base talk Do artist owe fans regular music releases?

[DemDam92]

Do artist owe fans regular music releases?
 

you became a fan during prime time of an artist, there has always been regular music releases. 
 

Once time goes by the releases stop or come very late/irregular.

 

Best examples: Rihanna, Shakira, Mariah etc.

 

It feels like they leave the fans behind which is hard as fans usually stans one artist only and have no other artist to be happy about. Is it unfair or should be respected?

opinions.

[Virgos Groove]

The only time an artist owes their fans something is on tour, since you're paying actual money to see them.

[keshasfillers]

Yes

[alfonso12]

Nope. It's their art and only they will know when it's ready.

 

2 minutes ago, Virgos Groove said:

The only time an artist owes their fans something is on tour, since you're paying actual money to see them.

Also this.

[Aston Martin]

No. As frustrating as it may be from a fan’s perspective, they don’t owe anyone music outside of the obligations of their record contract. The “imperial phase” of a musician’s career seems quite taxing and most people can’t keep that going forever. 

[Klein]

No, they don't. An artist should never make an album just for the sake of pleasing fans. That has to come from within. 

 

However, they owe it to them to be honest about it. For example, I'd say Rihanna has been acting a bit disrespectfully to her fans by constantly saying the album is coming "soon", or "dot dot dot" or "pending" or "in 2019". 

[Edibles.]

Celebrities in any capacity don’t owe you anything. End of story.

 

These parasocial relationships have clouded your brains beyond repair.

[CBC]

5 minutes ago, Virgos Groove said:

The only time an artist owes their fans something is on tour, since you're paying actual money to see them.

/endthread

[magazine]

Yes. It's a 9-5 job 

[worldwide angel]

no. thats an idea propagated by labels that want to pressure artists into making them money by using their fans. 

if they were to work on fan's time, said fans would call their output rushed and desert them. and now with these 

parasocial relationships and too many instances of leaks, fans can rush their faves, pan their official releases, and 

then leak a **** ton of their songs. i mean look at ariana. 

[Johnny Jacobs]

No

 

What they owe is transparency. 

 

Dont lie that you will release when you wont. Dont promise something you won't deliever. 

 

Rihanna sis im talking to you. 

 

 

[Happylittlepunk]

Tbh no. It sucks but it’s the truth. If the artist needs time to rest and experience life to write new music then it makes since. Fans don’t want rushed albums that are low-quality. Personally I prefer artist who release music they are passionate about and actually plan a will organized roll-out. 

[Abel Minaj]

When they stop making music, that means it's time to grow up and move on with life

[Moonturn]

11 minutes ago, Johnny Jacobs said:

No

 

What they owe is transparency. 

 

Dont lie that you will release when you wont. Dont promise something you won't deliever. 

 

Rihanna sis im talking to you. 

 

 

This.

[loveisdead9582]

Owe? No. They can do what they want with their art. That said, it is good for their careers to stay in the spotlight with even occasional droplets. 

[HEAVYONIT]

Artists don't owe their fans anything, but if they want to keep their careers afloat and active then they have to feed their fans. 

[GentleEarthquake]

Yes. Get to work 

[vuelve88]

[PrettyHurts]

ask rihanna

[EnigmaticAndroid]

No, and to act otherwise is super entitled imo. Every artist has their own process and timeline. And obviously label plans are a factor. 

 

With that said, being an artist is a career and repeatedly releasing bad or incredibly subpar music, taking multiple long breaks, etc. can be bad for business. If a fanbase feels like their interest and investment in an artist is less and less worthwhile, they will eventually move on and you will have alienated your core audience. 

[dumbsparce]

No, music is not a pill.

[Keeandga]

No, but if people are interested in the music and you don’t release atleast 2-4 years after the last album some/most people will move on, depending on the situation. 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Keeandga

[Dula Peep]

57 minutes ago, Black Jesus said:

Artists don't owe their fans anything, but if they want to keep their careers afloat and active then they have to feed their fans. 

exactly, they don't owe us anything but don't expect us to care when you finally drop after 6+ years of crickets...

[Shimenawa]

Yes we need to be entertained

[John Slayne]

no, they don't owe us anything the same way we don't owe them our money/attention. it's a two way street: they deliver, we stan. they retire, we move on.