patrick bateman wrote:pheek wrote:Could be weak for YOU but be awesome for 500 others. There's a lot of labels that I dont like their music and think have "weak" releases, but theres 1000 other people that says the opposite. It's a matter of tastes.
A lot of people seems to see labels as Football clubs who performs or not... it's art, nothing to do with trophees and such.
But, if you follow a label, and a label sticks to a sound that doesn't change much, then there can be releases that are still within this sound, but are weaker releases, and maybe also sells less, see what I mean?
Of course it's a matter of taste, but it's also wrong to say that a label doesn't have weak releases IMO.
My problem here is the use of terms. To me, there's weak production: poor techniques, bad sounding record, bad mastering, etc. But i don't believe sales or tastes are an indication if the record is "weak" or not when we're refering to the music itself. I totally understand you Patrick, It's just when I see people say the release was weak, I'd think it'd be more appropriate to say "i dont like it." But this is only choice of words, not a big deal anyway.
