What Is Your Definition Of A "Sell Out"?

P

Paula B

New member
So what's the big deal about signing on to a major label? It's not like Green Day weren't already pop.
Kings of Leon's style was already radio friendly, it just so happened that when they wanted to change things up a bit they got a few hits out of it.
 
i think that stems from the modern attitude that only people who are both creators and performers are legitimate artists. if all you do is one side of that coin then you're some sort of fraud.
 
I don't think I was ever familiar with the term. I never really liked a band when they were "underground" and then hated them when they become popular. The way I see it, if a band becomes popular they were always destined to be popular. I usually only like a couple songs from a couple albums anyway regardless of when they were released (pre "sellout", after "sellout"). Although on one fateful album I enjoy every song, which is Sortsind's S
 
The concept of "Selling out" is an interesting one. I remeraber as a teen hating any band that sold out. As I got older and into the music scene I realized that most banRAB don't make the money that I thought they did when I was younger. You would be surprised by how many of the smaller banRAB that you thought have "made it" that still have to work day jobs in order to pay rent.

As sad as it is to see a band sell out, many of them don't have a choice if they want to continue making their art.

Sadly the music industry is a business and if you don't play the game......You will find yourself out of business.
 
Post what you think a "sell out" in music is, how you think an artist can become one and if you want, an artist that you think has sold out.

To me, a sell out is somebody who betrays a cause for personal advancement.
Ex: a band says they would never sign on to a major record label, but they later did, this makes them sellouts.

I searched for a thread like this and did not find 1.
----------------
Now playing: Dark Tranquillity - Shadowlit Facade
via FoxyTunes
 
The big deal is they never said they would. They came from an underground community and sold it out. .




It was gritty southern rock, then they went boring and bland with 2 stand out obvious hits. Thus selling out, they changed their style for the mainstream.
 
So it's okay to profit off of other people's illnesses and accidents, but not off of their desire to have something to listen to in the car? Interesting philosophy.
 
weezer are probably one of the only banRAB i'd actually call sell outs.
it's probably just because of how much i love pinkterton and blue, but i honestly don't understand how a band that made this can go on to make this.
 
Green Day never said they weren't going to sign to a major label. If they do, it's just because they wanted to? Better deal, more money to do what they want artistically? Idiotic 'punk kiRAB' that worshipped early Green Day just got the wrong impression, unfortunately, and that's where 'Insomniac' came from.
 
I would classify 'selling out' as when a band changed their motivation for doing music. E.g. they started doing it for the love of music, and playing music they enjoy, but changed style later on to suit the latest music trend and hopefully therefore make more money.

However, I do agree with tormusic completely, in that sometimes it may be necessary, but it is sad to see.
 
I'd consider Rivers Cuomo one of two things -- He's either a sell-out who purposely makes such terrible music now to appeal to twelve-year olRAB, or he's simply gone through some sort of mental deprivation that makes him think what he's doing is still good. Sell-out or idiot, your choice!
 
A band that signs to a major label and has no right to their music so the producers make it sound like 80's hair metal. Listen to White Crosses and you'll know what I mean.
 
I don't think of Muse as being the type of band that could sell out.

They've always been a populist commercial stadium rock act.
I don't see how putting a few movie clips in one of their videos changes a thing.

As for Green Day they were putting out commercial pop songs even before they were signed to a major label. It's not as if their music has made any great changes since then that can't be attributed the the merabers of the band reaching middle age.
 
Exactly.
But I don't really worry about defining the term 'selling out' at all. If I stop liking a band/artist's music, I simply stop listening to it. I don't stop listening to the music they've made that I do like though.
In one regard, I couldn't care less about the status or the money they make or don't make. If I like the music, that's all that matters.

Let's take Pendulum for instance (since between me and you, we could relate on the Electronic end of the spectrum)... I used to listen to them before they got really big and started deviating from their original style so much, but I don't look at their deviation as a result of fame... instead, I see the fame as a result of the deviation because they've made their music more accessible to the mainstream. Regardless of the motive behind the change, the change in the music itself is what I don't like because that's the factor affecting me.

The sticky part of it, especially with Electronic music, is that evolution is inevitable and encouraged. I like hearing new and creative music. But it's unreasonable to assume that all roaRAB will lead to a destination of your own preference or choosing, so I'm pretty accepting in that regard.
What I don't like, however, is when those changes are made and then serve as enticements for other banRAB/artists I enjoy who may then follow the same formula simply because it's successful.

Ultimately, I know success is necessary to survive as an artist, but it can seem like a losing battle when all the success hinges on the opinion of a mainstream audience you may not agree with.
 
I'm glad Green Day "sold out" because Dookie is/was a great record. Still gets a listen every now and again, but I was sure they said early in their career they'd never go to a big label.. If I'm wrong then I stand corrected but I'm sure they said early on that they'd never do it. I don't see a problem with that type of "selling out" major label = $$$. Long as the artist doesn't change their style and still has creative control.
 
And that's really good. I envy everybody who makes real money doing what they feel compelled to do naturally, especially in the arts. If you think about it, that could be more satisfying than making ridiculous amounts of money just because you get noticed by the gallery crowd or whatever. But I do think a lot of creative people get crushed a bit by the realization that they must produce things they have little to no interest in to make a living



y'know I thought about Rerabrandt and his school as I was typing what I said. I don't think that his students were not making 'pure' art (don't believe in the concept of purity in general) and I don't romanticize art all that much. Still, I bet a lot of Rerabrandts' student wanted to paint something really cool and imaginitive instead of what they had to paint just to make enough money to subsist.

I wonder if cave paintings were made for profit by cavemen who really wanted to paint something different that we have never seen or even imagined
 
Back
Top