Halsey Not ALlowed To Make New Album By Her Label After The GreatImpersonator "Flops"

[Teletubby 151,119]

13 minutes ago, Bobina said:

This must be why they're rehashing Badlands (which I'm not mad at, love badlands too). 

10th anniversary edition was released by her old label - Capitol(UMG), she is under Columbia(Sony) now

[LauraPalmer 1,403]

i was a really big fan of this album, so i think this is a shame. as someone who was depressed in my teen years, the Letter to God tracks were so powerful to me because of the theme of begging for your life once you’re older and happy and suffering from health issues even though you used to wish it away. that really hit home for me. lucky was a weak single but i think ego and lonely is the muse were excellent

[StrawberryBlond 14,923]

This is really sad. I've heard about labels delaying an artists album and recalibrate it until it's got a hit and sounds more mainstream but to basically not allow the artist to create music because they're flopping that badly is just the antithesis of what a label should be doing. I mean, Katy's albums have been performing worse with every release and Capitol keeps her going and even allows her to do a world arena tour despite an album that got a commercial and critical roasting by critics and public alike. Halsey is in the unfortunate position however of not having a huge catalogue of previous hits that can keep her supported by her label as a legacy act. It's a shame as she has quite a few good albums including the latest one. It was barely promoted so the label can hardly be surprised it performed how it did and also, it was a product of trauma as she was ill and thought there was a chance she could die and this is how her label treats an unwell artist? Really shocking. I'm so grateful that Interscope really respects Gaga's creativity and wellbeing, as clearly. so many other artists aren't as lucky.

[Ladle Ghoulash 26,826]

5 hours ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

That blows. They're only growing as an artist and TGI was one of the most solid albums of the year. 

Can't disagree enough with this tbh. Darwinism is so Bowie coded and Panic Attack is basically a Fleetwood Mac cover from a different dimension. Arsonist gives that Fiona Apple heroin chic. Hometown is very Dolly's Applejack. Idk I guess I just feel bad you don't hear what I hear lol 

Bowie, I’m so sorry, baby…

[Roughhouse Dandy 11,766]

2 hours ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Bowie, I’m so sorry, baby…

[Future Lovers 7,044]

I don't know why I'm shocked that the response in here as fairly jokey and anti-Halsey. 

I don't really care for her music personally. But if you care about music at all, you should be bothered to hear that a label is actively preventing an artist from being an artist purely because of arbitrary commercial expectations. Halsey's album debuted with more than Ed Sheeran's last three albums, and yet he continues to get unrestricted access to label resources and can make albums whenever he wants. 

The fact that an artist as established as Halsey has to consistently appeal to the public to even be allowed to make music in the first place should be concerning for anyone, whether you enjoy her music or not. 

[Teletubby 151,119]

21 minutes ago, Future Lovers said:

Halsey's album debuted with more than Ed Sheeran's last three albums, and yet he continues to get unrestricted access to label resources and can make albums whenever he wants. 

I don't know why are you bringing another artist but she didn't debut with more than Ed's last 3 albums, Subtract sold 112k in the US and over 75k in the UK.It was his last album released directly under Atlantic. 
Autumn Variations was released independently and Play was released under his own label with Warner handling the distribution. He sells stadiums and can afford all the resources he needs.

[MadArchitect 1,098]

how is she not allowed to make a new album? honestly? the label is holding her down so is doesn't make music? how is that even possible? and how is she even allowing that herself? that should be entirely in your own account and disposition, because making music is one thing, and releasing it to the industry market is another, that a creative is prevented to make art for this reason is ridiculous and upside down...

[MadArchitect 1,098]

1 minute ago, MadArchitect said:

how is she not allowed to make a new album? honestly? the label is holding her down so is doesn't make music? how is that even possible? and how is she even allowing that herself? that should be entirely in your own account and disposition, because making music is one thing, and releasing it to the industry market is another, that a creative is prevented to make art for this reason is ridiculous and upside down...

it would make sense to me if she said she already made an album but the label is not allowing her to release it, but to say that she is not even allowed to make an album is wild...

[Delulu 1,899]

this site is filled with ‘evil twinks’ and this discussion is evidence enough, a well - known woman in the industry who has been mistreated on multiple occasions during the years is not allowed to MAKE NEW MUSIC, we’re not talking about publishing it and stuff like that, the label is taking the most important thing an artist has from her and y’all are laughing at her and shaming her for it, that’s crazy.

Edited Sunday at 12:36 PM by Delulu

[Bronco 12,315]

1 hour ago, MadArchitect said:

it would make sense to me if she said she already made an album but the label is not allowing her to release it, but to say that she is not even allowed to make an album is wild...

Studios etc cost money

MJ's Thriller album had a $750,000 budget at the time (which is closer to 2 mill in current terms) for example. 

Her album debuted well, but rapidly dropped off the charts as it had no longevity. So there's a real possibility that the album didn't break even and they're reluctant to fund another.

[MadArchitect 1,098]

50 minutes ago, Bronco said:

Studios etc cost money

MJ's Thriller album had a $750,000 budget at the time (which is closer to 2 mill in current terms) for example. 

Her album debuted well, but rapidly dropped off the charts as it had no longevity. So there's a real possibility that the album didn't break even and they're reluctant to fund another.

i mean you can still make an album without studios, that just covers the final professional mix and master of the records, most final demos sound so close to the recorded tracks

[Bronco 12,315]

10 minutes ago, MadArchitect said:

i mean you can still make an album without studios, that just covers the final professional mix and master of the records, most final demos sound so close to the recorded tracks

Yeah that's entirely true - providing she actually has personal access to recording tools etc. It will entirely depend on whats available to her without label support. 

And I imagine it's that final production stage prior to release that the label are blocking her from. It's not like they can physically prevent her sitting at home at a piano writing. 

[Future Lovers 7,044]

8 hours ago, Teletubby said:

I don't know why are you bringing another artist but she didn't debut with more than Ed's last 3 albums, Subtract sold 112k in the US and over 75k in the UK.It was his last album released directly under Atlantic. 
Autumn Variations was released independently and Play was released under his own label with Warner handling the distribution. He sells stadiums and can afford all the resources he needs.

Less than 20k difference between Subtract and TGI. Not much to write home about.

I brought in another artist to prove the hypocrisy of blocking her from anything while other artists, especially men, get continuous free passes for underperformance where female artists do not.   

It shouldn’t happen to any artist under any circumstance. No artist should be punished or banned from creating due to charts. It’s wrong. 

But people don’t like Halsey for whatever reason so they’re fine with it. 

Edited Sunday at 07:37 PM by Future Lovers

[Bling 31,488]

7 hours ago, Bronco said:

Studios etc cost money

MJ's Thriller album had a $750,000 budget at the time (which is closer to 2 mill in current terms) for example. 

Her album debuted well, but rapidly dropped off the charts as it had no longevity. So there's a real possibility that the album didn't break even and they're reluctant to fund another.

Right, it's about business, not our feelings about the artist. Unfortunately, that's the reality. They're not going to go bankrupt just to be nice to an artist 

Edited Sunday at 09:23 PM by Bling