thing, SO WHAT if some of her songs are about break-up? Is she the only one?? At least she writes her own experience not like other artists who only sing what they bought!
I may have swerved from the real point here, I’m sorry. Scott, why do you want to change Taylor? Why do you want her to become pop? To be like other people? We, her fans, fell in love with her and her music because she’s different from other artists. And now you want her to change. Didn’t you realized that you might lose fans? WE bring money to you. WE should be heard, instead of your own child-like rants. We might not be professional, but remember, it is from US that’s why someone loves your artist. If you change her, then you might as well shooed us. If you want to make more billions, then listen to US. WE DON’T WANT POP MUSIC, YOU HEAR THAT? WHO CARES WHAT MAJORITY OF PEOPLE LISTEN THESE DAYS? WE AREN’T THE MAJORITY YET WE ARE MORE THAN THEM BECAUSE WE ARE STRONGER AND WE ARE THE ONES WHO MAKES YOUR BUSINESS GROW. LISTEN TO WHAT THE CROWD WANTS NOT YOUR BRAIN. IT’S THE CROWD THAT BRINGS MONEY, NOT YOUR BRAIN. WHY AM I TALKING ABOUT MONEY NOW? BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT BUSINESSMEN LIKE YOU WANTS, RIGHT?
Thank you so much.
July 22, 2017 @ 11:25 am
Nathan sort of just scoffed at the comparison when I just mentioned it to him. He was playing the CMHOF theater with his wife and some other female singers. His wife has an original “folk song” that is more country than his music in my opinion. He thinks SCM is grumpy about everything. I said that is a perspective we need. Nice guy. Good on his guitar too.