What do you think about musicians material being released after they have died?

[Beanz]

Is it just shameless cashing in or born out of a genuine desire to catalogue every last bit of relevant piece of work and archive their career?

Example here - https://www.uncut.co.uk/news/new-dav...aterial-108772




9 recordings most of them at an unfinished demo stage. Is it really necessary? Would Bowie have released them? Does it matter?

[greynotsoold]

Wasn't it Lemmy that said that after you die you immediately become 58% better than you were while alive?

[walrus]

I’ve always enjoyed bootleg and other types of releases. Some pretty cool Lennon songs were released after his death. A few new songs but mostly rough works or different versions. TBH it’s like a gift evertime it happens. Most of the time it’s only material true fans of the artist enjoy so I say keep it coming.

[Gandalf]

Those are rare songs long sought after by fans. It's great that people have a chance to hear them at last. According to Nick Pegg there is a lot out there. We get spoiled periodically too like when Toy was leaked as were The Leon Tapes. You even have funny stuff like this.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NrtXFTw2ico

Personally I wish for something like the Dylan bootleg series coming out of the Bowie Estate. It doesn't hurt the legacy. His core body of work is so strong.

Unreleased stuff is like seeing sketches and works in progress. It only adds to the layers. Just because you have heard a demo of Space Oddity it just adds a new dimension to the final piece.

[Beanz]

For me there is an element of greed and morbid fascination it it. Just like the weariness you feel when you see an artists music being used to advertise crap you know they would never have endorsed when they were alive, the same exploitation is there when unfinished demos are suddenly looked on as fair game. They have been unreleased for 40+ years for a reason. If it makes fans happy I suppose there is no harm but It does dilute the catalogue when sketches are sold as finished paintings.

[Spicoli]

For me as long as it's the artist in question and nothing terribly foul is afoot I don't have a major problem with 'hidden B sides' or previously unreleased material. Now if the artist was known to oppose it's release or it's remixed heavily edited etc than that's not so cool. I have a bigger problem with major companies using that hologram nonsense of dead musicians to sell Coke or a new model of automobile. Music, movies though was pre internet and the same, once it's out there to the masses you're bound to see something objectional. Using John Wayne to sell a light beer ffs