SCOOTERTECHNO.COM

Quoted

When I saw this years back I didn't think that there's anything unusual in this.

It was only three years ago! Even I remember it...

Quoted

On the contrary... I think the deadline stuff is just a method that works the best for them, makes them push themselves hard.

Except it's not their prerogative to pick the dates of these deadlines.

What does this tell you?

Quoted

If they needed more time I think they could well have it

Do you honestly think the negative reputation they've gotten over the past few years has been worth it?

They've been called pretty much every name in the book. All of this could've been avoided if they instead were able to create their own material rather than engineering and depending on the work of others.You'd a thought if they were interested in leaving behind some sort of commendable musical legacy that they'd rather be known for their notoriety in producing original sounds. Anyone interested in being remembered in a good light would do this given the choice. However their management, or Jens, is more interested in quantity than quality. It's the counterintuitive conditions enforced by their bosses that is leaving them no other option than to jeopardize their status as a band. Think about it - what would you rather be known for given the choice? If they had the authority to choose they'd be a much more respected group.

Quoted

To me this interview or any other doesn't prove that they'd be complete slaves.

Given the monetary reward. Yeah... it's sorta obvious. Some people will sacrifice anything for it.


Grrr... for the sudden change in subject.

Isn't this Posse business more suited to the Live section?

Quoted

How do we really know what happens behind the scenes? It could just as well be HP saying "alright, we're starting on a new album, and are aiming for the spring market". Or with too close a date they could say "sorry man, that's too soon".

I think we can get a fairly readable impression from the information elucidated via interviews and the amount of time it takes for them to release one record to the next. Your example is a great deal more conjecturally based than my own interpretation -- seen as I'm not basing on what I think could be happening but rather trying to put together the pieces from what we're told. If you're not willing to accept that what was said during that interview to be true; then what are you saying, exactly? Are they lying? If so, for what purpose? If it did function the way you seem to be suggesting then there really wouldn't need to be a need for a product manager telling them this or that at all. It would be utterly pointless.


And in regards to the deadlines that are determined by the management and not the band themselves, they've all but admitted that they prefer working under a chaotic and potentially disastrous environment where everything has to be rushed. Who on earth would inflict that on themselves though? Some artists spend a great deal more time on their work because the freedom and ability to postpone a estimated release date gives them an environment whereby they feel they aren't rushed for time and nobody is in the background ordering them about. It's that sort of productive atmosphere that is inarguably conducive to inspiration and creativity. In my mind there are only two possible explanations for this: they're either being told what to say and don't genuinely feel the conditions that are enforced on them are fair, or they're agreeing to these unworkable stipulations because quantity is directly related to profit (to which they benefit).

Quoted

They've said that once they stop stirring opinions they might just as well stop. The point here, for all I've seen in interviews -- just look at the most recent one -- is that they take pride in their method.

It may sound cynical or contrary to what many consider to be an impossibility due to the whole God complex that is associated with them - but they are nevertheless giving the impression that they're merely in the business for the monetary rewards, and not the music itself. An artist doesn't want to be known for borrowing the work off others in order to cement her career and reputation as an artist -- she wants to be known for her originality, uniqueness and creativity. Isn't that what legacies are built on? It's hard for me to accept that a music group would actually want such a polarized opinion about them. It is these methods of their's after all that has made them a laughing stock in much of the music industry. The shock that was accompanied by their success here by the press substantiates that. No artist wants this.... Seriously, they don;t. It's because of this that leads many to believe what many other realistic fans and haters do. If they cared, things would be a hell of a lot different. We instead see an artist that continues to descend its reputation into the depths of laughability for a quick buck.

Quoted

(And all in all, are there more people who see them in bad light than those who see them in good light? I think the good outweights the bad.)

Yes. Obviously...

Actually I think that's an unfair generalization that doesn't apply to every mainstream artist at all. And pop is a such an encompassing term that I worry the two artists that have instantly come to mind may not be viewed as pop musicians. Regardless, I think the charitable spirit of people like Lady Gaga and Avril Lavigne show that the notion that all an artist cares about is money and status to be a parroted myth. Unlike our beloved German techno group, both artists are involved in so many other different projects that takes up much of their time. Aviril Lavigne, for example, has her own charity foundation that was set up to help the sick and physically handicapped. I can't say Scooter have ever down something that improves the condition of humanity - at least nothing as monumental as that. And Lady Gaga, who is relentlessly attackted by bigots and extremists - presumably because she's an avid supporter of LGBT rights that brings to mind a few speeches and protests that she's participated in to help the cause. This includes the all obvious one of raising awareness to the need to lay down fundamental human rights for all. They both undertake all this good and still manage to have enough time and freedom to create some fantastically received records.

Their philanthropy is but the complete opposite of generic money obsessed people like Jordan. Whilst this is not so much a reflection on the quality of their music (both do care though however), it to me shows that their characters are not as one dimensional as some talentless artist may be. And therefore not every mainstream act is in it for the cash or fame. More to the point, Scooter's agreement to work in conditions whereby they're forced to finish something at a specified time is not practical. It only rushes them, and leaves us wondering how much more amazing their work would be had they been spared the deadlines. No one in their right mind would sacrifice their freedom to produce music in a stress free environment for a hectic one ---- UNLESS they were offered large sums of cash. I honestly don't mind because the music they subsequently end up with is good to me. But I'm through deluding myself about them.... Accept them for who they are already people!

The two aforementioned artists are synonymous with their desire to help people. And I don't think digging up a few isolated examples demonstrates a commitment to bettering humanity. Regardless of the few sporadic instances where they've raised a bit of money to help those in need -- it doesn't negate the point I've made about their working dynamic. My intentions with using Lady Gaga and Avril Lavigne to shatter the myth that all mainstream acts care about is wealth and status shows that some of them genuinely care about the music they commercialize. I used their philanthropy as a means of conveying that point. From what's been dug up over the years, I don't think Scooter qualify as as an act that truly cares about much of anything. Besides, I did specifically follow that statement with saying I'm certain they haven't done anything as "monumental" as them. It was probably an obligatory decision on their managers part as opposed to a conscious deliberation to help. May sound incredibly pessimistic -- but that's what I get from how they operate.

Quoted

as the year 2010 closes up we can say a farewell to UTROTT and look forward to the new style

You have no idea how refreshing that is to hear.

Wasn't a bad album by any means - but I'm glad this chapter has been closed to make way for something fresh. And I am looking forward to what may be another bizarrely oriented experimental album. Also I'm hoping they're aiming for a March 2011 release rather than a postponement into the summer. I'm just so thirsty for some new Scooter material right about now that any more waiting and I'm gonna die. It's not as if releasing it before TSTI would be detrimental either. It's only going to build up our anticipation for the event. Or it could alterntively be available a few weeks beforehand too. Just as long as I hear the new record before the huge gig because I kinda want to know what I'm walking into. I highly doubt I'll be disappointed... Not worried about the influences that may or may not be a wide departure either, as I know the end result is going to rock.