Nightbugs Hotel - Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???


    
      
        Nightbugs Hotel
        (http://forum.sarahslean.com/cgi-bin/YaBB/YaBB.pl)
      

        1st Floor >> Library >>  Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
        
(Message started by: Nikolita on Dec 13^th, 2001, 10:23pm)

Title: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Nikolita on Dec 13^th, 2001, 10:23pm

I was debating with a friend of mine the other day about Sarah Slean (who was a Sarah Harmer fan before she was a Slean fan) and the quality of musicians compared to their fame. She argued that even if a musician is fantastically amazing, the overall quality of the musician has to include their tact and ability to sell their talent. We used Sarah Harmer as an example (discluding their friendship from the argument).

My friend argued that Sarah Harmer, if forced to be compared to Sarah Slean, would be the better "quality" musician due to her ability to make herself known and to make the "right" career moves (ie: Leaving Weeping Tile and going solo). This of course was compared to Sarah Slean's reluctance to sign onto a major record label.

My argument was that Sarah Slean would be the better "quality" musician due to her personal strength, perseverance and steadfastness in her principles. This "poor tact" (as my friend called it) would only serve to make Slean the "better" musician because it gives her music so much more meaning. I personally believe (and even my friend agreed) that Sarah Harmer sounded better with Weeping Tile.

So . . . after writing ALL that . . . what do you think? Should an artist compromise sound quality for overall quality ??? ?

(and by the way, I think both Sarah Slean and Sarah Harmer are excellent musicians, no matter what they decide to do with their careers)

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by crimsun on Dec 14^th, 2001, 12:16am

Sorry to contradict, but I feel talent and global exposure are not mutually exclusive, nor is either indicative of some correlation between marketing ability and soul. I admire both Sarahs (well, there are a *lot* of Sarahs I admire...), btw. :) For instance, Jeff Buckley was signed but never had "major" exposure. Or let's take Eva Cassidy, who never got exposure during her lifetime. These latter are two of my favorite artists, but to judge one's talent as related to his(her) ability to market oneself -- well, that's something I can't see having anything to do with one's talent. :)

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Seraphiel on Dec 16^th, 2001, 5:41pm

and Nikolita spake thusly ...

> She argued that even if a musician is fantastically amazing,
> the overall quality of the musician has to include their tact
> and ability to sell their talent.

I would disagree with your friend.

IMO, not everyone can sell themselves well regardless of how talented they are. Some people can, some can't. Most artists are "overnight successes" after years of playing at small clubs and so forth. I think that it also helps if you are deemed "physically attractive"... which was the subject of debate in another thread. If you're stunningly attractive you can get away with having only mediocre talent as too many pop "artists" demonstrate.

Quality is a very personal thing... both from the point of view of the artist and the listener. Songwriting is the marriage of good lyrics to good music. That's how I generally grade quality.

> My argument was that Sarah Slean would be the better "quality"
> musician due to her personal strength, perseverance and
> steadfastness in her principles.

I agree that those personal qualities make for writing good lyrics, but when it comes to writing good music for those lyrics, you can't go by those qualities. In my mind, the ability to write really good music is something that you're born with. Sure you can learn the musical theory and be trained in the art of music, but I feel that you need something from within (something innate) to be able to produce really good quality music.

Those are my thoughts on it anyway....

Tim

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by gorbeckie on May 3^rd, 2002, 9:42pm

slean is better
it's simple.. she is more talented.

haha :)

Becky

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Hejira on May 3^rd, 2002, 10:40pm

It's really all a matter of personal preference with something like this. You could come up with any number of reasons to support either performer.

The criteria is a bit off...it seems silly to me. Ability to sell themself? No. I don't think so. I think the musician's priority is to make the music. Someone else can sell them. There's an entire business devoted to that--let that be the problem of the thugs at Warner.

How can you compare the so-called 'right' career moves of two different performers? How does someone make a 'better' choice when we're talking about two completely separate people?!?! Seems kinda silly to me to compare the two like that.

A musician's music is the most important thing. A lot of the stuff you talked about is peripheral and unecessary and there's no need to include something like that when you're assessing someone based on their music.

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by angrysnatch on May 4^th, 2002, 1:51am

just ot start off

I LOVE SARAH HARMER!

what a slick chick! lovin' her

but as for who's gonna make it big time.. i dunno hard to say .. sarah harmer definately has made great career choices .. going solo was a big move and it paid off. also seeing her with the tragically hip gave her loads of exposure .. doing a soundtrack was a good move on her part.

but as for the fab MS.Slean .. hey now .. any chick that can rock the ivories and look completely fab doing it .. well thats talent .. coupled with the fact that she writes everything.

i honestly do think that the Fab Ms.Slean will hit the more mainstream music and hit it big .. whereas sarah harmer will be a legend in the folk field.

sorry ..

i really do love harmer .. ive been listening to her since the weeping tile days .. saw her in concert 3 times .. love her.. but Ms.Slean has the ability to make it more mainstream.

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by guyfromARGYLEROAD on May 4^th, 2002, 6:52am

Last year, Harmer
This year, Slean

They're both great.
Sarah Slean has less abrasive edge...though her music sometimes has a good edge.
Sarah Harmer, is more back-porch, more rootsy.
Sarah Slean is more fantasy...to me...

So, my above response makes sense.

J

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by MrManning on May 7^th, 2002, 6:56am

well here it goes.............on songs for clem.....Sarah Harmer showed what she can do with her voice and really shone......and while You Were Here......was a fantastic album......she really didn't showcase her vocal talent very well.......Sarah Slean I believe has done somewhat of the same thing........by adding more background instruments, she takes away from the simplistic beauty of just listen to a woman and her piano........the first two times I saw Sarah Slean it was just her and her piano....and they were two of the most fantastic performances of my life........I just think the new album, while beautiful, could be even better...were it stripped down........Harmer, almost same deal........Clem was simple cuz they weren't her songs......they were more stripped down than You Were Here.......both talented artists....and if I had to say who had more talent overall.......I'd probably have to say Sarah Slean.........but Harmer made my favourite album between the two.....just too bad they weren't her songs........... :P

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Grindig Boy on May 10^th, 2002, 11:42am

You can compare, but to no avail. They are both outstanding.

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Nikolita on May 11^th, 2002, 1:43pm

I agree ;D

(but I still prefer our little slean)

nikolita^_^

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by MatU2 on May 23^rd, 2002, 7:19pm

I would say that the artist should do what they love rather than what will make them more popular. Take Emm Gryner for example.. She had an album released on a major label and when the label restructured and she was one of the artists to be dropped, she didn't bother to look for a new record deal but rather kept on going independant so that she could do what she wants... That is something I have a lot of respect for. And so far I think that Sarah Slean seems to be going the same road as Emm... Just doing what she wants.

Cheers
Mat

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Raoul_C. on May 25^th, 2002, 6:48pm

When sarah signed to a big time record company she bought air time. it was only the next big step for her she wants to reach a larger audience. maybe she needs the money you cant live of of 15000 record sales for an album.

Does Sarah slean Have a day Job?
How tall is she?

anyways the idea behind the major label signing is getting the major label to pay for the musicians range of influence. they make you heard but you do have to sell out a bit

Title: Re: Sarah Slean versus Sarah Harmer???
Post by Nikolita on May 25^th, 2002, 6:56pm

I posted a message a while back with part of an article I read typed out... Aparrently she's had some really crappy jobs in the past... one including a job in a c*ockroach infested stall where her boss would walk by and slap her a*ss. Poor Sarah. As for a job now, I doubt it, she's getting into the big times now! wooo hooo....

nikolita^_^