Sell Outs

Yes, but in the context of your OP. Do you mean:

  • Starting a YT channel
  • Writing later music that you don't feel is up to their earlier material
  • Promoting other business interests (John Petrucci selling IR's)
  • Taking endorsements
It could mean various things.

Whatever form it takes, I don't have a problem with it mainly because my interpretation of their motivation for doing so could be completely wrong.

I've heard people claim JP sold out when he switched to EBMM for example. But he may have simply gotten a company more willing and able to build him the guitars he truly wanted, and, had the means to do so at the volume to allow his fans to play the same exact guitars he does.


I think selling out is a nuanced and very contextual thing. I think it can apply in a million places. I like your questions here specifcally, because I had never considered two of them. I'll just respond inline:

  • Starting a YT channel
To me that is not selling out at all. To me it can be creative and very cool. I think though that you can have a YouTube channel where you're just a sellout, but I don't think creating a channel itself means anything at all! I think gear reviews are a very helpful thing, as long as they're honest, for instance. And for musicians trying to promote their original music, I think the music industry is so brutal you're probably best off having a YouTube channel as yet another venue hopefully to have your music heard and recognized.
  • Writing later music that you don't feel is up to their earlier material
That doesn't mean anything in and of itself. Maybe someone isn't as good of a songwriter. Maybe they came up in angst but got complacent in success, or a million other things. But I think that your instinct will tell you when something is just made to be crap.
  • Promoting other business interests (John Petrucci selling IR's)
I think that's fine. I think that's actually an awesome thing that can help people get closer to their ideal tones and get closer to making music!
  • Taking endorsements
I think this is contextual too. If it's something you think is great, I think it's great to be compensated to be associated with it. I think if you're associating yourself with shit, just to be paid, you're selling out.

You have a really interesting point about Petrucci's endorsements being a point of contention. I hadn't considered that one either! I don't really know the deals there, but I don't really see that as a point of selling out at all. To me, he's one of greatest musicians ever to have picked up a guitar (even if I can't stand most of his music!), and he should have the very best gear to achieve what he's going for. That means working with whatever company gives him the respect he deserves and whatever company will help him best to achieve his goals.
 
I'm pretty much with SoE on this.

As for Metallica, if their goal was to be the biggest metal band in the world regardless of what type of music they made then they're not selling out.

Obviously if they don't like the crap they've been making after the first 3 or 4 albums and are just doing it to be the biggest metal band in the world, then they're total sellouts.
 
This is why I love/d the whole Discord records D.C. area scene.

When I first heard of fugazi, and their whole belief in the, " no more than 5 dollars at the door, no more than 10 dollars for an album....no merch....all heart." Ethos. I knew they were something special.

They played many benefit shows for free all the time, for crowds of people whom didn't even know who they were....but they united and entertained....and ate just fine...kept the business running.

This was always my love, my dream, my heart.

They are an example of how not to sell out. One of many.
 
Being a full-time musician doesn’t pay shit.

giphy.webp


The gravy train that so many bands benefited from pre-2Ks left a long time ago; the music biz collapsed under the weight of all the trend-following & crookery... and the $$$ all dried up.

Some of the best guitarists in the history of mankind are out there today; slaving away putting up YouTube clips and iTunes songs and not even making peanuts from monetization. These guys would've been comparatively rolling in the dough in the 70's and 80's with their bands. Furthermore, incredible modern guitar talent on display is ignored because no one's impressed anymore; "been there - heard that". And rock music is pretty much either underground or part of the modern country genre.

The dream is dead.

Regardless, best to get what enjoyment you can out of playing.
 
For me, the one that comes to mind and which I think is a good example is Maroon 5.

Their first album is full of great songs that THEY wrote. The next couple albums are similar.

By the 4th album (Overexposed), every single song is co-written and obviously targeted at the crappy pop music market.

That trend continued and the next album is all co-writes but only Adam Levine from the band contributed.

Obviously, they have achieved massive success, but I really can't stomach their current material and to me it's really Adam Levine as a "pop artist" with a backing band.

I also totally agree that the "sell out" label is mostly coming from (often former) fans.
 
Those are fighting words ;)

I really never understand comments like these regarding the music.

Their music is very much in-line with other rock music of the time (the earlier stuff, pre-Dynasty, anyway).
Well, it's easy. It's not music I'd ever purposely listen to, and apparently anything similar to it. It's simplistic, boring, and doesn't make for an enjoyable experience at all.
 
I was a teen during Hotter Than Hell, RnR Over, Alive I, that area, and still have those, and a few more, records. I was also into Aerosmith, from the start to Rocks. Dug both. Then.

But when I listen to those songs now, the Aerosmith still holds up. The Kiss sounds like crappy, HS, garage-band music.

But oddly enough, I love, er, strongly like, this song:

 
Back
Top