Prefer to sign to a label owned by an artist or not?

[algorhythm]

Following up on my latest poll about 'Which dance label would you sign to?'
I thought it would be good to see if the fact that an artist owns the label would matter.
Since the spinnin' records/martin garrix breakup, it certainly would for me or would at least make me much more cautious if I was offered a contract.

Any thoughts?

[Knappster]

I have my fav labels that coincidently are owned by the Artists. Major labels have huge teams working behind them and selecting tracks for the label. Unless I get really lucky I don't think the actual label owner would even choose my track to be released on their label. That being said, I think it's about trying to form a personal relationship with some of the guys affiliated with the label. I talk with some of the guys from Black Sunset regularly about music in general, they are really helpful for me. I took part in a remix contest and was able to get a hold of some of them. 

[Danyella]

Hmm.. I guess it doesn't matter. My personal favorite label is owned by artists, but I don't dislike major labels.

In regards to the Spinnin Records/Garrix breakup - I don't know the full story, but given the fact that Spinnin Records made him earn over $10 million in 2 years, giving him total financial freedom to live his passion, it's quite strange of him to use that very same money they've enabled him with to sue them. I wouldn't feel good about that. Unless he's signed a lifelong exclusive contract with them unknowingly then I'd probably understand, but other than that, no. Anyways, none of my business :-)

[Anuma]

I think an artist owned label is the way to go if you do want to sign for a label, take the Madeon/Sony incident for example...

http://www.stereogum.com/1803424/madeon-accuses-sony-music-of-holding-artists-hostage-by-removing-their-music-from-soundcloud/wheres-the-beef/

However, I would just say make sure you read the small print before signing anything.