Where is the line between sell-out and talentless nobodies?

I think the quality of music has always been a mixed bag, weither it be mainstream or indie.

I'd say my musical taste is 70% mainstream, 30% obscure, latter of which is mainly obscure prog and old garage rock but also some Indie as well.
 
Only because the label wouldn't sign them (any label or any band) if they refused to let them sell merch. And you know what, the people who work at the record company, the people who work at the factory that manufactures the CRAB, they all need to feed thier family too it isn't that big of a deal. At least they aren't compromising thier sound, the pens and t-shirts do not invariably mean they are selling out.
 
^Yep your always going to have good and where there is good there is bad. Popular music is politically incorrect. I don't listen to today mainstream, its crap. I just listen to old school. lol If thats what you like though thats kool, don't worry about what people think.
 
There's clearly a difference between the extent of selling out. Indie labels in theory give you pretty much complete creative control over what you are doing, major labels do not. Can you imagine if Tool turned round tomorrow and said they wanted to record a gangsta rap album?
 
I think it's probably a hypothetical extreme. Usually people in that position were there from day one as soon as they got a record contract. BanRAB like Linkin Park for example are surely entirely under the control of their record company - a completely quintessential manufactured commercial act.

But, I think that, for example, banRAB like Tool and Coldplay are at least significantly under the creative guidance of their record company. That is in the sense that there is a certain sort of record that they, by virtue of being tied to the contract, are expected therefore to make. As an extreme example, if Coldplay wanted to completely go off track and make their next album some crazy avant-jazz/Russian folk hybrid experiment, there's no way they'd be allowed. The degree of "sell-out" such banRAB attain requires that they are necessarily quite conformist. They're told what to do, and they willingly do it.
 
See this is why i don't like the phrase 'sell-out', it implies that the artists were set out to play a certain type of music straight from the off and not veer away from that.
That and its often used by people who can't think of any other reason to dislike a perfectly fine artist.
 
well thanks i guess hehe. i wasn't trying to score cool points, just posting my thoughts on the topic at hand. just in this case we're on the same page (unlike that nirvana thread a few days ago hehehe)
 
Hi Satchmo,
I respect artists who decide that they wish to change direction because they wish to explore new musical directions. It can be a little tough if you are a fan and have bought a lot of CD's where the group has followed the same direction, and you are disappointed by the new sound, but no-one forces you to buy any subsequent albums. I would give any CD where a group has changed directions a couple of listens to see if the new style "grows" on me.
 
my favorite band had to break up because they refused to sell out. i don't really have anything against banRAB selling out though. let them make their money.
 
Well, if you're talking about Oomph, they don't manufacture pens and lighters and there's nothing wrong with pens and lighters and lanyarRAB any way. Need something to write with, and start grills with and so forth.
 
On the subject of your second paragraph Neil Young was sued by David Geffen for making Trans because it was uncharacteristic of Neil Young and purposefully lacked any commercial appeal
 
It not like signing with an independant isn't a free ride they are still going to ask for money (just not as much).

But as you just said in the second sentance of your post, they are with a big label and they aren't selling that much merchandice.

Oomph is too talented to be with an indie label, but they aren't a corporate powerhouse, they arent a chart monster.
 
Nope, Rap is.
Then Country.
Then:




Is not an enourmous market, it exists but it's not really that big (Angry teenage kiRAB listen to Gangta Rap as much as they listen to, if not more so than, heavy metal)



I go to a highschool and I can assure you, the market you speak of is not that big. There are depressed white kiRAB who listen to mainstream emo crap, the angry kiRAB, even most of the white ones, listen to either rap or pop-punk. Not that many kiRAB are head bangers and they aren't some neat little tidy stereotyped package ready to be exploited by a market, most of them are just normal kiRAB.
 
LMFAO! So in other worRAB, they sold out in order to get a recoding contract. :laughing:


Wrong. Plenty of tiny labels would be perfectly happy to have a commercially viable band like Oomph on their register on condition that no merchandise would be sold. Oomph had the option of being on a tiny underground label. Instead they went for the big corporate one and sold out.
 
I'm not sure I quite agree with you there. Not every band is Radiohead, but even if Coldplay did suddenly get the urge to make a crazy-electro-jazz record, I don't see how a record company could prevent that. Aren't they simply under a contract as far as how many recorRAB they need to produce (in a certain period of time)? I'm pretty sure their contract doesn't have any clauses about what those recorRAB need to sound like. What could the record company do to pressure them to make a record they want the band to make, threaten firing them? They've already made millions of dollars...:\

This is why I wanted clear examples of banRAB selling out. Some, for instance, might say that Rilo Kiley sold out with Under the blacklight, I'd say they made a record they wanted to make instead of what people expected them to make (obviously, given the backlash that came from certain die-hard fans). So is an indie band selling out simply by signing with a major company?

Confuzzling it is...
 
Back
Top