[Denim]

This goes back a long ways, but I always thought of the Bee Gee's as selling out. They began as Rock (didn't they do "Lonely Nights"?"), then switched to Disco when it was popular. In reality, they probably adjusted their style to remain firmly in the center of Pop music.

In contrast, it surprised the hell out of me when Cadillac started using Led Zep songs in their comercials. The old Caddy image never would have stood for it. It took me awhile, but finally came to the conclusion that their target audience had new taste and they were keeping in step with them. I didn't consider this a sell out, but a marketing adjustment.

So why do I see a band (that's really a company) being a sell out when they try to stay current with the times, but it's OK for a company to make the same adjustments? Could it be the band is more personal because we see their faces and a company (such as Cadillac) is only seen through their commercials?

 

[tennisets]

No, this is selling out.

In all seriousness, bands are accused way too often of selling out when they simply go in a new direction, sometimes even when it doesn't increase their popularity, and that is patently ridiculous.

If an artist goes in a direction they are not really interested in as an artist, but merely as a businessman, that is selling out. Going in a new artistic direction is not, even if it's a direction that brings the band's sound closer to mainstream ideals.

 

[ojnihs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tennisets /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, this is selling out.

I'm at a loss for words. Really I am.

 

[Coltrane]

Selling out is quite often overused by people who just get mad that their band becomes popular (like with the Black Album or Good News etc by Modest Mouse. I dont see any evidence to suggest a dramatic change or an attempt to sell more records by changing their sound.)

However, artists often do change their sound, or atleast 'encouraged' to odify their sound by record execs. Metallica, beginning with Load, undeniably changed their sound to match what was currently on the radio so they could maintain or increase their popularity. How do we 'know' this? Because the music is so incredibly generic and such a radical departure. Either one must accept that they 1. sold out, or 2. turned into a crappy band over night and forgot how to write songs.

As far as bands in interviews not saying they sold out, I have two responses.

1. Of course they dont want to admit that. They will ALWAYS say 'this album is my best work and im proud of it.' Even if they dont sell out, and even they think it sucks. Either through willful delusion, or they just lie for more sales.

2. Many artists DO admit to selling out. David Bowie has said that his early 80s work was done specifically to have hit songs. Many other artists have admitted to aiming for a demographic, or for trying to broaden their fan base. Real musicians talk about their music, not who buys it. Weezer is another good example. Rivers, the lead singer/songwriter, was very much hurt by the lack of sales from their second album, and he has concentrated on hit songs ever since.

The Linkin Park thing is pretty interesting though. How someone could think a completely corporate and generic rock band could sell out anymore is beyond me. That would be like Britney Spears selling out.

Now, some people like to say that those who claim 'sell out' are doing so only because they dont like, or just cant take, their favorite band changing sounds. While this is sometimes true, its is most often not the case. Bands like Radiohead had HUGELY changed their sound, but are in no way sell outs. Change is rarely the issue, its why the change was made, and what the end result it.

What is undeniably true is that selling out DOES exist. How and why it manifests itself is where the disagreements come in.

 

[cedric]

Bands who created good music. Witch then choose to change their style with aim at making more money or appeal to the "masses" taste.

 

[porschemad911]

I don't think Metallica sold out. When interviewed after producing Load, James Hetfield said, 'Because I like to ****** with people', in response to a question about their changing musical style.

Doesn't sound like he did it for the money or the popularity.

However, I don't like any of Metallica's old or new music any more. I guess I just grew out of it after my heart changed.

 

[Rempert]

It seems like the phrase "sell out" is usually said by those who think they have better musical taste than everyone else in the world, or those who think that buying a band's first album when it was new entitles you to determine the career path of said band. It is merely a reflection of arrogance as far as I'm concerned.

Perhaps if a band literally sold their music to support a cause they are known to disagree with. But to say a musician sold out simply because he or she dared to change to a musical style you don't like, give me a break.

 

[MaZa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rempert /img/forum/go_quote.gif It seems like the phrase "sell out" is usually said by those who think they have better musical taste than everyone else in the world, or those who think that buying a band's first album when it was new entitles you to determine the career path of said band. It is merely a reflection of arrogance as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps if a band literally sold their music to support a cause they are known to disagree with. But to say a musician sold out simply because he or she dared to change to a musical style you don't like, give me a break.

Its not simply about changing styles, its about changing style in hope to appeal wider masses and make more money. I know bands that have changed their sound and no-way-in-hell are sell-outs, even if I dont like the change.

Quote:

I don't think Metallica sold out. When interviewed after producing Load, James Hetfield said, 'Because I like to ****** with people', in response to a question about their changing musical style.

Naaah, thats just acted fake-angsty outburst in hope to make people think "wow this is tough!!!" and buy their "music" even more.

 

[en480c4]

Regarding Metallica, I think a lot of the Load & Reload stuff is great music. If it had been released by anyone but Metallica, I doubt anyone would've made a big fuss about it. It's obvious they were listening to other kinds of music, including blues and southern rock. And remember these guys were in the mid-30's at that point... I'm sure they were very different people from who they were though And Justice For All... so why should we be surprised that the music reflects that? To me, selling out would've been making And Justice... 2, or Metallica 2... Albums that would've been guaranteed to sell millions of copies. Instead they did something they wanted to do, including shedding that late-80's metal image, knowing it was risking alienating a lot of their fans in the process.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Not changing can also be a part of selling out. Think of all the rebellious groups who now trudge from stadium to stadium playing the same old lineup, year after year.

They've sold out, too. They're more interested in collecting money from fans than exploring new angles or creating something new. They're just there to cash in.

And if they played something new, odds are, the fans wouldn't show up.

Selling out has more to do with chasing money than it does with change.

 

[Rempert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif Its not simply about changing styles, its about changing style in hope to appeal wider masses and make more money. I know bands that have changed their sound and no-way-in-hell are sell-outs, even if I dont like the change.

That's just the point though. The implication is that making music that lots of people will enjoy is inherently a bad thing. In my world view, bringing enjoyment or inspiration to large amounts of people is surely a good thing. The notion of music as some sterile artform that is supposed to stand on its own without regard to people actually enjoying it is kind of sad to me.

 

[John D.]

Selling out is when you let a major CORPORATION use your music in a Cadillac commercial. There are members of bands who refuse to do this on artistic principle, such as John Densmore of the DOORS, his attitude is that Jim Morrison would never have allowed his music to be compromised
in such a blatant commercial manner.

This to me is Selling Out.

JD

 

[Coltrane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rempert /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's just the point though. The implication is that making music that lots of people will enjoy is inherently a bad thing. In my world view, bringing enjoyment or inspiration to large amounts of people is surely a good thing. The notion of music as some sterile artform that is supposed to stand on its own without regard to people actually enjoying it is kind of sad to me.

Not at all. All good music should, and will. be enjoyed.

What this has to do with is artist intentions. ALL great art must be made from the perspective of personal expression. If people love it, that is great. Immensely popular music can still be great art. But music that is made primarily for the purpose of financial gain will be significantly compromised.

Obviously, this is more of a general rule, as on occasion sell out music can occasionally still be quite beautiful. However, for the most part, there is a gnawing artificiality to 'sell out' music that makes it very much unlistenable.

 

[MdRex]

somehow, i think some people think that they can tell the intentions of an artist better than the person next to him.

 

[SickMouthy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MdRex /img/forum/go_quote.gif somehow, i think some people think that they can tell the intentions of an artist better than the person next to him.

In my experience musicians often have little idea what they're doing at all, especially successful ones.

Here's a thing I wrote years ago - http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articl...-sells-out.htm