I also own a little coffee house that I want to run in retirement. When people come to coffee houses they most enjoy intellectual discussion and reading a good book. Folk music works well and live acoustic performances also work. However, no one asks for good rock and roll to rattle the walls. It makes me wonder if those signing to this label are going to start trying to create music that fits the Starbucks scenario. For some that is great, for others terrible. I would hate for McCartney to not try to rock us one more time now that he is on the label. I am curious as to who else is going to follow suit and have their music sold over a cup of coffee? And, what kind of music is it going to be?

It bothers me that a good artist would even sign to a Starbucks label... I can understand signing to a major label... but fuckin' STARBUCKS? Gross.

All I can see is a CD full of white boys singing softly over a strummed guitar.

I think bands are aware that if they're on a Starbucks label that they are:

1. Selling out
2. Washing out

quote:

Originally posted by Mathor:
I think bands are aware that if they're on a Starbucks label that they are:
1. Selling out
2. Washing out

Yet, they just keep signing to it.

Sonic Youth recently had a hits compilation released through Starbucks. When pressed for comment, Kim Gordon said, "They're less evil than Universal."

quote:

Originally posted by EricG75:
"They're less evil than Universal."

Very true. At least Starbucks dabbles in fair trade and organic. All Universal ever did was suck and profit.