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

[Yo GagaGaga 6,541]

 

[Sister 9,907]

He gonna be squashed on twitter LOL

[HoeMoe 1,242]

i still dont understand where exactly did he mention gaga or the superbowl  ?

i thought he praised the preformance right after ..... this might be a misunderstanding ...

[HoeMoe 1,242]

unless theres another page where he actually mentions gaga and the superbawl

But seriously this "party is over" thingy trends has to stop, people need to grow up, in the end of the day ur just hurting Gagas reputation. very childish 

[cryingrainbow 1,136]

12 minutes ago, MomoQ said:

i still dont understand where exactly did he mention gaga or the superbowl  ?

i thought he praised the preformance right after ..... this might be a misunderstanding ...

have you ever talked **** about someone without mentioning their name on social media? yeah? he did just that! lmao at the thought of when he wakes up to see twitter, he'll cry bcz ed sheeran all year will not work haha

[HoeMoe 1,242]

Just now, cryingrainbow said:

have you ever talked **** about someone without mentioning their name on social media? yeah? he did just that! lmao at the thought of when he wakes up to see twitter, he'll cry bcz ed sheeran all year will not work haha

i read what he wrote and i know about these rants ur refering to.... this doesnt look like it at all. imo,

plus its a shame tbh hes gonna wake up to monster acting like 7 year old, i mean we both know what gaga stands for and this is 100% against it. very immature. 

 

[Sid 6,755]

59 minutes ago, Takemyhand said:

We are not talking about a regular person going to work  to survive, we're talking about a person that have decided to make unintersting music for money ( with already million$). I'm okay with that but don't act like a d!ck towards people that have decided to keep their music integrity ( like the woman this site is dedicated to)  

 

What?  Of course we are talking about a regular person going to work. Ed Sheeran is not a god, he has a legitimate musical career as Lady Gaga has created for herself. That fact that you find it uninteresting means absolutely nothing, and this 'music integrity' argument, is complete conjecture. The fact that he has 1 or a million dollars is irrelevant. He is allowed to create whatever he likes and it would be smart for him to create something that will entertain a variety of people and enable him to continue creating a successful business for himself. Ed isn't shading Gaga, he is simply stating that he would like to continue working with his team to create commercially viable music, instead of something purely creative which would be great for him to play in his own car. Obviously he can create his own music project solely for himself, but if he's looking to continue the Ed Sheeran brand OF COURSE he's going to make something listenable for a majority of people.

Pop music is not objectively 'good' or 'bad'. Someone making 'commercial' music simply means they are creating music that many different types of people enjoy, and therefore sells well. Just because someone works with a team to create catchy music doesn't invalidate their work, it means they are using tools available at their disposal to reach as wide of an audience as possible. Music has always been created as a sharable, universal experience. Otherwise, everyone would make music for themselves and nobody else would ever hear it. 

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

Wow oh wow...a fame *****, industry puppet, narcissistic, and terrible attitude...

Yeah that'll get you far in this industry

 

[Takemyhand 634]

15 minutes ago, Ruth Hogben said:

What?  Of course we are talking about a regular person going to work. Ed Sheeran is not a god, he has a legitimate musical career as Lady Gaga has created for herself. That fact that you find it uninteresting means absolutely nothing, and this 'music integrity' argument, is complete conjecture. The fact that he has 1 or a million dollars is irrelevant. He is allowed to create whatever he likes and it would be smart for him to create something that will entertain a variety of people and enable him to continue creating a successful business for himself. Ed isn't shading Gaga, he is simply stating that he would like to continue working with his team to create commercially viable music, instead of something purely creative which would be great for him to play in his own car. Obviously he can create his own music project solely for himself, but if he's looking to continue the Ed Sheeran brand OF COURSE he's going to make something listenable for a majority of people.

Pop music is not objectively 'good' or 'bad'. Someone making 'commercial' music simply means they are creating music that many different types of people enjoy, and therefore sells well. Just because someone works with a team to create catchy music doesn't invalidate their work, it means they are using tools available at their disposal to reach as wide of an audience as possible. Music has always been created as a sharable, universal experience. Otherwise, everyone would make music for themselves and nobody else would ever hear it. 

I don't want to fight, that is just my opinion about him, if you don't agree I'm happy for you, no need to be rude to me

[Sid 6,755]

3 minutes ago, Takemyhand said:

No you don't get my point. I don't think it's bad to dedicated your music to the pop industry. I don't like shape of you at all, I don't like the melody or whatsoever but I do like "sing". That's not my point. I just think you shouldn't act that rude to other artists because you think you sell more. He may not be shading Gaga but he is acting very cocky and that's annoying. And ed is no regular popular, he's a millionaire, he's richer than lot's of people in the world and his success seems to change his personnality

 

How is he being cocky? There have been a plethora of artists that have started a successful music business, decided to turn it into a creative outlet and their brand has suffered immensely. He's talking about when an artist becomes successful and they take all the credit for the success and start making music based solely on their opinion and not the opinion of their team that helped them get to the point they are. He's basically saying he appreciates having great people work with him on music and he's interested in continuing it. He's not being rude at all, just stating that he is going to continue making commercially viable music instead of making music solely based on whether HE likes it or not.

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

He is pathetic and his latest album is trash

[peto flex 2,641]

Ed is all about the

[freebit 6,240]

There's no evidence he's referencing her, this is overreactive and people need to chill and stop embarrassing the fan base. 

Yes, he's been acting obnoxious regardless - people should solely get at mad at him acting like an asshole in general instead of running around and trying to insert and victimize our fave for something that is a huge assumption on their parts IMO. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,961]

He's really stuck on this issue lately and its not a good look. Ed has to be careful here. His entire success has been all to do with how he's a nice, sweet, humble guy who makes music about the real things in life. If he keeps talking about how his aim is to be #1 and how you do what you have to do to be at the top, his appeal is going to go down massively. He didn't talk like this until now. His most out-there diss to other artists was when he said that line in You Need Me I Don't Need You about how some artists get songwriting credit for songs that they didn't write. That was on his debut album and that's the most cutthroat he's ever been until now but he could get away with it because it's vague. But now he's being a bit too specific. There's not many people he could be talking about when he says "they were once the biggest artist and now they're not." If it's not just Gaga he's referring to, she is definitely one of the names he was thinking of. Lately, I've started to think he's not keen on Gaga for whatever reason.

However, at the same time, I do kinda get what he's saying. Some artists do get a bit carried away with any success of an experimental song and think this is a sign that they can have success with anything from here on out. And being surrounded by yes people can be extremely damaging to your artistic output. But he says it all in such a superficial way. As if the aim of all artists is to be the biggest. Maybe that's what you want, Ed, but not everyone does. He's giving the impression that if an artist isn't the biggest, he doesn't have any time for them. And we know that's not true because he set up a label to help new artists. He's trying to have it both ways - supporting the little guy while still trying to be #1, which is a hard feat. He's let fame go to his head, for sure. Thing is, he must know, deep down, that he can't make any other kind of music. So, he's maybe a bit jealous of those who are diverse and can make stuff that's different. I mean, I like that song of his, I See Fire, but then I heard this girl group sing a cover of it on Britain's Got Talent and they turned it into this massive epic track and made Ed's version sound like your standard acoustic cover. And after that, I wasn't as enthralled by the original because the lyrics are so big and dramatic, yet Ed just keeps it all mellow in his usual acoustic style and it doesn't fit. He knows he doesn't have the voice to make songs vocally big nor does he have the ability to make anything other than something with an acoustic guitar base. So, is he jealous of anyone who can do more than that? Maybe.

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

He just cares about fame, money, and HIMSELF...what an EGO!