http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7215226.stm
for years i have heard from too many u2 apologists who make excuses for the sub-par music that their favorite band has produced in the last 15 years. when “achtung baby” came out and the band switched from a political rock band to one more concerned with radio play and airtime, i heard a lot of people say that u2 was just focusing on their music instead of their politics, that the music should be more important. i took this one in stride, because i definitely respect a band which would take time to release music that they want to sound the best it can be. but half the tracks on this album sound like they were afterthoughts, and the album as a whole was most definitely beneath the quality of “the joshua tree”. but then, nothing u2 has done has ever equalled the excellence of that album, so it’s not a fair comparison in hindsight.
but my main interest in u2 was always the fact that they were so strong in their political convictions, and especially on topics that i was also interested in: the ongoing conflict between britain and ireland, illegal whaling, apartheid south africa, and a few others. this was a band that i admired in all aspects of their personal *and* public lives. not only did they release some of the best music i had heard in my life, but they took some bold (in my mind at least) stances on issues that were difficult to solve. but then i heard bono sing the high praises of then world bank president james wolfensohn, and what a great job the world bank does worldwide. this despite the fact that the world bank gets countries out of poverty by putting the country’s resources in the hands of foreign investors who only want to profit at the expense of a country with an excessive amount of poor people who are ripe for exploitation.
so when i hear larry mullen and the edge say, after the release of “achtung baby” that they didn’t feel attached to the music, they were just putting this album out to make money off of it, my image of the band as a group of guys standing up for their ideals began to crumble. the apologists would say, again, that the band was focusing on the music, and why shouldn’t they be allowed to make money with their music? the problem with this argument, as i have always felt, is that if the music is only there to make money then how are they any different from the “hit machines” of top 40 radio? you know, the ones who have a few hits, make their money and then cash out before people realize they have no more musical talent than your average vending machine?
after “achtung baby” u2 released one mediocre album after another and my respect for their music has dwindled to little more than reliving the glorious years leading up to the joshua tree. i think the icing on the cake for this phenomenon was when they released a video for the song “vertigo” as an ipod ad before it even hit the stores in order to sell as many copies of “the u2 ipod” as possible. this band has been coasting for years and have been more concerned with commercial success than in creating the kind of music that inspired millions of people throughout their first decade as recording artists.
so yesterday, when u2’s manager paul mcguiness came out in favor of forcing ISP’s to prevent people from downloading music not approved by the recording industry, i was forced to finally admit that u2 is nothing more than a bunch of money hungry millionaires who care not one whit for fans of music. the music industry succeeded for so many years because people were forced to pay inflated prices on media costs. that cd your favorite record store puts on the shelf and prices at $15? it costs the publishing company less than a dollar to pump one out. that other $14 you pay goes to lining the pockets of the recording industry, and if the artist has negotiated a good contract they may see $1 from each cd sale, if that. so for industry folks to try to pretend that the artists are suffering is really not happening at all. what’s going on is that industry executives see their six martini lunches threatened by a changing market and they want to prevent that market from innovating them out of existence.
the basis of an economy is the law of supply and demand. when the consumers demand something, the economy reacts by trying to increase supply. but when consumers demand a downloadable, digitally encoded file instead of a clunky, plastic ring to listen to their favorite music, the suppliers are fighting tooth and nail to keep that from happening. they want to force the world to keep paying $15 too much for that plastic ring because then their profits are continually assured year after year as long as they keep an absolute dictatorship over the supply source. if this were truly about artists not making any money on the music they create then the industry should renegotiate those contracts and give the artists a bigger slice of the music sales pie.
radiohead just proved that an established band doesn’t need a big name label to get people to buy their music. this is what the true issue is where internet-based music is concerned. the artists make the vast majority of the money off of concerts and merchandise, not in cd sales. i have friends who are literally “starving artist” musicians who don’t care if they give away their cd’s as long as people support them by coming to hear them play and telling their friends what great musicians they are (links to come for anyone who is still reading who wants to support some great musicians! 
) the point is, that music can still be given away for free and the artists will not have to starve for it. the ones who are afraid of starving are the people who cling to an antiquated, dying industry in the hopes that they can continue to line their pockets on the backs of the musicians and artists who get pennies on the dollar for each album purchased in a store somewhere.
on that note, here are some GREAT musicians that you should support in any way you can because they are making some of the best music you’ve never heard before:
Ryan Hanifl — his latest CD “Sourpuss” is an amazing journey of sound and emotion.
Arrica Rose and the …’s — a local folk rock band featuring some of the most dedicated musicians i have ever met in my life. plus arrica and her guitarist abby kincaid are part of a group of female musicians calling themselves The Bombshell Alliance which is set up as a charity for some very good causes. these ladies are worth supporting just on that alone, but they still produce some incredible music too!
Curtis Peoples — Curtis likes to put an 80’s retro sound on some pop hooks and turn it into something that sounds familiar but yet still brings you in with its energy and passion.
Ernie Halter — Ernie has an amazing voice and a great flair for arrangement in his songs. plus you get to play the “Ernie Halter drinking game” that i invented. every time Ernie says “Love” in a song, take a shot. (ok ernie, it’s a joke, please don’t hurt me! )
Joey Ryan — Joey puts an amazing sound together between himself and his guitar that i have yet to hear from another artist. and it’s his birthday in a little over a week, so get some of his music just for that reason! 
The Elevaters — I took a friend to see these guys play last week and she thought they were one of the best bands she’s seen in a long time. they play a funk/soul/hip hop fusion which turns into some of the most energetic music you will see onstage. these guys also have big hearts off the stage and will be playing some charity benefit concerts in the LA area this week. definitely another band to support just for their dedication to these issues alone.
Laura Jansen — I used to call Laura Jansen “the little girl with the big voice” when i would describe her to anyone who had never heard her before. she is definitely one artist that you should not miss if you have a chance to see her play because it’s hard to believe that she has such a powerful voice if you don’t experience it for yourself in person.
and last but not least Sara Hickman. I can’t say enough about this lady and what she does, both musically and life in general. Sara is one of those musicians whose heart is bigger than her fan base. she works with half price books and other charities to provide poor and sick children the opportunity to have access to books. i have written about sara before in these pages, so i won’t say too much more about her, except that she is one of my favorite people on this planet and i feel privileged to have met her on more than one occasion.
these artists, and others like them, are the ones who everyone should be supporting in any way they can. the best way would be to pay for a ticket to see their shows. but if you can’t do that, as long as you make other people aware of the kind of talent they possess and help them reach out to more and more interested fans then we can prevent people like paul mcguiness and the u2’s and metallica’s of the world telling us how we are allowed to spend our money on music. don’t forget that the music market is built on supply and demand. if you don’t demand it, they won’t supply it. and if they stop allowing music to be freely shared among fans, then music made by artists like the above may never be heard.
these are listed in no particular order or preference: