I don't think it's invented... It just is. There are 2 songs I like on this list & that's generally the case with radio rock. This is what the "stupid masses" want to hear and this is what I'd have to play to "make it" and I simply refuse to do it.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Be Honest: Would You Ever Sell-Out?
- Thread starter bogey_j
- Start date
I don't think it's invented... It just is. There are 2 songs I like on this list & that's generally the case with radio rock. This is what the "stupid masses" want to hear and this is what I'd have to play to "make it" and I simply refuse to do it.
Haha, I don't like radio rock much either, to be honest, and don't really play it because I prefer more commercial stuff. Shakira, Lady Antebellum etc. As I once told a singer, "eh, I have nothing against playing music normal people like".
On the other hand, I don't have a problem playing rock or quirky avant-pop. I generally don't like those, have no real interest in them, but so what? If somebody offers me a gig and it won't require too much work, why not? What would be so terrible about that?
Here's an interesting perspective on selling out, ending with an example of an artist with principle and integrity: http://illustrationart.blogspot.com/2009/06/selling-out.html
On the other hand, I don't have a problem playing rock or quirky avant-pop. I generally don't like those, have no real interest in them, but so what? If somebody offers me a gig and it won't require too much work, why not? What would be so terrible about that?
Here's an interesting perspective on selling out, ending with an example of an artist with principle and integrity: http://illustrationart.blogspot.com/2009/06/selling-out.html
Like you, I only find two of the current top 10 Rock songs pleasing. Still, priorities vary from individual to individual. I would have no objection to doing any or all of them as requests (assuming I knew how to play them allLOL). IMO, the audience needs to leave the venue liking what they heard (and experienced) and that's not "selling out," it's being a professional.
To the point, if anyone has any hard info on getting product placement money for videos, let me know -- here or PM.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Yes.
I've done the "keep it pure" thing for a long time and it has consistently led me to making my scratch playing covers. So, in a sense I've already sold out.
Look at it this way, if you sell out and make it, you can split off from your successful project around the 3 CD (with your success and cash) to then pursue your non-compromised endeavors. If you fail then, at least you'll have something to fall back on.
I've done the "keep it pure" thing for a long time and it has consistently led me to making my scratch playing covers. So, in a sense I've already sold out.
Look at it this way, if you sell out and make it, you can split off from your successful project around the 3 CD (with your success and cash) to then pursue your non-compromised endeavors. If you fail then, at least you'll have something to fall back on.
Did not even think about this one. I would sell out and even start playing a Jazz bass if it meant money. Don't much care about fame, but if the money was there, you bet your sweet bippie I would sell out...
I like classic rock, good old fashioned radio friendly rock and roll. My band plays this style of music, have we already sold out?
come on, man!! You believed all that? In their self-produced biography? You don't think they didn't have say over content in that? It wasn't a 60 Minutes piece done without their consent, I assure you.
There are few bigger Rush fans than me, and I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but that wonderful document was also a marketing tool for the band!
So they just HAPPENED to start using keyboards in the 80s when keyboards were so big? It's just a coincidence? And the videos of Geddy Lee with his hair styled and pulled back into a pony-tail and wearing a sport jacket? Just a coincidence? Alex in brightly colored suits that Spandau Ballet could've designed? Even Neil's clothes and hairstyles? It was hardly 2112. Heck, it wasn't even Moving Pictures!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-ZjNl5aOoU
I agree they weren't Depeche Mode, but I don't agree that this was some sort of artistic vision of the band that just HAPPENED to conform to the times and what was popular. Not for a minute!
Dude, they were trying to sell records. Trying to work off the popularity of Moving Pictures during a time when heavy rock was not cool and neither was long hair. I don't know your age, but I was in college/grad school from 1980. And I've been following the band since 2112 was released.
They were trying to make a buck, and a lot of them, like everybody else. They "sold out" and you know what? It didn't work. Their concerts now hardly have anything from Power Windows on. It's 85% old stuff. That's what people want to hear. They are great. They are still fabulous on-stage (I saw them in September again). In some ways, they are bigger than ever, but it's a nostalgia show. They have a lot of integrity -- especially in their early days. They did concept albums when everyone was doing to singles. They stuck to their guns. but...later??
They only backed off the synth stuff because it wasn't SELLING. And it was turning off their core fan base!! I can't listen to Power Windows. Hold Your Fire doesn't even sound like Rush to me. Not just the instrumentation. The song-writing seemed to lose it's way. Collections of very UNmemorable songs. And I love this band! They didn't follow their label's advice in the 70s...but in the 80s, it's pretty damn clear that they were trying to become VERY corporate and mainstream. And it was an epic failure. so they went back to their roots. Their last album is their heaviest, to me, since Permanent Waves.
As I said, I don't even know what "selling out" even means. Everyone wants to make money and people that think that their lack of success means that they have "integrity" are fooling themselves. They're just playing sh*t that almost no one wants to hear.
define what those mean...because the term has no meaning. If "selling out" means "commercially popular", I guess that the Beatles, the Stones, AC/DC, Zepplin, The Doors, the Eagles, etc etc etc were all "sell-outs"...while "no-hit wonders" have "artistic integrity."
I see your angle. I even think it's plausible that what they presented in the documentary was massaged to conform to their 'buck the system' MO.
You may be right, but I prefer to take their story at face value until credible information to the contrary is presented.
Were there other conversations related to financial concerns that may have influenced their musical direction? Maybe. It's certainly possible that when it came to the "talk about that 80's sound" part of the documentary, they opted to favor the band's musical exploration aspect over the market share angle to maintain their 'musical integrity'.
I am not so naive to think everything you see on TV is true. But I really don't see any value in Rush putting out a documentary and filling it with lies about yourself. Honestly - what do they have to gain from that?
Yes, for the right money, duh! Cuz at one point you'll make enough, and gain enough fame to, get your artistic integrity back. It seems that once you've become that "big", the roles reverse. The labels will do anything to make you happy just to keep you(r) (contract) Im in!
Those are some pretty lame poll options. It's not about supermodels or hookers, limos or taxi cabs. For me, it wouldn't even be about fame, although a modest amount of fame would be fun. As others have said, it's about getting to earn a living by playing music. Specifically, playing bass. There are some things I wouldn't put up with from a record label, but in general I'd say yes to "selling out." Remember, not all pop radio music is bad.
there are lies..and there are LIES...that wouldn't be a "lie"...it is a matter of perception and who is to say that whatever they said on the documentary about their motivation to change their clothing, hairstyles and use keyboards is a "lie"? Only THEY know if they are spinning the truth or not.
As much as I respect them as musicians, I'm sure they are as interested in getting rich as the next guy. The documentary was a beautiful marketing gimmick to support their latest tour. I don't begrudge them their chance at making big bucks.
BUt I'm quite sure they had 100% say-so about all content in the documentary -- which really wasn't a documentary. It was a tribute to them. There wasn't a negative word spoken by them or about them by anyone. That's the way it's done. It's like the fluff pieces on "Biography" -- there was a time when they were honest. Now they are produced with the assistance of the person or persons profiled and are released usually in conjunction with something else, like a new movie coming out, a book, whatever.
I loved the Rush documentary because I found out a lot about them. But I'm not fooled into believing that this was real journalism. I'm sure there are lots of things about them personally they don't want you to know.
It's sort of like the "Rush in Rio" DVD -- the concert and the documentary. Journalism? Hardly...produced by Geddy Lee's BROTHER!! They were going to be shown in the most positive light possible. Wouldn't you be?
that's show biz. And being in show biz is about attention and money. I don't begrudge them either. But I don't believe for a minute that they didn't adjust their sound and look to reflect what was going on in the 80s...in order to make more money.
I'd rather sell my music for TV shows like Gilmore Girls, film, video games, and Massingil commercials; and make cash than sign with a label, get ripped off, dumped, and bankrupted. You know, the kind of stuff that used be considered REALLY selling out - it's called making a living.
No doubt money was a consideration in their pursuit of being a band that makes a living off of being a band. That's not in dispute.
Sure, the bio/fluff piece was certainly a piece of self-promotional entertainment designed to boost awareness and interest in the group.
And fine. Maybe I just like them enough to extend them the benefit of the doubt and take what they, themselves produced and put out to promote they - themselves - as is and not cynically interpret it as a purposeful attempt to fool me.
I agree with many 'old' Rush fans that their musical change seemed to be a response to current musical trends - but I also know, as a musician, that current musical trends CAN be appealing and interesting - as well as the latest thing - and can also be genuinely something they, as a band, might be interested in experimenting with.
I am sure it's a healthy mix of curiosity and exploration as well as cold, pragmatism. None of which I consider to be 'selling out'.
