Ed Sheeran shades artists who fight for creative control over their albums

[Yuuri 21,636]

I have more respect for artists such as Gaga and Jackson now, going against your label is a big deal and could decide if you have a job or not.

[LaLuna 12,732]

22 hours ago, sipthistea said:

Well, that depends on the kind of artist that you want to be. If you want to be successful, then listen to your record label and try to buy into every trend that's out. If you want to follow your passion or your own conviction, then you should do what you feel like doing.

Everyone has that choice. Tbh, I'd rather not have as much success, but to have creative control. I'd prefer to quit the music business instead of becoming a sellout artist like Maroon 5. Or Ed.

What's the point of being an artist if you don't want to express yourself creatively though? Besides, record labels are not always right. They put out a lot of crap thinking it's going to be a hit only to see it flop. And sometimes they're against an artist taking a certain direction, but it becomes a success. I mean, Def Jam dropped Gaga for God's sake. That says everything. 

[Chiunzhan 997]

He exposed himself an uncreative, tragic...

[Panchecco 17,634]

[Emvee 8,413]

What a ****ing idiot. He's got his ugly face so far up his ass that he doesn't realize that not all artists release music for commercial success and to be played on radio. Most artists create what they want and what's relevant to their lives. 

This shady ass ****er doesn't deserve success. No respect for fellow artists. 

[TSUNAMI 21,018]

I started to like him... and now this  

[REALITY 76,761]

1 hour ago, Britney Spears said:

I see no lie in what he said.Stop trying to creatve controversy

You know, a part of being an artist is to creatively express your artwork. When you have people that constantly tell you that "this isn't okay", or "you should do this", or "don't make this kind of music", you've lost that creative process.

I get what he's saying, but at the end of the day, what he's talking about is commercial success and relavancy. He just expressed that he'd rather be commercially more successful than actually be an artist and fight for what you love and create. There's so much wrong with that.

[nswain1110 3,084]

Ughh - he's so high on himself these days... Sure Ed, you have EVERYTHING figured out - you're the best, bla bla bla barf...

[Caolicolor 50]

48 minutes ago, Scathach said:

What's the point of being an artist if you don't want to express yourself creatively though? Besides, record labels are not always right. They put out a lot of crap thinking it's going to be a hit only to see it flopping. And sometimes they're against an artist taking a certain direction, but it becomes a success. I mean, Def Jam dropped Gaga for God's sake. That says everything. 

Just look at allies unsolved playlist era 

[Battle 4 Ur Life 6,716]

where's the shade? I only see truths...

 

[Killa 17,490]

oh dear lord. you have to listen but with a great grain of salt and show them the tits(tomatoes) and werq werq

he's just starving for the number one. and wanted to be safe

 

[Hyoha 1,613]

I couldn't agree more with him, just think he could have put it less aggressively

[freebit 6,240]

Some of the best artists have some huge ups and downs in their career - Prince, Bowie, Madonna, Johnny Cash, Elvis etc. (Bowie "flopped" for the duration of the 80s after Let's Dance for example, and that album was HUGE). I don't feel like Ed even understands what he's talking about, and he'll eventually be disappointed if he thinks it's going to work out like he thinks it is. When we look at the past it's clear that huge success is impossible to sustain. And if you do keep making inoffensive moves with your material, yeah, you'll have some success, but there's really no stopping the fact that you'll eventually just be kind of ...."there" and no longer become part of the conversation (Maroon 5 for example). You might as well keep it interesting. 

1 hour ago, pie-kun said:

What is his obsession with being "the biggest artist"? He's referenced this concept multiple times in this era, I think he needs to realize that all artists aren't obsessed with being as commercially successful as possible. In fact, the reason a lot of artists take creative control of their albums is because they're tired of trying to chase after the next #1 song and want to create something unique.

Not to mention the fact that there are a lot of artists who do everything their label says and work with all the hit producers and still end up underperforming/flopping. Following your label's advice does not guarantee you will be successful. Let's remember that labels put out more flop artists than they do hit artists. 

Honestly, I've never been a fan of Ed but I always thought he was in it for the music. The fact that he pulled a song off the album that he really liked and wanted on there just because his label asked him to is pretty pathetic. The fact that he's gloating about it is pretty sad in itself.

I've noticed this too, and was baffled by it. But after reading about him getting turned away from his own record label's after party at this years Grammys, it all made sense. He's insecure AF.

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

2 hours ago, donutellha said:

Of course

His label must have been pleased with cheap thrills part.2 with bad vocals.

The only "division" happening in this era is his credibility and sales.

Preach it!! 

[Moebius 8,965]

So an ~ artist ~ (cause this bitch is far from that) fighting to make music they like and actually pour something into their music is bad? Is this guy for real? This has to be a joke; from his ego this era to this, bullshitting on actual artists; it has to be a publicity stunt  I'm so ****ing done with this guy wow. Any more words and I'm getting banned