Sell Outs

[Holden Afart]

was just supposed to be a thought experiment about..... nevermind.

No thought needed, that was a total sell out album.

 

[jay mitchell]

I love a ton of pop music, and I love a ton of simplistic music in general, none of the stuff I love feels like the product of selling out.

To you. It might feel very different to someone else.

To me it’s definable in the same way your sense of a person is when you know them. It’s instinctual, intuitive.

IOW, it is very much a matter of personal belief, in exactly the same way religious views are. None of that shit is arguable (in any valid way) in an online forum. Which obviously doesn't stop folks from arguing about it. Whose musical dogma are you going to buy into, yours or someone else's? (That's a rhetorical question BTW.)

I can never quite expect other people’s reasoning, so it’s always cool for me to gain a little bit more understanding in general by asking an open ended question like my OP. It’s just interesting to me, in the end.

Anyone who collects money in return for services - of any sort - is selling something. Are they "selling out?" One thing's for damn sure: neither you nor I are in any position to answer that question for them.

 

[megametal7]

I’ll never forgive Tallica for selling out and making shyte albums. They are dead to me now….

Ill cherish my school day memories with my old tallica on cassettes and VHS.

 

[State of Epicicity]

1. A bandleader who says the band will split the money equally who then surreptitiously takes a much larger cut. This is opposed to a leader/sideman arrangement.
2. A businessman who relies on deceiving their customers in order to make a profit.
3. A venue owner who shorts a band after they've performed for a previously-agreed-on amount. Back in the day, it was no unheard of for a band's manager to carry a weapon in order to persuade reluctant club owners.
4. A manager who signs a performer to an exploitative contract, taking almost all of the artist's revenues as a result.
5. A record label that does the same thing as in 4

I’m sorry any of that happened to you; all those situations are huge part of what is wrong with the music world, and that bullshit of course predates the world of hurt streaming caused. I wouldn’t define those people as sell outs; I’d define them as fraudsters and crooks!

 

[State of Epicicity]

They are not. Having one does not exclude the other.

Oops. You’re right. I used the wrong term! I meant to say they are interdependent. I was too head up, so to speak.

Since when has the notion of playing music you happen not to approve of become a "moral argument?"

It’s not. I’m not following how you got there from what I wrote, but there’s plenty of music I don’t like that I respect, music I don’t consider selling out. A moral argument in music depends entirely on what your values are. That’s a philosophical argument. I think that labeling all commerce in art as the product of selling out is a cynical way to dismiss what can be a beautiful thing: following your heart, staying true to yourself, and being fortunate enough to make money doing it.

I agree with you that the music industry is largely a craven shitshow. I think that’s because of people like the ones you listed earlier. I’m repeating what I’ve written earlier in this thread, but selling out to me means having a sense of principles that you’ve formed as an artist, then abandoning those by choice. And I think even worse is being in the art world and never forming principles of any kind. That kind of thing is soulless.

This whole question to me is going to be as varied as people’s own experience with music. Everyone has a different experience, so the values they form are extremely different, and that’s what I think is interesting, seeing what the different definitions are, and how this plays out in different people’s minds.

 

[JiveTurkey]

To say my reaction to first seeing (and by association; hearing) the Enter Sandman video was one of pure hatred continues to be one of the biggest understatements of my over-critical life. I did get over it with time and some decades. Some things aren't meant to be pure forever and cutting someone off from making a living because they are no longer in the cool column is just, well; childish. Even if I can agree 100% with the sentiment of said artist turning to absolute dogshit.

 

[jay mitchell]

I’m repeating what I’ve written earlier in this thread, but selling out to me means having a sense of principles that you’ve formed as an artist,

What IYO would be a good example of said "principles that you’ve formed as an artist," then? Without that, we're inevitably just gonna talk past each other.

 

[TSJMajesty]

selling out to me means having a sense of principles that you’ve formed as an artist, then abandoning those by choice.

What's an example?

 

[laxu]

To say my reaction to first seeing (and by association; hearing) the Enter Sandman video was one of pure hatred continues to be one of the biggest understatements of my over-critical life. I did get over it with time and some decades. Some things aren't meant to be pure forever and cutting someone off from making a living because they are no longer in the cool column is just, well; childish. Even if I can agree 100% with the sentiment of said artist turning to absolute dogshit.

The Black Album was actually the first Metallica record I bought so I don't have anything against it.

I had the same reaction to Load though. Even if now I can recognize it's a good rock album, it was just not something you expected from the band. I think it would have been well received if they had made another band instead of saying it's a Metallica record.

The flipside is you could be ACDC, writing the same album for several decades. Fans love the familiarity, but at the same time wish the band would evolve the formula a bit.

Mike Patton has been really smart by just having tons of bands that let him explore different things. Faith No More fans will then pick which ones they like but won't feel like he's selling out by doing something different. Not that his bands have a mainstream sound by any stretch.

Where does John Mayer land in all of this? His claim to fame came with pop albums which then allowed him to explore blues as a big name artist. Is he a sellout from the start or was he just business-smart?

 

[TSJMajesty]

I wish some bands would sell out.

 

[State of Epicicity]

What IYO would be a good example of said "principles that you’ve formed as an artist," then? Without that, we're inevitably just gonna talk past each other.

Sure, we can get into that, but I don’t think what my values are need to be universal. Some foundational values to me are to play music you feel / believe in, to play with passion, to write with intellect, to treat the audience, band mates, and yourself with general respect, to work your ass off to master your craft to the best of your ability, to have a deep enough understanding of theory to communicate with collaborators effectively, in general to act like a professional, and never to be a fucking douchebag.

What's an example?

Dudes I’ve known who’ve become known are the first thing I always think of. But for this illustration James Hetfield is the easy example to me. I never had any respect for Hammett, so there was none to lose when the band changed. I saw Hetfield as a visionary imaginative songwriter who pushed into progressive territory in some of the coolest and most powerful ways I’ve ever seen. Then I saw a guy who couldn’t stop yelling “Yeah!” every ten seconds. The pop icons I heard being played at the gym who sounded so similar there was no telling them apart, who can sing unbelievably well but sit in a cookie cutter song written by someone with no emotional connection to the song. The people who jump on bandwagons started by someone else and just do their best to copy.

As I named earlier in the thread, most metal bands after the black album followed Metallica’s lead, following the trend, and the results were terrible, from Megadeth, Anthrax, Forbidden, Xentrix, Overkill. These are bands I fucking worship.

Oh, another example: Dream Theater with Falling Into Infinity. Granted, my favorite album by them is When Dream and Day Unite, and I don’t like most of their music in general, but that album was so blatant, I just felt like there was nothing there but chart ambition.

Those are just some examples.

 

[TSJMajesty]

Sure, we can get into that, but I don’t think what my values are need to be universal. Some foundational values to me are to play music you feel / believe in, to play with passion, to write with intellect, to treat the audience, band mates, and yourself with general respect, to work your ass off to master your craft to the best of your ability, to have a deep enough understanding of theory to communicate with collaborators effectively, in general to act like a professional, and never to be a fucking douchebag.



Dudes I’ve known who’ve become known are the first thing I always think of. But for this illustration James Hetfield is the easy example to me. I never had any respect for Hammett, so there was none to lose when the band changed. I saw Hetfield as a visionary imaginative songwriter who pushed into progressive territory in some of the coolest and most powerful ways I’ve ever seen. Then I saw a guy who couldn’t stop yelling “Yeah!” every ten seconds. The pop icons I heard being played at the gym who sounded so similar there was no telling them apart, who can sing unbelievably well but sit in a cookie cutter song written by someone with no emotional connection to the song. The people who jump on bandwagons started by someone else and just do their best to copy.

As I named earlier in the thread, most metal bands after the black album followed Metallica’s lead, following the trend, and the results were terrible, from Megadeth, Anthrax, Forbidden, Xentrix, Overkill. These are bands I fucking worship.

Oh, another example: Dream Theater with Falling Into Infinity. Granted, my favorite album by them is When Dream and Day Unite, and I don’t like most of their music in general, but that album was so blatant, I just felt like there was nothing there but chart ambition.

Those are just some examples.

Appreciate it. And I get your point.

But you would have to know their 'principles', you would have to know they willingly abandoned them, you'd have to know their thoughts, you'd have to know the outside influences on the situation at the time...

Who can know all of that?

So my point is, the best anyone can ever do is to say they perceive them to have sold out. Or they believe they sold out. Or whatever other word you want to use.

And as far as DT is concerned, wrt FII, as I recall, they did have outside pressure, from the label, on that album. They forced them to use outside people on that album. Maybe it very well came down to a tough choice that they were facing- do what the label says, or hang it up.

That's exactly what I remember from watching interviews with Portnoy. It's not an easy situation. They had looked for a singer for a year-and-a-half, and after finally finding LaBrie, they were then teetering on the edge of not being able to continue as a band at that time. I wouldn't consider that 'selling out.' At all. But even if I did, I just don't know, or have any real way of knowing, what was going on behind the scenes, and in their heads.

I love FII, and can't stomach WDADU. Charlie's voice is like screeching tires to my ears. And Petrucci's playing sounds like an addendum to his instructional book! So for every fan that thinks, because a band went into a different musical direction they "sold out," there's others who think that music was great. Plus, they had 2 different members, so the music's going to change regardless. Derek is very different than Kevin. And I'm sure JP was still very much growing as a songwriter.

LOTS of things to consider.

One other thing I've noticed when it comes to bands that have had long careers, and their fans, very few fans like their music, from end to end. Most people tend to like the stuff from around the time they first got into them. Then at some point, as their music evolves, those fans lose interest. And a lot of those fans characterize the change in their music as, "They sold out." BS

• Don't like Van Hagar
• Rush lost me when they started playing too much keyboards
• U2 went too far into pop
• Aerosmith sucked after they all got clean

Are just a few of the things I've heard fans say. (The one about Aerosmith happens to be true though. )

 

[norminal]

Hammett

 

[TSJMajesty]

View attachment 26900

I gotta save that one!

 

[State of Epicicity]

Appreciate it. And I get your point.

But you would have to know their 'principles', you would have to know they willingly abandoned them, you'd have to know their thoughts, you'd have to know the outside influences on the situation at the time...

Who can know all of that?

So my point is, the best anyone can ever do is to say they perceive them to have sold out. Or they believe they sold out. Or whatever other word you want to use.

And as far as DT is concerned, wrt FII, as I recall, they did have outside pressure, from the label, on that album. They forced them to use outside people on that album. Maybe it very well came down to a tough choice that they were facing- do what the label says, or hang it up.

That's exactly what I remember from watching interviews with Portnoy. It's not an easy situation. They had looked for a singer for a year-and-a-half, and after finally finding LaBrie, they were then teetering on the edge of not being able to continue as a band at that time. I wouldn't consider that 'selling out.' At all. But even if I did, I just don't know, or have any real way of knowing, what was going on behind the scenes, and in their heads.

I love FII, and can't stomach WDADU. Charlie's voice is like screeching tires to my ears. And Petrucci's playing sounds like an addendum to his instructional book! So for every fan that thinks, because a band went into a different musical direction they "sold out," there's others who think that music was great. Plus, they had 2 different members, so the music's going to change regardless. Derek is very different than Kevin. And I'm sure JP was still very much growing as a songwriter.

LOTS of things to consider.

One other thing I've noticed when it comes to bands that have had long careers, and their fans, very few fans like their music, from end to end. Most people tend to like the stuff from around the time they first got into them. Then at some point, as their music evolves, those fans lose interest. And a lot of those fans characterize the change in their music as, "They sold out." BS

• Don't like Van Hagar
• Rush lost me when they started playing too much keyboards
• U2 went too far into pop
• Aerosmith sucked after they all got clean

Are just a few of the things I've heard fans say. (The one about Aerosmith happens to be true though. )

Totally Man. I think it’s extremely subjective; that’s why I wasn’t offering my own examples either for Jay’s or your question in the OP. I just feel like the examples are going to vary too much if you get really specific, but really I was just wondering about the general ideas people have about the concept of selling out. I’m seeing now that’s also extremely varied.

By the way, with regard to When Dream and Day Unite, I second that I don’t like Dominici’s vocals, and I don’t like the production, but I love love love the writing. To me Only A Matter Time is an epic and powerful journey. But anyway, nitpicking about any band in a discussion like this to me distracts from the essence, that selling out is really based on your world view in music, like what is real music to you, what feels genuine, what feels plastic, that sort of thing.

When my wife and I ran a gallery we represented this painter who is incredible, and the dude said that Foreigner represents the epitome of bullshit corporate music. My jaw hit the floor, because I love Foreigner, but the dude loves punk, so that’s his basis, his world view. For me it begins with Death from Leprosy on, and the two thrashiest Sepultura albums. Those represent real and genuine songwriting to me. And that informs everything else, in a way.

So I don’t know, I definitely don’t have great answers, but I like to consider these things and question my own assumptions. If I’m lucky, I’ll find I was dead wrong somewhere and grow as a result.

One more thing about my love of Dream Theater; it’s largely a love of Kevin Moore; it’s the songs and parts he wrote that always hit me hard.

 

[TSJMajesty]

I agree with your premise, basically. I just don't think any of us can really know when/if someone is selling out, just by what we hear in their music.

But yeah, if someone abandons their artistic side, and suddenly runs after materialistic..., 'trappings' I'll call it, for reasons such as it being simpler/easier/more profitable, then I guess I would call that 'selling out.'

But the bigger picture for me is, when a band goes off in another direction, of whatever form it may take, i.e., may not even be something related to making music..., and I don't like it, I just stop listening to them.

I mean, it's happened to me with pretty much all the bands I've loved. Muse's latest album..., mostly meh. DT? Hoping for a fresh new album that will bring me back, because the last few have only had small snippets of things I love. Rush, Pink Floyd, VH, Elton John..., I couldn't name any of their final albums.

Now, do I feel other bands jumped on the money-train to cash in on what the hot formula was at the time? Hell yeah! I heard a lot of that in the 90's, with more than a few bands that I literally couldn't distinguish from one another. I'd say that was due to the record execs trying to milk a band's popularity, by signing other bands that sounded the same. Kinda like when a movie does exceptionally well, and they make sequel after sequel, to make as much money from it as possible.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

I've heard cynical arguments about the world of music ad nauseum since I started playing guitar, and in this case, I couldn't disagree more. Getting paid doesn't equal selling out. Artistic values and playing original music are mutually exclusive; they can overlap if that's your choice, but it's not some imperical inescapable moral conundrum. Itzak Perlman didn't play a lot of originals. If one blankets any field in statements like those, it's easy to dismiss moral argument of any kind. "If no values are possible, how are value judgments possible?" is the essence of this kind of argument. People may have made those bullshit arguments to you in the past, but that's some ill-formed reasoning right there.

You can collaborate with other musicians, form bands, work as a hired gun, and still maintain integrity; it has to do with what your values are, and that's what I'm trying to find out underneath this. The idea of selling out implies that there is a value that has been sold. So what is the value? Can there be a value in the world of music? What values exist to you? Those are the interesting questions. To say "its a business" yada yada yada, you're just pushing forth more of the ill-formed reasoning.

Artists live and die by "artistic values." Mocking them as naive betrays a lack of respect for values themselves.

Hmmmm….

‏Violin - ویولن‏ على Instagram ‏: "Itzhak Perlman __ John Denver playing Bluegrass 🔥 @violin.virtuoso 🔥 ..... (¯`v´¯)♥ ...…. •.¸.•´ .... ¸.•´ ... ( ☻/ /▌♥♥ / \ ♥♥ #violin #mendelssohn #music #genre #song #songs #socialenvy #wearabletherapy #mel

‏‎8,750 likes, 70 comments - ‎‏‏‎violin.virtuoso‎‏ في ‏‎July 5, 2022‎‏‏: "Itzhak Perlman __ John Denver playing Bluegrass 🔥 @violin.virtuoso 🔥 ..... (¯`v´¯)♥ ...…. •.¸.•´ .... ¸.•´ ... ( ☻/ /▌♥♥ / \ ♥♥ #violin #mendelssohn #music #genre #song #songs #socialenvy #wearabletherapy #melody...

www.instagram.com

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

For me, the definition is really simple:

Do you make music to make music

Or

Do you make music to make money

If the almighty dollar is the driving motivator in making music, or painting, or writing fiction, or sculpting or any other form of art creation, then “sold out” is applicable.

The instant someone monetized creativity, it immediately became impure. To what level that impurity infests the art is up to the artist. Regardless of what any audience member thinks.

And if making music is your income one can’t play stuff they don’t like?

I mean “shit music” to me is guys regurgitating 80s stuff, or worse guys that were there the first time around still serving Luke warm reboots of it.

I try again at 15 I hated Chic, EWF etc
Later on at the times I subsidises income by doing cover bands those bands material was the fun part of the gig for me.
Whereas I hate doing stuff like Whitesnake for example.

 

[FuzzyAce]

 

[Iron1]

And if making music is your income one can’t play stuff they don’t like?

I mean “shit music” to me is guys regurgitating 80s stuff, or worse guys that were there the first time around still serving Luke warm reboots of it.

I try again at 15 I hated Chic, EWF etc
Later on at the times I subsidises income by doing cover bands those bands material was the fun part of the gig for me.
Whereas I hate doing stuff like Whitesnake for example.

One can do whatever they like. I just answered the question of how I define it. At this stage, Im acutely aware I can barely run my own life, much leas anyone else’s. How you choose to live your life is all good brutha.

And not sure playing cover songs falls under “making music” technically. It’s more “re-making” something someone else already created.