Originally posted by Allstar

Who stans for the biggest singer of 1939?

Originally posted by Witness

I'm sure someone out there does. #1 song of 1939 was this obscure little number titled "Somewhere Over the Rainbow".

Originally posted by Albany Guest

There is no such thing as "background movies", anymore than you have background books. Yes, films as an art media require a bigger commitment than music (as you need employ just one sense for music, at least two form film), so? This is not a discussion between visual and auditory art forms.

You get slang words from EVERYTHING. There are film based slang words too. As for the notion that fashion comes from music, that is highly debateable; after all, what were Nirvana's sartorial influences, or the Beatles?

you claim to "understand" relative popularities - well, I doubt it. The likelyhood of an Indian factory worker knowing about Star Wars (even if they haven't ever fully seen it) is much higher than them knowing who the hell Nirvana is. He might very well know Michael Jackson, but all you have there is equivalent fame, and no way of proving which, if any, had any "influence" on his life (I doubt either had any influence on his sartorial choices). As for what defines an era, people will look back at a lot of things. Nowaday, people might very well first think of the TV shows of the era as anything else. That is an idiosyncratic situation.

This thread is about INDUSTRY influences. Industry is an ECONOMIC term, not an artistic one. The industry that employs more people and has bigger revenue streams is the more influential.

Originally posted by Gui Blackout

Originally posted by like2throw

We dont know which industry employs more people. The music industry delves much deeper than the mainstream labels of Sony, Columbia, and RCA, and even those labels employ many different people in various branches. You have to keep in mind the concert staff, the recording engineers, the people the forumulate the concerts, the A&R, and thats just the contemporary music branch. The orchestra branch is a whole different ball game. There are no numbers out their that will lead one to believe that one industry makes more than another, we dont have the resources to make that assumption.

So im even going to backtrack my comment on the Movie Industry making more at this time, because the state of album sales are just one aspect of the Music Industry, and an aspect thats only focused by the big four labels.

Originally posted by Witness

That's nice. Kind of irrelevant though unless you're also implying that nobody remembers or cares for musicians prior to 2005.

Originally posted by Albany Guest

I am sorry, but the New York Philharmonic is not a bit of the "music industry." Every artist in a form is not participating in that industry. (which again, is about commoditzing and mass distribution). You seem unwilling to accept the differentiation between an art form and its various different economics. Small time producers and artisinal creators are not inherently part of the relevant INDUSTRY.

And yes, I think we can figure out which Industry employs more people. Film. How? Bollywood.

Originally posted by like2throw

So you can tie in Bollywood and Hollywood together , which are two completely different industry's aswell, but I cant do the same for the orchestra and contemporary music branch?

Originally posted by Albany Guest

Bollywood and Hollywood are as much part of the film industry as Toyota, Daimler Benz, and Ford are all part of the automobile industry. The fact that they are in different countries does not make them parts of different industries. Many philharmonics stay in business through charitable grants or state support. Essentially different economic basis for survival.



There are music awards at the Oscars, aren't there? How many orchestral musicians make their money from film and TV soundtracks? AGAIN, you need to divorce art form from INDUSTRY.

Originally posted by like2throw

This I did not know.

But even still, we dont have numbers, just assumptions.

Most movie soundtracks come from music labels, so Im assuming the money is going to the music industry? At this point, things just become way too confusing.

Originally posted by like2throw