Considering the passing of Jeff Beck this discussion is entirely relevant. A musician of complete integrity who never sold out, made a point of not selling out, and arguably paid a price for it.
He also said on many occasions that playing music was not his first love (it was tinkering with cars) so that also factors in I think. He probably didn't get as consumed with music as some others do - maybe more 'grounded' & "normal" (but reportedly also difficult to work with)
Depending how you gage fame and wealth, yes he was never a world renowned megastar but he did make a good living out of it on his own terms, keeping his integrity.
When you're a teenager and live at home, it's easy to criticize an artist for wanting to make money. As an adult with responsibilities, bills, etc, your perspective changes. Also, the more I've learned about how bad the money situation is, even for popular bands, the more forgiving I am about bands trying to make a living.
There's a big difference between earning a living and being worth 600 million dollars and becoming a piece of shit reality show and making another 20 to 30 million. It's called GREED.
the diference is be yourself and the art you want to do and then o jump and be a puppet to producers and companies and became a entertaiment figure, no mather the reason, a sell out is that, there is no law against that, but they are sell outs.
The decisive line between "authentic" artists and "sold out" artists is much narrower than a lot of people like to think. The underground artist who seems to not care still exactly knows this is the image he conveys.
Very interesting topic. The one area that I always felt was unfair, was that when I band becomes popular, they sometimes get criticized. The whole point of making music is so that people can hear it. From the bands point of view, the more people, the better..
They brought up many good points. One thing about concert tickets ( at least when I was working for various promoters). The promoter owns every seat in the house and they decide pricing. The artist has a concert fee. Promoter has to make a profit. The band does not control prices.( Or did not when I was involved). Also scalpers would buy blocks of tickets and mark the price way up. The band had no control. The promoters job is to sell all the tickets , guaranteeing a full house/ possible 2nd show.
I am 67 and two of my favorite bands growing up were Jefferson Airplane and a couple years later Genesis. As you can tell from these bands, I've been cursed by the understandable "sell out" direction. It's human nature to want to be popular and successful. That being said, that does not diminish the enjoyment I get from listening to the music from their beloved early years. Thanks for the discussion!
The issue of whether a band has sold out musically is too complicated to have a black and white, yes or no answer. If a heavy metal band really wants to put out a more pop oriented radio friendly record is that selling out if it's exactly what they want to do musically?
@@chriswilkinson7636 my answer comes a little late, sorry for that, but with Genesis i think, that was the way they went with their music, Rush too. One chapter was over, they wanted to something different. "Selling out" seems to be the easy explanation for that. They still made longer progier tracks till the end. Interesting enough not many complained about it when it comes to Peter Gabriel, who experimented but also went away from the music of Genesis, most of his music i would see as some sort of Rock.
@@ronaldfleischer7675 I don't think anyone would ever accuse Rush of selling out would they? Especially considering they wrote Spirit of radio, a real anti sellout song if ever I heard one.
@@chriswilkinson7636 they went away from Prog like Genesis did, thats all, made different music then, also radio friendlier i guess. Nothing bad about it, for me both bands just took a new route and i like this. No Sell Out, it’s what they wanted to do.
Don't worry about it, I've seen far worse faux pas in yt comments sections. Oops! I may have sold out by using a French phrase to appear more 'sophisticated' there)) Thanks Pete and Martin- great show as ever!
Brilliant video Pete, loved it. Here's my example of a band selling out. Status Quo in the late 70s early 80s. Quo were mega during the early to mid 70s, they were one of the best live bands around with a string of mega selling albums, Dog Of Two Heads, Piledriver, Hello, Quo, On The Level, Blue For You, every single one of those albums were classics. When Alan Lancaster and John Cologne left and Francis Rossi decided Quo should be radio friendly and started singing about being ( In The Army Now ) that was it. They even appeared on a local soap program on ITV called Coronation Street, for me, that was it, all credibility went out the fucking window.
The real truth is that people hate change. Whenever a band/artist makes something that is them and from their heart but it sounds nothing like what they did before the fans just want to dismiss it as garbage. It happens in all genres. It's like we just want the same regurgitated album that is seen as their masterpiece of 15 albums straight. Many bands/artists love to innovate with their music and take risks/add trends to their music, that doesn't constitute selling out. A band can be staying true to themselves and still grow and change as musicians and make incredible music.
@@TooSkinnyKenny I mean there are lots of bands who successfully did it. And then there are lists of bands who failed because the fans were unhappy with the change.
@@TooSkinnyKenny Nope. There was a band called The Beatles. The Beatles in 1961 were a raw and pretty sleazy rock & roll band doing small clubs in Germany. In 1962 they became the biggest pop group of all time.
I was thinking of a good topic to do for you guys is" Bands or artists that videos killed and / or made." There's lots of those artists or bands from the 70's that just didn't make it through the video age because they just weren't pretty enough or didn't have that visually appealing appearance that translated well to videos. On the other hand, there are lots of bands/artists that, if not for videos, may not have gone anywhere. I'm just throwing that one out there.
One of the many reasons I love Kansas. A great band that has always been humble & whose concerts were about the music - not light shows, pyrotechnics, or makeup & costumes. Can’t think of a single way they really sold out.
Carry On My Wayward Son in Supernatural...they made a ton off of that licensing deal I'm sure. To some people that is selling out, I don't see it that way personally.
As a Gen-X'er, the most primary example of selling out is when a band starts out edgy/vulgar/Satanic and has Parental Advisory stickers but softened their lyrics/art/music/appearance drastically to appease the advisory groups and commercial interests. This was especially the case with rap music.
As big of a Kiss fan that I've been all my life, I can't help but admit that they tick nearly every single box put forth by Martin & Pete LOL They certainly have jumped on trends from disco ("I Was Made For Lovin' You") to grunge ("Carnival of Souls"), they've brought in the famous producer (Bob Ezrin, Ron Nevison), they've gone the power ballad route ("Reason To Live", "Forever"), they've issued a ton of compilation albums (starting only 4 years into their career!), they've brought in the outside writers AND ghost musicians, dating way back to "Destroyer", they've certainly oversaturated the market from a touring perspective and, of course, have played the "farewell tour" card not once, but twice. And that's without even getting into the ticket prices, the meet & greets, the cruises and, of course, the merchandise - of which they have always been & will remain the big daddies. I'm sure I could go on, but this list is already making me depressed haha Thanks for another great show, gents.
Metallica is the one band that sums it all up-for me.. Changed style, did covers, did symphony albums (TWICE), Big-Producer Bob Rock, Several-Boxsets, Big Producer again-Rick Rubin, playing an album with Lou Reed-Lulu.
@@gioandi3556 I disagree (but then I'm a Lou fan). Metallica's worst offense was not musical but political - fronting the campaign against the democratisation of music-distribution (file-sharing etc). And why? Because like any "professional" musician they were amoral, subhuman - it hardly matters whether they're psycho- or socio-pathic, the result is the same. They fronted the campaign against democratic music-distribution because they were fearful of losing their ill-gotten gains and actually having to support their music-making leisure pursuits by getting proper jobs, of working to support the human species at large, of behaving like actual humans. It's been said before and I'll say it again - no-one has the right to be a "professional" musician or author or web-designer or machine-designer or actor or novelist etc etc. Firstly because all of that is not work - it's "chatter". "Work" is making, repairing, farming and transporting things which exist. Clue - we pay doctors for their laying-on-of-hands, not for their chatter. Secondly because there is no such thing as intellectual property, because - except in the minds of vile amoral perverts - there is no such thing as property, and no such thing as an original thought. [If you have been trained to speak the same language someone else has spoken, your mode of perception is corrupt, therefore you are incapable of original thought...it's that goddam simple!!]
Except Metallica’s later music (post Black Album) is superior to their prior material. Maybe it’s lighter than their old stuff, but you can actually tell the songs apart. When I listened to And Justice for All, I thought I was listening to the same track 😂
There are multiple ways and examples of selling out as a recording artist. The first rule defining a sellout, is that the band/singer has to value their artistic integrity from the start. If the plan was always to be a big famous rich rockstar, well then that integrity is already compromised. 1. Selling out - compromising your music by simplifying it to appeal to a simpler and more massive audience. Black Album ? 2. Selling out - compromising your expression to serve your old customer base. When people want the old stuff. An example would be most sixty year old bands that play heavy metal on stage that sounds like 1987 in 2022. Pretty much every modern festival. Selling out - compromising your image and public view points for cash. Bob Dylan 2014 Chrysler Super Bowl ad
Awsome discussion. I can really relate to Pete’s point of when a band you like, that has a small following, that you kind of feel as “your own” suddenly gets big and you have to share them with the public at large , so you move on. GUILTY
Bands/artist change naturally over years/albums. This is usually gradual, with ageing and individual life experiences. Sometimes a band make a positive effort to go commercial for more profit. Genesis from W&W to ATTWT was not quite selling out, but an intentional nod towards the mainstream. From ATTWT to Duke and Abacab was an intentional effort for pop success and a wider audience. They sold out - It worked.
You can say that "Invisible Touch" and "We Can't Dance" were sellouts. I love "Land Of Confusion" and "No Son Of Mine", but the problem I have with some Genesis songs from the 80s is that they sound too similar with Phil Collins' solo stuff. I don't think there's anything wrong with writing radio-friendly songs and going in different directions, but in this case it seemed like the band was intentionally cashing in on what worked for Collins after "Face Value" got big. Ironically, though, I believe Genesis would have moved more away from prog rock in the 80s even with Peter Gabriel on the mic.
Martin, I was also at that Buffalo UFO show in the early 2000's... I still think of it fondly...Man, what a kick ass performance... Even though the crowd was sparse (but definitely devoted & rabid), UFO gave it 150%, & played like they were performing at an arena... I remember Phil Mogg, from the stage, telling some people at the bar (who obviously weren't UFO fans, & were just there drinking & watching TV) , "Trust me folks, there's more action going on up here; we're much more interesting than whatever you're watching on TV!!!"
For me. 2 of my favorite prog bands back in the day, Yes snd Genesis, sold out big time putting commercially popular music versus the original music that made them great.
I think there's a fine line between selling out and developing a band's sound. I personally enjoy the early Queen music but got off their music once they went funk and commercial. Too me, they sold out but I appreciate they were good enough and popular enough to take risks with their music and get away with it.
it's changed a lot since the 1960s. back then selling out meant getting into movies and advertisements, playing it safe, and recording the music that the record companies wanted. i think the 1970s changed it with huge amounts of the most popular music being very mellow and corporate- where the entire radio day was sellouts...and with the rise of heavy metal in 1980s it cleaned things out for a while and made rock dangerous again. now we see some of the older musicians selling out again, but it's easy to pay attention to those who are still making great music on their own terms.
That’s why I loved the 1974-1977 Kiss. They played the way they wanted to play. Later, producers like Vini Poncia, Ron Nevison and Bob Ezrin, changed their sound, to overproduced, synth music.
I never thought about "greatest hits" albums counting as artists selling out. But it makes sense because the general public remembers a particular artist for their hits.
Linkin Park went through about three phases in their career where they were accused of selling out and changing their sound for movies, top 40 radio, video games, you name it. Even though the band pointed out they were selling less albums from trying something different and said if they were really selling out, they would’ve just put out the same lyrics and riffs over and over.
It was sad at the end though when they were in their 40s working with all these younger artists and flavor of the month outside writers and producers trying to remain relevant. They just couldnt embrace being a hard rock band and had to chase the pop world late in their career. No wonder they got shit for it, deservedly so. Ended on a whimper instead of a high note.
I think when artists are younger, they don't put as much thought into stuff and their music is more raw. As they get older, they refine their approach (often leading to a more commercial sound), which provokes accusations of selling out.
Two of my favorite bands come to mind: INXS: I knew fans who hated Kick because they thought the band "sold out. They won't listen to anything past Listen Like Thieves. Some were super hardcore and thought Shabooh Shoobah was their best album. I love almost every album they ever put out except the first and the last w/Michael Hutctence, which I don't hate at all. On the flip side, I won't and listen to the album they did w/J.D. Fortune. As a fan, I thought the Rock Star: INXS show was a complete insult because no one can replace Michael so, don't bother trying! Anyway, Kick is my favorite INXS album and favorite album of all time. But I became a fan just before w/Listen Like Thieves, which was the first INXS album I owned. Then, I bought Shabooh Shoobah, which I like a lot. When it comes to this band, they can do almost no wrong in my eyes and I love almost everything they put out. U2: I remember someone calling The Joshua Tree music for housewives. I was a fourteen-year-old kid who loved this album when it was released in 1987. Like INXS, I love almost everything they put out old and new. Some think they sold out w/Achtung Baby. That album happens to be my favorite U2 album, and I like that they changed their sound for the new decade. I thought it was a brave move. But, like most fans, I have a period I like best: everything from War to Pop. All You Can't Leave Behind, I absolutely hate and some people consider that a sellout moment. But, after All You Can't Leave Behind, I sort of checked out unfortunately.
With or Without You could be music for housewives, but the rest of the Joshua Tree is artistic and edgy IMO. But you have to sit and decipher the lyrics. Bono was singing about the decline of the Working Class. Sort of like Fish era Marillion. Running to Stand Still is about workers who lose their jobs and end up on drugs. I grew in working class PA during those days, so the album tracks resonate with me. The Pop Mart tour was where U2 really sold out to me.
@@nrood79 A man on this channel who knows his U2. I'm impressed! You're right about the rest of the album. The Joshua Tree, if I remember correctly, was inspired by their tour through America and Rattle and Hum was the extended concert video🤣🤣I know a lot of their music is also inspired by religion. And I hear it in I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For. And I think it's One Tree Hill was based on the murder of a friend or someone they knew. In short, I agree w/what you said about the album. The funny thing is I became a fan because of With or Without You but, w/the exception of Achtung Baby, it's my favorite U2 album. Oh, I missed the Johsua Tree tour in 1987, which I regret. I did see Zoo TV in 1992, which was decent, but I saw INXS' Kick Tour in 1988, which I liked much more. I did see Pop Mart in 1997 and I agree it was a major disappointment. It was like Zoo TV minus the imagination. The funny thing is I was going to skip it, but I was in Boston for my roommate's wedding and another friend had an extra ticket so, I went. It was $60 at the time, which was expensive for a college student like me. In short, Zoo TV was more imaginative and nearly half the price and I had a much better experience. Pop Mart was a poor imitation of Zoo TV like I thought it would be.
One Tree Hill is about Bono's personal assistant from New Zealand, who died riding his motorcycle. I saw them on the 360 Tour. They're a good live band.
Bands having lots of merchandise (even if a lot of it seems silly) is a good way to get more income since albums sales have declined over the years. With that said, artists like Michael Schenker and Robin Trower are in need much MORE merch being available as it's hard to find.
For bands that did well playing a certain style early in their career they have no commercial imperative (or record company pressure) to try for a deliberately more radio friendly, dumbed down style. Bands that had only middling success and probably constantly threatened by the record company to produce a hit or get dropped were more likely to suck it up and change. It is also true that there were some artists who never liked the kind of music that got them started and jumped at the chance to try something more commercial..
Musicians have to make a living, and maybe the albums or shows don't cover it, or even gasp merch enable a band to make a profit and keep touring. Some bands just can't be bothered to meet and greet. Focus were different Thijs Van Leer hasn't any ego he will chat to fans after the gig. He is so good to be around ,he makes you feel life is good. He is a gentleman.
It's an "it depends". Kiss were ALWAYS supposed to be a commercial interest to merchandise from day 1 so it's hard for an act like them to sell out. Wheras a Whitesnake, did they sell out by "going hair metal/MTV?" Well, Coverdale was not a rich man with blues rock. 1987 was his set for life record. Surely we, even if we don't love an album, can want that for our heroes. Genesis/Yes/ELP - well, the Genesis fellas were pop and soul fans as kids. Commercial is what they loved as students. Yes became a new band and Trevor made them "sell out" by default since he was a very contemporary producer. Covers albums? Well, it depends too. Springsteen's new one is terrific, it's an equivalent of Ella or Louis doing the Gershwin songbook. I dunno. I never feel like an act "owes" me, so if they do something I don't like, fine. Sell out or just bad album - I'm just grateful for the music I DO like by certain acts. And Greatest Hits aren't just for newbies and sales - they're also used by labels and artists to produce another record when they're signed for X-amount of albums. (Ditto doubles and live records) It's the music BUSINESS after all and so many of these acts were ripped off by their managers back when, or nowadays ripped off by streaming royalties.
I do think it's easy to have a concept of waht "selling out is", but when it comes down to it, you have to examine every artist on a case by case basis. I really don't think most fans expect an artist not to deviate from their core sound, ever. But ther'es something pretty sad in someone starting out witht eh desire to make exciting, creative music and then preogressivelyt eh songs get more tailor made for the hits, the radio, etc. I just really dove into Journey for the first time last year (I was born in 1980 so i really missed their heyday). I know some people love those later records and, I mean, i wouldn't begrudge them, but listening to them simplify and make the vocalist the Guy that Really matters in the band, as in, hearing those albums back to back starting from the very first ones, gave me a sinking feeling in my heart. yeah they made lots of money. They appealed to the masses. Sometimes, you should listen to waht the masses want. But, I don't think that the vast majority of people are that invested in music, as much as the folks who subscribe to the Sea of Tranquility channel are, for example. "Corporate rock" usually means formula, repetition and not challenging the audience in anything but perhaps superficial ways (like a shocking album cover instead of surprising music). Of course, an artist should do what they want, and it is true taht a lot of the people who get angry at them for 'selling out" have "regular jobs". if you tour enough as a band, you can't really keep a regular job anymore, and you have to make the band your career -- and the only way to stay afloat is to make money. So you have to figure out the balance, somehow. I realise it'sa tricky thing.
This is sacrilegious for me, but my favourite artist ever Johnny Winter kind of sold out. He was a Bluesman at heart, in the early seventies when it went out of style he allowed management to talk him into dropping his band and going Rock & Roll, which he did wonderfully with speed and power, he realized he was going through the motions and went back to his roots with Muddy Water and for decades after.
The Slayer album that a lot of people still out on is 1998's "Diabolus in Musica". While they certainly integrated some nu-metal riffage on some songs here and there, I do not feel that the "sold out" in that particular case.
There were no "radio hits" on that album and it didnt even go Gold. You can arguing they were trying to sell out and failed. Just like John Bush era Anthrax. They tried to "sell out" but they didnt have the sales and hits.
Wow, Pete, you do read your emails! Thank you for discussing my topic. Great analysis. The song that is debatable for my friends and I is Harvester Of Sorrow. (Of course I know about the Fade To Black time).
Very good discussion. My contribution: Alice Cooper 1986 onwards really. In fact, since leaving the band really (although Billion Dollar Babies was very contrived and with session guitarists), although I would say he was being true to himself in the early 80s. This is musically essentially.
I agree, artistically a much more interesting artist curiously enough during his blackout years than when he (literally) got straightened out later on but went uninspired 'corporate metal'...ironically, then becoming a clone... 🦾
I never expect a band to be the same as they were when they started to 20 or more down the line. It'd be like me being the same dumbass I was when I was 18, no, I've matured, so does their music. The stuff I always considered to be a sell out would be like Kiss Saves Santa. Stuff like that always seemed like it was more about the marketing than the music. Good show Pete and Martin, always enjoy you two, thanks!
Thought provoking discussion. Only thing I can add is famous solo artists that do a duet with another famous artist just to hopefully double the fan-base.
Machine Head has always been that band for me. I love “Burn My Eyes” and have since it came out when I was 16. It’s still one of my favourites. But every other Machine Head album since has felt like a product of whatever was popular in that moment, in my humble opinion. A lot of them are misses. Burn My Eyes may be that also, but it felt very genuine at the time.
Again though why in metal circles is it seen as a bad thing to be influenced by current bands? It seems like you are not allowed to be influenced by newer music.
How do you know it was for monetary reasons? There is a horrible album by Pat Metheny called Zero Tolerance For Silence. When you think of Pat as a guitarist you have a hard time believing someone that talented could actually play that badly. He put out that album when he was having a huge battle with the record company. Neil Young did the same thing. Tom Petty did a quite brilliant thing instead to get out of contract. He declared bankruptcy.
@@nellgwenn Very good point. I should have qualified that by saying contractual obligations are a different matter. Maybe that`s a topic for another "Fun House".
What is the difference between a band who are broading their horizon (music taste or fan basis) or selling out to corporate record labels (just to sell more copies)?
To me there is a fine line between changing with the times/exploring different creative directions and "selling out". The other factor is simply making a living. Heart to me is the classic example of selling out in the mid-80's.....they readily admit that they sold their souls to sell records. They were getting dropped from their label, so I don't know if they had a choice. Outside songwriters, ridiculous MTV videos....Nancy up front in a skimpy outfit with Ann hidden in the back. But they sold a lot of records....
What is interesting in some bands who become really big is that they are often semi-carrying a member who is a better marketer than they are musician. Gene Simmons, Lars Ulrich, Clown from Slipknot. Where this happens, the marketing decision on what to do - including many of the options from Pete and Martin - becomes a big deal. 'Is putting out credible music the best market position' becomes a thing!! Lars as a leader, strategist and marketer could be the subject of business school case studies, he is outstanding. There is surely no question other than he puts that ahead of music. Being a band member/ owner makes these things far more impactful rather than simply being the manager. Thing is it is a tough gig in some ways - how many Marketing Directors have to do the drumming as well. He has worked very hard to make the minimum level (which he has done and he is a good drummer) Clown though went one step further - in order to be a band member and yet have really good players in each instrument, he thought 'I'll hit a barrel with a stick' - thing is it is a unique sound that gives a bigger percussion sound than really anyone else. It also means he isn't taking up a main instrument though, but is still (like Lars) a band member and not just a manager, which matters. Lars maybe could have put himself on triangle and got in a really top drummer!
'Selling out' is an invention of fans, a catch-all for any decision fans don't like, and is an indictment of their sense of entitlement. Sure, bands will sometimes make decisions for financial or commercial reasons, but 1)It is their job, so that isn't unusual, and 2)They don't owe you a damn thing.
They kinda 'owe' fans (and why they'll usually thank the fans for their upport when they win awards for example) in the sense that without the support of the fans they are literally making music for themselves = 3/4/5/6 people in the world. That's just not realistic (to your point about financial/commercial considerations) so there has to be some level of acceptance by somebody outside the band. If not, that band/artist pretty quickly goes away & then we're not even talking about them anyway. I do agree that many will use the 'sellout' label to denigrate music they don't like - just like labeling music as 'dated' for instance
The whole concept is subjective. But yea , sometimes they jump on a current bandwagon or repeat themselves musically. The WHO did a fantastic album in 1967/ "The WHO SELL OUT". They figured do it now and don't pretend . ( It' my favorite WHO album. I've been a fan since 1966/ saw them 12 times with Keith Moon). And I like 99% of all their material.
@@wolf1977 They "owe" record buyers the best record they ca make. They "owe" ticket buyers the best show they can perform. Beyond that, they don't owe us anything.
I'm only partway through the video, and I know some of these concepts are mentioned, but the big instances that I can think of: * TV commericals: e.g. Nike using "Revolution" by The Beatles was an outrage at the time (I know it wasn't The Beatles' decision) * ticket prices: e.g. The Eagles' "Hell Freezes Over" tour was eye-watering and showed that people will pay big $ * faux farewell tours: e.g. Motley Crue's farewell tour (with "the contract"), and then coming back * catalog: e.g. Bob Dylan selling his entire publishing catalog for big $$$
another one is auctioning off iconic guitars... though often that is done for charity (e.g. David Gilmour) which is hardly controversial. But, say, if a guitar were sold to the Hard Rock Cafe etc
Everyone seems to be in favor of supporting small businesses and want them to be successful. I think if we viewed our favorite bands or artists as a small or local business, we might think differently about what selling out actually is, and whether it’s more of a judgmental attitude on our part as fans.
Labeling someone of selling out is definitely making some assumptions about their motivation based on little-to-no actual facts (most of the time). I think I lean towards treating this as when music writers/critics resort to labeling music as 'dated' (instead of reviewing the actual music based on its own merits) or saying stuff like 'decade x sucked'. Not many facts & a whole lot of opinion. That's not to say that some artists didn't sell out but not sure how many of us are actually qualified to make that judgement - of course you can hold any opinion you like whether it's correct or not
At some point in the 2010s, the major labels stopped signing rock/hard rock bands and signed all these indie pop, electro pop, folky, hipster bands who were more poppy and dancey than rock so they could sell their music to commercials to make money off of them since album sales were dead. When you make music that sounds like jingle music thats made to be played in commercials that basically selling out.
What constitutes a sellout? Well I just saw a Toyota commercial using Peter Gabriel's Solsbury Hill as a backing track. That would qualify for me. Rush knew they included it in The Spirit of Radio, "One likes to believe in the freedom of music But glittering prizes And endless compromises Shatter the illusion of integrity, yeah"
A great example of a different kind of band wearing another type of bands shirt is the band First Class performing their big hit Beach Baby in a video from 1974 with the lead singer wearing a ZZ Top Texas BBQ concert shirt. It's on TH-cam.
Hey Pete,, I really like Your choice of glasses. I wanted to suggest to you that you may wanna get non reflective lenses. It will help rid the light of monitor or lighting reflecting back on cam. They are also nicer when you drive because lights behind you also re not reflected back into your eyes. they allow your eyes to be seen clearer especially in pictures Really enjoy your channel. Thanks!
Interesting topic. Hearing your examples, it seems kind of difficult to completely avoid selling out in some way. I guess we all have different ideas or lines we draw as to how much sell out we will tolerate. Those few that do not fall into those pitfalls tend to be relegated to obscurity. One of the more obvious sell outs would be Kiss. Do I need to say more here? The merch, the outrageous ticket prices, multiple "farewell" tours, disco songs, the makeup, taking the makeup off, putting it back on, etc... Still dig the early stuff though. The first artist I tend to think of when it comes to artistic integrity and not selling out is Frank Zappa. He did the music he wanted to do, all the time, started his own label, had a revolving door of the best studio and live musicians, had no interest in radio hits. I guess you could say that the onslaught of box sets and reissues in recent years may be a form of selling out, but you obviously can't blame that on Frank.
There's a great short video on TH-cam of Bowie saying "you should never play to the gallery" meaning don't ever do something that fulfills someone else's expectations. That to me is another example of selling out. Sacrificing artistic integrity for others, sales, etc is the type of selling out that drives me mad.
@@davidsummer8631 "Bowie's 1980s output was done for money" - Not sure how you know that. Sure 3 of his top 10 selling albums came in the 80's but I think you have to make some assumptions about what he would've/could've done differently to say that he 'sold out' simply based on the fact that he sold a lot of records during that time. I thought you might've brought up his 90's "Bowie Bonds"/10-year bonds scheme where investors could 'bet' on prior albums' future sales. Very innovative, especially for a musician. He also controlled the licensing of his music. Not really 'selling out' - more being really smart about your business dealings
@@wolf1977 Its well know he did those albums for money and later in life he looked back at those albums with disdain simply because had he not needed the money he would not have done albums of that nature
Why I like seeing The Doobie Brothers. They play some hits and some deep tracks and still put out new music and weave that into their live shows. Some of their shows can be marathons as they have an extensive catalog.
As a teen metalhead in the 80s I was very cognizant of bands "selling out". But without the internets sometimes you had to go by publicity photos, album covers or released singles. Sometimes you'd jump the gun and buy the album the day it was released and get screwed. Especially if it was a band you'd previously loved and ignored the warning signs, a la "Love at First Sting". Have still never bought another Scorps album. I didn't buy "Delirious Nomad" because of the album cover. It had sell-out written all over it. Was wrong about that one. But this was the minefield we traipsed in the olden days of yore when print media was your usual medium of information.
Two that come to mind are Peter Cetera going adult contemporary and Michael Bolton. He started out as a hard rocker then became easy listening. And does anyone remember when indie darling Lou Reed was in a Honda scooter ad?
Post Terry Kath Chicago seems to be the quintessential sellout to me. I certainly felt that way 25 years ago; however, 50 y/o me now undertands the importance of making as much money as possible while you still can.
For me selling out is when a band does something against their own vision just to please someone else's strategy (or even their own strategy) with the sole intention of selling more stuff. Sometimes the albuns coming out of that can even be great but still they're selling out. One of the greatest examples for me is Celtic Frost's infamous Cold Lake, and seing that Tom G. Warrior regards it as something he should not have done is exactly why I think it's a great example of selling out gone wrong. I still enjoy it but I understand why the artist regrets it.
Who I feel started the whole "selling out" thing was Jim Morrison when he went crazy over the other 3 members of The Doors agreeing to sell Light My Fire for fair use in a car commercial without his consent,and most of their songs had equal writing credits,but technically Robby Krieger wrote Light My Fire.
Is anyone old enough to remember when Alice Cooper would guest on The Hollywood Squares game show in the 70s?? I also remember in the 80s when Yes looked like they got their clothes from the closets on The Cosby show.
Mark Weiss was one of the most famous band photographers in the 1980's. A large majority of the pictures in magazines like Hit Parader , Circus , Creem , ect. had Mark Weiss's name in the corner of the pictures.
Heart to me where the best example of being forced by record company’s to conform to fashion but having integrity to go no more do lovemongers then get heart back but on there own terms and in my opinion producing absolutely amazing albums and songs fanatic red velvet car beautiful broken and fierce bliss by Ann Wilson regaining there own integrity and later admitting how why and when they felt they sold out I respect them a lot for there honesty great show Pete 🏴🍺👍🏼🎸
The term is applied very loosely by fans whenever a band they like takes a turn in a direction they don't like. I'm not sure there is a correct usage of it, but as long as the band is doing what they actually want to do it's not "selling out". If they are doing it purely for sales or airplay, even if they don't like the direction they are going, then you could call it that. Most of the time when that happens it's because of pressure from the record companies though.
I agree with Martin about Rush not selling out but taking a risk. Rush could of gone in a different direction in the early 80's, maybe new wave of British Heavy Metal or traditional metal and that would of been considered selling out. Although it would of been interesting to hear Rush do that.
My favorite band of all time is Clutch. If I heard one of their songs on a Verizon commercial I would be indifferent. Good for them for getting a big check, but now when I see them there may be a new influx of fans showing up to shows to hear that one Verizon song.
A sellout can take many forms, like when a band follows a great album with a series of terrible ones. Metallica with Lou Reed is a perfect example. Another definition of a sellout is a rock band like The Scorpions doing all ballads for MOR radio. A sellout could be a Walmart contract to sell AC/DC tee shirts or a band having a hit single with a cover song like, when Judas Priest did Chuck Berry's "Johnny B Goode." A sellout could be asking way too much for concert tickets like Bruce Springsteen or an artist cashing in by selling their entire catalogue or an artist like Paul McCartney, selling multiple versions of his latest solo album to get just one week on top of the charts. A sell out could be a reality television show or a judge seat on a pop talent show. The only way that an artist or band cannot really be called a sell out, is because they are dead, and cannot approve any posthumous releases or have any power to veto how their image is being presented and sold. Jimi Hendrix can never sell out, nor can The Doors. I understand that the recording industry is a business, but as time goes on, old music has to have another outlet in order to be heard in an era of hip hop and dance music.
The one band I thought of with this topic is Our Lady Peace. They came out with an album called Spiritual Machines and it was fantastic, one of my favorites of all time. I ended up getting their entire catalog up to that point and became a big fan of them. I don’t think it sold as much as they hoped and the changes then happened. They got rid of their longtime producer and lead guitarist and got Bob Rock to produce them and then came out with a more poppy album with Gravity and the power ballad song Somewhere Out There and then faded away, at least here in America. To hear their growth in the 4 albums they came out with from the debut thru Spiritual Machines and for that to happen was disappointing to say the least. A few friends I have that are into music and got and loved Spiritual Machines thought the same thing.
Steely Dan is kind of the antithesis of Rock n Roll imagery. Never really touring behind any of their albums, not really promoting Rockstar personas and not really selling themselves thru merch. They just sort of made good music and didn't rely on the usual Rockstar tropes that are typical of the industry to boost their popularity, with the exception of radio play.
@@scottricci5063 According to a listing of their 1970's live appearances on the net (not sure if it was really EVERY single one) there were like maybe a dozen for '72 and maybe about 70 or so for '73 (actually more than I would've thought). Then about 60 for '74. Then it says: "There were no Steely Dan concerts between 1975 & 1992". They started up again in '93 & I believe that's when I saw 'em (August 17, 1993 Civic Center/Hartford, CT)...I do have a lot of live SD recordings - my earliest is Transmision Impossible (1974)
KISS never credited people that played on their albums, especially the times Criss and Frehley left the band. Even their reunion album Psycho Circus, credited the band playing on it when actually Thayer played on all but 1 or 2 tracks. And Criss only played on 1 track as Valentine played drums on all other tracks.
IMO the classic definition of "Selling Out" is when a band compromises their music style and appearance in order to either fit in with the latest trend or become more of a commercial entity for short term gain or both. The music ends up becoming tepid and watered down when compared the artiaty of the early days. One of the best examples is Incubus. Their first 3 albums were experimental funk metal in the style of Mike Patton & Mr Bungle. Their later material consists of mostly soft ballads and love songs. It hardly sounds like the earlier material. They gave themselves trendy, short hair cuts, and they even changed band members to present a more MTV friendly image. Check out Nebula on the album SCIENCE for a good example of their earlier stuff. I would say that a lot of the characteristics that Pete and Martin described apply more to older Artists. After Artists reach the age of 35 - 40, they come to realization that they can make a career out of this. They stop taking chances, and their new material just becomes a bland retread of the more edgy early period. Some classic cases are the Rolling Stones, Metallica, and U2.
Funny I could listen to New Kids on the Block or Kiss and not think of them as sell outs but when Metallica did a music video or released the Black album my alarm bells were ringing. I guess it depends how you represent yourself to the world is a big part of it.
16:30 I ❤️ that Rush put out DVD's for every tour from Vapor Trails and onward. I had noooo problem with that. They changed the setlist enough to keep it interesting and always had loads of extra bonus stuff like on R30 for example. Loved it. 😎😎😎😎😎
It's basically an artists(s) doing something that they would have never done had they not been pressured by either the corporate music industry or outright greed.
Then Elvis was a Sell Out simply by doing all those live shows in ill health because of that corrupt contract he had with Tom Parker. The only good take-away from the movie Elvis that just came out was that situation.
A band "selling out" usually boils down to realizing how bad their record-deal sucks and how much money they owe the label. So the band decides to start writing hit-songs.
I am only ten minutes into this video, and I am already thinking about who I think are some of the biggest sellouts in my mind. My list so far includes Chicago, Aerosmith, Genesis, ZZ Top, the RHCP, and the three remaining members of The Doors who wanted to change the name of their Morrison-less band, but the suits pressured them to keep the name, so they did.
Pete and Martin, Good stuff. Always look forward to Friday at the Fun house! Show idea ... Great bands and artists who deserve a mulligan for that ONE song we wish they had never done. I was thinking about the greatness of someone like Stevie Wonder. Definite mulligan for Ebony and Ivory.
Considering the passing of Jeff Beck this discussion is entirely relevant. A musician of complete integrity who never sold out, made a point of not selling out, and arguably paid a price for it.
Yes. I guess after Hi Ho Silver Lining he backed away from the whole circus and did his own amazing and wonderful thing.
He also said on many occasions that playing music was not his first love (it was tinkering with cars) so that also factors in I think. He probably didn't get as consumed with music as some others do - maybe more 'grounded' & "normal" (but reportedly also difficult to work with)
I liked his performance with Kelly Clarkson!
Yes , you cant name 3 hits from Jeff Beck ...only small group of hardcore fans .
Depending how you gage fame and wealth, yes he was never a world renowned megastar but he did make a good living out of it on his own terms, keeping his integrity.
When you're a teenager and live at home, it's easy to criticize an artist for wanting to make money. As an adult with responsibilities, bills, etc, your perspective changes. Also, the more I've learned about how bad the money situation is, even for popular bands, the more forgiving I am about bands trying to make a living.
😃👍
There's a big difference between earning a living and being worth 600 million dollars and becoming a piece of shit reality show and making another 20 to 30 million. It's called GREED.
@@michaelmiller7574 👍
the diference is be yourself and the art you want to do and then o jump and be a puppet to producers and companies and became a entertaiment figure, no mather the reason, a sell out is that, there is no law against that, but they are sell outs.
The decisive line between "authentic" artists and "sold out" artists is much narrower than a lot of people like to think. The underground artist who seems to not care still exactly knows this is the image he conveys.
Soul Asylum is a good example. They just grew and evolved and boom hit with their 3rd or 4th album given their song writing improved and evolved.
Episode a great example why this is my favorite show on TH-cam.
Disco Stu - Knows What to do !!!
What a great episode! Love it when such topics are analyzed in detail.
Very interesting topic. The one area that I always felt was unfair, was that when I band becomes popular, they sometimes get criticized. The whole point of making music is so that people can hear it. From the bands point of view, the more people, the better..
They brought up many good points. One thing about concert tickets ( at least when I was working for various promoters). The promoter owns every seat in the house and they decide pricing. The artist has a concert fee. Promoter has to make a
profit. The band does not control prices.( Or did not when I was involved). Also scalpers would buy blocks of tickets and mark the price way up. The band had no control. The promoters job is to sell all the tickets , guaranteeing a full house/ possible 2nd show.
I am 67 and two of my favorite bands growing up were Jefferson Airplane and a couple years later Genesis. As you can tell from these bands, I've been cursed by the understandable "sell out" direction. It's human nature to want to be popular and successful. That being said, that does not diminish the enjoyment I get from listening to the music from their beloved early years. Thanks for the discussion!
I presume as a fan of both bands you must have gone to Knebworth 78 ?
The issue of whether a band has sold out musically is too complicated to have a black and white, yes or no answer. If a heavy metal band really wants to put out a more pop oriented radio friendly record is that selling out if it's exactly what they want to do musically?
@@chriswilkinson7636 my answer comes a little late, sorry for that, but with Genesis i think, that was the way they went with their music, Rush too. One chapter was over, they wanted to something different. "Selling out" seems to be the easy explanation for that. They still made longer progier tracks till the end. Interesting enough not many complained about it when it comes to Peter Gabriel, who experimented but also went away from the music of Genesis, most of his music i would see as some sort of Rock.
@@ronaldfleischer7675 I don't think anyone would ever accuse Rush of selling out would they? Especially considering they wrote Spirit of radio, a real anti sellout song if ever I heard one.
@@chriswilkinson7636 they went away from Prog like Genesis did, thats all, made different music then, also radio friendlier i guess. Nothing bad about it, for me both bands just took a new route and i like this. No Sell Out, it’s what they wanted to do.
Excellent. Foot of our Stairs is probably my favorite part of A Passion Play.
I think you commented in the wrong video.
@@seaoftranquilityprog I did! At least it was music-oriented! Thanks. Love your channel, Pete.
Don't worry about it, I've seen far worse faux pas in yt comments sections. Oops! I may have sold out by using a French phrase to appear more 'sophisticated' there)) Thanks Pete and Martin- great show as ever!
Brilliant video Pete, loved it. Here's my example of a band selling out. Status Quo in the late 70s early 80s. Quo were mega during the early to mid 70s, they were one of the best live bands around with a string of mega selling albums, Dog Of Two Heads, Piledriver, Hello, Quo, On The Level, Blue For You, every single one of those albums were classics. When Alan Lancaster and John Cologne left and Francis Rossi decided Quo should be radio friendly and started singing about being ( In The Army Now ) that was it. They even appeared on a local soap program on ITV called Coronation Street, for me, that was it, all credibility went out the fucking window.
I agree.They left me cold when they did that.
Their new guys then I believe were session players, the bass player came from Dexys Midnight Runners and Kim Wilde.
Other topics to consider
1. Highly anticipated albums that disappointed you
2. Great albums with bad production.
3. Funniest people in rock.
Please include Bedtime For Democracy & Warehouse: Songs & Stories for topic 2 !!
The real truth is that people hate change. Whenever a band/artist makes something that is them and from their heart but it sounds nothing like what they did before the fans just want to dismiss it as garbage. It happens in all genres. It's like we just want the same regurgitated album that is seen as their masterpiece of 15 albums straight. Many bands/artists love to innovate with their music and take risks/add trends to their music, that doesn't constitute selling out. A band can be staying true to themselves and still grow and change as musicians and make incredible music.
Right now on tv there is a band that TOTALLY changed their style and were 10 times more successful after doing so. Their name: The Bee Gees.
@@TooSkinnyKenny I mean there are lots of bands who successfully did it. And then there are lists of bands who failed because the fans were unhappy with the change.
@@TooSkinnyKenny Nope. There was a band called The Beatles. The Beatles in 1961 were a raw and pretty sleazy rock & roll band doing small clubs in Germany. In 1962 they became the biggest pop group of all time.
I was thinking of a good topic to do for you guys is" Bands or artists that videos killed and / or made." There's lots of those artists or bands from the 70's that just didn't make it through the video age because they just weren't pretty enough or didn't have that visually appealing appearance that translated well to videos. On the other hand, there are lots of bands/artists that, if not for videos, may not have gone anywhere. I'm just throwing that one out there.
I can start. Killed : Billy Squier 🤣
One of the many reasons I love Kansas. A great band that has always been humble & whose concerts were about the music - not light shows, pyrotechnics, or makeup & costumes. Can’t think of a single way they really sold out.
Carry On My Wayward Son in Supernatural...they made a ton off of that licensing deal I'm sure. To some people that is selling out, I don't see it that way personally.
As a Gen-X'er, the most primary example of selling out is when a band starts out edgy/vulgar/Satanic and has Parental Advisory stickers but softened their lyrics/art/music/appearance drastically to appease the advisory groups and commercial interests. This was especially the case with rap music.
Ministry managed to do the exact opposite, but still turn it into a sell out, replete with virtue signalling anti corporate / globalisation schtick
As big of a Kiss fan that I've been all my life, I can't help but admit that they tick nearly every single box put forth by Martin & Pete LOL They certainly have jumped on trends from disco ("I Was Made For Lovin' You") to grunge ("Carnival of Souls"), they've brought in the famous producer (Bob Ezrin, Ron Nevison), they've gone the power ballad route ("Reason To Live", "Forever"), they've issued a ton of compilation albums (starting only 4 years into their career!), they've brought in the outside writers AND ghost musicians, dating way back to "Destroyer", they've certainly oversaturated the market from a touring perspective and, of course, have played the "farewell tour" card not once, but twice. And that's without even getting into the ticket prices, the meet & greets, the cruises and, of course, the merchandise - of which they have always been & will remain the big daddies. I'm sure I could go on, but this list is already making me depressed haha Thanks for another great show, gents.
You forgot the Gene Simmons reality show. Another box to tick there.
All true, except for one thing: KISS set out to become rich and famous rock stars first and foremost, and they've always stayed true to that goal
The issue is Selling Out vs. simply Selling
Rock on Pete and Martin !! Love Friday's guys 👍
Metallica is the one band that sums it all up-for me.. Changed style, did covers, did symphony albums (TWICE), Big-Producer Bob Rock, Several-Boxsets, Big Producer again-Rick Rubin, playing an album with Lou Reed-Lulu.
Sure, Lulu is total sell-out. 😂
I agree 👍
@@gioandi3556 I disagree (but then I'm a Lou fan). Metallica's worst offense was not musical but political - fronting the campaign against the democratisation of music-distribution (file-sharing etc). And why? Because like any "professional" musician they were amoral, subhuman - it hardly matters whether they're psycho- or socio-pathic, the result is the same. They fronted the campaign against democratic music-distribution because they were fearful of losing their ill-gotten gains and actually having to support their music-making leisure pursuits by getting proper jobs, of working to support the human species at large, of behaving like actual humans.
It's been said before and I'll say it again - no-one has the right to be a "professional" musician or author or web-designer or machine-designer or actor or novelist etc etc. Firstly because all of that is not work - it's "chatter". "Work" is making, repairing, farming and transporting things which exist. Clue - we pay doctors for their laying-on-of-hands, not for their chatter. Secondly because there is no such thing as intellectual property, because - except in the minds of vile amoral perverts - there is no such thing as property, and no such thing as an original thought. [If you have been trained to speak the same language someone else has spoken, your mode of perception is corrupt, therefore you are incapable of original thought...it's that goddam simple!!]
Except Metallica’s later music (post Black Album) is superior to their prior material. Maybe it’s lighter than their old stuff, but you can actually tell the songs apart. When I listened to And Justice for All, I thought I was listening to the same track 😂
Exactly how is making a boxset selling out?!
There are multiple ways and examples of selling out as a recording artist. The first rule defining a sellout, is that the band/singer has to value their artistic integrity from the start. If the plan was always to be a big famous rich rockstar, well then that integrity is already compromised.
1. Selling out - compromising your music by simplifying it to appeal to a simpler and more massive audience. Black Album ?
2. Selling out - compromising your expression to serve your old
customer base. When people want the old stuff. An example would be most sixty year old bands that play heavy metal on stage that sounds like 1987 in 2022. Pretty much every modern festival.
Selling out - compromising your image and public view points for cash. Bob Dylan 2014 Chrysler Super Bowl ad
Awsome discussion. I can really relate to Pete’s point of when a band you like, that has a small following, that you kind of feel as “your own” suddenly gets big and you have to share them with the public at large , so you move on. GUILTY
The one thing to remember when you are pointing out a sell out, there is a huge difference between selling out and evolving emotionally and musically.
Bands/artist change naturally over years/albums. This is usually gradual, with ageing and individual life experiences. Sometimes a band make a positive effort to go commercial for more profit. Genesis from W&W to ATTWT was not quite selling out, but an intentional nod towards the mainstream. From ATTWT to Duke and Abacab was an intentional effort for pop success and a wider audience. They sold out - It worked.
You can say that "Invisible Touch" and "We Can't Dance" were sellouts. I love "Land Of Confusion" and "No Son Of Mine", but the problem I have with some Genesis songs from the 80s is that they sound too similar with Phil Collins' solo stuff. I don't think there's anything wrong with writing radio-friendly songs and going in different directions, but in this case it seemed like the band was intentionally cashing in on what worked for Collins after "Face Value" got big. Ironically, though, I believe Genesis would have moved more away from prog rock in the 80s even with Peter Gabriel on the mic.
@@aleccopile You're probably right. Gabriel himself went way more commercial for his So album and the ones that followed.
I could listen to pete and martin talk all day. On pretty much any topic i think.
Martin, I was also at that Buffalo UFO show in the early 2000's... I still think of it fondly...Man, what a kick ass performance... Even though the crowd was sparse (but definitely devoted & rabid), UFO gave it 150%, & played like they were performing at an arena... I remember Phil Mogg, from the stage, telling some people at the bar (who obviously weren't UFO fans, & were just there drinking & watching TV) , "Trust me folks, there's more action going on up here; we're much more interesting than whatever you're watching on TV!!!"
I wish I'd seen that show. I lived within a 2 hour drive of Buffalo and I was out of the loop. That was with Schenker, right?
@@flazjsg No, Vinnie Moore, the "You Are Here" tour...
For me. 2 of my favorite prog bands back in the day, Yes snd Genesis, sold out big time putting commercially popular music versus the original music that made them great.
I think there's a fine line between selling out and developing a band's sound. I personally enjoy the early Queen music but got off their music once they went funk and commercial. Too me, they sold out but I appreciate they were good enough and popular enough to take risks with their music and get away with it.
it's changed a lot since the 1960s. back then selling out meant getting into movies and advertisements, playing it safe, and recording the music that the record companies wanted. i think the 1970s changed it with huge amounts of the most popular music being very mellow and corporate- where the entire radio day was sellouts...and with the rise of heavy metal in 1980s it cleaned things out for a while and made rock dangerous again. now we see some of the older musicians selling out again, but it's easy to pay attention to those who are still making great music on their own terms.
That’s why I loved the 1974-1977 Kiss. They played the way they wanted to play. Later, producers like Vini Poncia, Ron Nevison and Bob Ezrin, changed their sound, to overproduced, synth music.
I prefer that era as well. After 1977 I checked out.
I never thought about "greatest hits" albums counting as artists selling out. But it makes sense because the general public remembers a particular artist for their hits.
Linkin Park went through about three phases in their career where they were accused of selling out and changing their sound for movies, top 40 radio, video games, you name it. Even though the band pointed out they were selling less albums from trying something different and said if they were really selling out, they would’ve just put out the same lyrics and riffs over and over.
It was sad at the end though when they were in their 40s working with all these younger artists and flavor of the month outside writers and producers trying to remain relevant. They just couldnt embrace being a hard rock band and had to chase the pop world late in their career. No wonder they got shit for it, deservedly so. Ended on a whimper instead of a high note.
@@Chaz4543 One More Light is a lot better than some people say it is.
I believe Maynard explained 'selling out' very eloquently.. 😄 Thx for the vids guys!
Very interesting discussion fellas. Cheers!
change sound and look because the record label said to.
I think when artists are younger, they don't put as much thought into stuff and their music is more raw. As they get older, they refine their approach (often leading to a more commercial sound), which provokes accusations of selling out.
It is huge business and money is the core of it
Two of my favorite bands come to mind:
INXS: I knew fans who hated Kick because they thought the band "sold out. They won't listen to anything past Listen Like Thieves. Some were super hardcore and thought Shabooh Shoobah was their best album. I love almost every album they ever put out except the first and the last w/Michael Hutctence, which I don't hate at all. On the flip side, I won't and listen to the album they did w/J.D. Fortune. As a fan, I thought the Rock Star: INXS show was a complete insult because no one can replace Michael so, don't bother trying! Anyway, Kick is my favorite INXS album and favorite album of all time. But I became a fan just before w/Listen Like Thieves, which was the first INXS album I owned. Then, I bought Shabooh Shoobah, which I like a lot. When it comes to this band, they can do almost no wrong in my eyes and I love almost everything they put out.
U2: I remember someone calling The Joshua Tree music for housewives. I was a fourteen-year-old kid who loved this album when it was released in 1987. Like INXS, I love almost everything they put out old and new. Some think they sold out w/Achtung Baby. That album happens to be my favorite U2 album, and I like that they changed their sound for the new decade. I thought it was a brave move. But, like most fans, I have a period I like best: everything from War to Pop. All You Can't Leave Behind, I absolutely hate and some people consider that a sellout moment. But, after All You Can't Leave Behind, I sort of checked out unfortunately.
With or Without You could be music for housewives, but the rest of the Joshua Tree is artistic and edgy IMO. But you have to sit and decipher the lyrics. Bono was singing about the decline of the Working Class. Sort of like Fish era Marillion. Running to Stand Still is about workers who lose their jobs and end up on drugs. I grew in working class PA during those days, so the album tracks resonate with me. The Pop Mart tour was where U2 really sold out to me.
@@nrood79 A man on this channel who knows his U2. I'm impressed! You're right about the rest of the album. The Joshua Tree, if I remember correctly, was inspired by their tour through America and Rattle and Hum was the extended concert video🤣🤣I know a lot of their music is also inspired by religion. And I hear it in I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For. And I think it's One Tree Hill was based on the murder of a friend or someone they knew. In short, I agree w/what you said about the album. The funny thing is I became a fan because of With or Without You but, w/the exception of Achtung Baby, it's my favorite U2 album. Oh, I missed the Johsua Tree tour in 1987, which I regret. I did see Zoo TV in 1992, which was decent, but I saw INXS' Kick Tour in 1988, which I liked much more. I did see Pop Mart in 1997 and I agree it was a major disappointment. It was like Zoo TV minus the imagination. The funny thing is I was going to skip it, but I was in Boston for my roommate's wedding and another friend had an extra ticket so, I went. It was $60 at the time, which was expensive for a college student like me. In short, Zoo TV was more imaginative and nearly half the price and I had a much better experience. Pop Mart was a poor imitation of Zoo TV like I thought it would be.
One Tree Hill is about Bono's personal assistant from New Zealand, who died riding his motorcycle. I saw them on the 360 Tour. They're a good live band.
@@nrood79 Thanks for the clarification
Bands having lots of merchandise (even if a lot of it seems silly) is a good way to get more income since albums sales have declined over the years. With that said, artists like Michael Schenker and Robin Trower are in need much MORE merch being available as it's hard to find.
For bands that did well playing a certain style early in their career they have no commercial imperative (or record company pressure) to try for a deliberately more radio friendly, dumbed down style. Bands that had only middling success and probably constantly threatened by the record company to produce a hit or get dropped were more likely to suck it up and change.
It is also true that there were some artists who never liked the kind of music that got them started and jumped at the chance to try something more commercial..
Musicians have to make a living, and maybe the albums or shows don't cover it, or even gasp merch enable a band to make a profit and keep touring.
Some bands just can't be bothered to meet and greet. Focus were different Thijs Van Leer hasn't any ego he will chat to fans after the gig. He is so good to be around ,he makes you feel life is good. He is a gentleman.
It's an "it depends". Kiss were ALWAYS supposed to be a commercial interest to merchandise from day 1 so it's hard for an act like them to sell out. Wheras a Whitesnake, did they sell out by "going hair metal/MTV?" Well, Coverdale was not a rich man with blues rock. 1987 was his set for life record. Surely we, even if we don't love an album, can want that for our heroes.
Genesis/Yes/ELP - well, the Genesis fellas were pop and soul fans as kids. Commercial is what they loved as students. Yes became a new band and Trevor made them "sell out" by default since he was a very contemporary producer.
Covers albums? Well, it depends too. Springsteen's new one is terrific, it's an equivalent of Ella or Louis doing the Gershwin songbook.
I dunno. I never feel like an act "owes" me, so if they do something I don't like, fine. Sell out or just bad album - I'm just grateful for the music I DO like by certain acts.
And Greatest Hits aren't just for newbies and sales - they're also used by labels and artists to produce another record when they're signed for X-amount of albums. (Ditto doubles and live records)
It's the music BUSINESS after all and so many of these acts were ripped off by their managers back when, or nowadays ripped off by streaming royalties.
I do think it's easy to have a concept of waht "selling out is", but when it comes down to it, you have to examine every artist on a case by case basis. I really don't think most fans expect an artist not to deviate from their core sound, ever. But ther'es something pretty sad in someone starting out witht eh desire to make exciting, creative music and then preogressivelyt eh songs get more tailor made for the hits, the radio, etc. I just really dove into Journey for the first time last year (I was born in 1980 so i really missed their heyday). I know some people love those later records and, I mean, i wouldn't begrudge them, but listening to them simplify and make the vocalist the Guy that Really matters in the band, as in, hearing those albums back to back starting from the very first ones, gave me a sinking feeling in my heart. yeah they made lots of money. They appealed to the masses. Sometimes, you should listen to waht the masses want. But, I don't think that the vast majority of people are that invested in music, as much as the folks who subscribe to the Sea of Tranquility channel are, for example. "Corporate rock" usually means formula, repetition and not challenging the audience in anything but perhaps superficial ways (like a shocking album cover instead of surprising music).
Of course, an artist should do what they want, and it is true taht a lot of the people who get angry at them for 'selling out" have "regular jobs". if you tour enough as a band, you can't really keep a regular job anymore, and you have to make the band your career -- and the only way to stay afloat is to make money. So you have to figure out the balance, somehow. I realise it'sa tricky thing.
This is sacrilegious for me, but my favourite artist ever Johnny Winter kind of sold out. He was a Bluesman at heart, in the early seventies when it went out of style he allowed management to talk him into dropping his band and going Rock & Roll, which he did wonderfully with speed and power, he realized he was going through the motions and went back to his roots with Muddy Water and for decades after.
I was pissed when Priest came out with Turbo. I couldn't believe it, especially since it was the follow-up to
Defenders!
And those perms... Definitely a sell out for the worse.
The Slayer album that a lot of people still out on is 1998's "Diabolus in Musica". While they certainly integrated some nu-metal riffage on some songs here and there, I do not feel that the "sold out" in that particular case.
Not their best work but a valid point.
There were no "radio hits" on that album and it didnt even go Gold. You can arguing they were trying to sell out and failed. Just like John Bush era Anthrax. They tried to "sell out" but they didnt have the sales and hits.
Wow, Pete, you do read your emails! Thank you for discussing my topic. Great analysis. The song that is debatable for my friends and I is Harvester Of Sorrow.
(Of course I know about the Fade To Black time).
Interesting talk. One thought. Is there really any band/artist in rock or metal who has not been accused of selling out?
Probably not 😂 they claim to be fans, but they really need to get a life instead of bullying people that want to try something new
Very good discussion.
My contribution: Alice Cooper 1986 onwards really. In fact, since leaving the band really (although Billion Dollar Babies was very contrived and with session guitarists), although I would say he was being true to himself in the early 80s.
This is musically essentially.
I agree, artistically a much more interesting artist curiously enough during his blackout years than when he (literally) got straightened out later on but went uninspired 'corporate metal'...ironically, then becoming a clone... 🦾
I never expect a band to be the same as they were when they started to 20 or more down the line. It'd be like me being the same dumbass I was when I was 18, no, I've matured, so does their music. The stuff I always considered to be a sell out would be like Kiss Saves Santa. Stuff like that always seemed like it was more about the marketing than the music. Good show Pete and Martin, always enjoy you two, thanks!
Thought provoking discussion. Only thing I can add is famous solo artists that do a duet with another famous artist just to hopefully double the fan-base.
You'd think they could do the basic math & hook up with two other singers to triple their fan base...🤷♂
I guess Pete might not agree but Whitesnake kind of sold out after the UK version of "Slide it in" for a lot of people.
Yes, but the US version of "Slide It In" was still nowhere near what the 1987 album was.
I'm a great Whitesnake fan until 1987 included and i prefer the US version of Slide it in to the UK version.
@@franciskocher200 …well, which version did you know first?
@@Utubemop The english version.I bought it when it came out
@@independenceltd. I prefer the Slide It In album over 1987
Machine Head has always been that band for me. I love “Burn My Eyes” and have since it came out when I was 16. It’s still one of my favourites. But every other Machine Head album since has felt like a product of whatever was popular in that moment, in my humble opinion. A lot of them are misses. Burn My Eyes may be that also, but it felt very genuine at the time.
Again though why in metal circles is it seen as a bad thing to be influenced by current bands? It seems like you are not allowed to be influenced by newer music.
To me an artist selling out is when they knowingly put out a product they disapprove of or regret solely for monetary or business reasons.
How do you know it was for monetary reasons? There is a horrible album by Pat Metheny called Zero Tolerance For Silence. When you think of Pat as a guitarist you have a hard time believing someone that talented could actually play that badly. He put out that album when he was having a huge battle with the record company. Neil Young did the same thing.
Tom Petty did a quite brilliant thing instead to get out of contract. He declared bankruptcy.
@@nellgwenn Very good point. I should have qualified that by saying contractual obligations are a different matter. Maybe that`s a topic for another "Fun House".
What is the difference between a band who are broading their horizon (music taste or fan basis) or selling out to corporate record labels (just to sell more copies)?
To me there is a fine line between changing with the times/exploring different creative directions and "selling out". The other factor is simply making a living. Heart to me is the classic example of selling out in the mid-80's.....they readily admit that they sold their souls to sell records. They were getting dropped from their label, so I don't know if they had a choice. Outside songwriters, ridiculous MTV videos....Nancy up front in a skimpy outfit with Ann hidden in the back. But they sold a lot of records....
What is interesting in some bands who become really big is that they are often semi-carrying a member who is a better marketer than they are musician. Gene Simmons, Lars Ulrich, Clown from Slipknot. Where this happens, the marketing decision on what to do - including many of the options from Pete and Martin - becomes a big deal. 'Is putting out credible music the best market position' becomes a thing!!
Lars as a leader, strategist and marketer could be the subject of business school case studies, he is outstanding. There is surely no question other than he puts that ahead of music. Being a band member/ owner makes these things far more impactful rather than simply being the manager. Thing is it is a tough gig in some ways - how many Marketing Directors have to do the drumming as well. He has worked very hard to make the minimum level (which he has done and he is a good drummer)
Clown though went one step further - in order to be a band member and yet have really good players in each instrument, he thought 'I'll hit a barrel with a stick' - thing is it is a unique sound that gives a bigger percussion sound than really anyone else. It also means he isn't taking up a main instrument though, but is still (like Lars) a band member and not just a manager, which matters. Lars maybe could have put himself on triangle and got in a really top drummer!
'Selling out' is an invention of fans, a catch-all for any decision fans don't like, and is an indictment of their sense of entitlement. Sure, bands will sometimes make decisions for financial or commercial reasons, but 1)It is their job, so that isn't unusual, and 2)They don't owe you a damn thing.
You are right but since I don't owe them anything either, I don't have to listen to something I'm not into.
It could be an invention by the fans. however, I remember the 1981 rolling Stones Budweiser tour and getting the feeling they crossed a line.
They kinda 'owe' fans (and why they'll usually thank the fans for their upport when they win awards for example) in the sense that without the support of the fans they are literally making music for themselves = 3/4/5/6 people in the world. That's just not realistic (to your point about financial/commercial considerations) so there has to be some level of acceptance by somebody outside the band. If not, that band/artist pretty quickly goes away & then we're not even talking about them anyway. I do agree that many will use the 'sellout' label to denigrate music they don't like - just like labeling music as 'dated' for instance
The whole concept is subjective. But yea , sometimes they jump on a current bandwagon or repeat themselves musically. The WHO did a fantastic album in 1967/ "The WHO SELL OUT". They figured do it now and don't pretend . ( It' my favorite WHO album. I've been a fan since 1966/ saw them 12 times with Keith Moon). And I like 99% of all their material.
@@wolf1977 They "owe" record buyers the best record they ca make. They "owe" ticket buyers the best show they can perform. Beyond that, they don't owe us anything.
I'm only partway through the video, and I know some of these concepts are mentioned, but the big instances that I can think of:
* TV commericals: e.g. Nike using "Revolution" by The Beatles was an outrage at the time (I know it wasn't The Beatles' decision)
* ticket prices: e.g. The Eagles' "Hell Freezes Over" tour was eye-watering and showed that people will pay big $
* faux farewell tours: e.g. Motley Crue's farewell tour (with "the contract"), and then coming back
* catalog: e.g. Bob Dylan selling his entire publishing catalog for big $$$
another one is auctioning off iconic guitars... though often that is done for charity (e.g. David Gilmour) which is hardly controversial. But, say, if a guitar were sold to the Hard Rock Cafe etc
Everyone seems to be in favor of supporting small businesses and want them to be successful. I think if we viewed our favorite bands or artists as a small or local business, we might think differently about what selling out actually is, and whether it’s more of a judgmental attitude on our part as fans.
Labeling someone of selling out is definitely making some assumptions about their motivation based on little-to-no actual facts (most of the time). I think I lean towards treating this as when music writers/critics resort to labeling music as 'dated' (instead of reviewing the actual music based on its own merits) or saying stuff like 'decade x sucked'. Not many facts & a whole lot of opinion. That's not to say that some artists didn't sell out but not sure how many of us are actually qualified to make that judgement - of course you can hold any opinion you like whether it's correct or not
Bravo, sirs, bravo!
When you make your logo legible.
At some point in the 2010s, the major labels stopped signing rock/hard rock bands and signed all these indie pop, electro pop, folky, hipster bands who were more poppy and dancey than rock so they could sell their music to commercials to make money off of them since album sales were dead. When you make music that sounds like jingle music thats made to be played in commercials that basically selling out.
What constitutes a sellout? Well I just saw a Toyota commercial using Peter Gabriel's Solsbury Hill as a backing track. That would qualify for me. Rush knew they included it in The Spirit of Radio, "One likes to believe in the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless compromises
Shatter the illusion of integrity, yeah"
A great example of a different kind of band wearing another type of bands shirt is the band First Class performing their big hit Beach Baby in a video from 1974 with the lead singer wearing a ZZ Top Texas BBQ concert shirt. It's on TH-cam.
Only time I accuse artists of selling out is when I think they are making music that they themselves don't like, just for the money.
Not mentioned here, but can't say ol' Morrissey sold out. He may be a bit of a diva but he's always said what's on his mind...
Hey Pete,, I really like Your choice of glasses. I wanted to suggest to you that you may wanna get non reflective lenses. It will help rid the light of monitor or lighting reflecting back on cam. They are also nicer when you drive because lights behind you also re not reflected back into your eyes. they allow your eyes to be seen clearer especially in pictures Really enjoy your channel. Thanks!
Interesting topic. Hearing your examples, it seems kind of difficult to completely avoid selling out in some way. I guess we all have different ideas or lines we draw as to how much sell out we will tolerate. Those few that do not fall into those pitfalls tend to be relegated to obscurity.
One of the more obvious sell outs would be Kiss. Do I need to say more here? The merch, the outrageous ticket prices, multiple "farewell" tours, disco songs, the makeup, taking the makeup off, putting it back on, etc... Still dig the early stuff though.
The first artist I tend to think of when it comes to artistic integrity and not selling out is Frank Zappa. He did the music he wanted to do, all the time, started his own label, had a revolving door of the best studio and live musicians, had no interest in radio hits. I guess you could say that the onslaught of box sets and reissues in recent years may be a form of selling out, but you obviously can't blame that on Frank.
There's a great short video on TH-cam of Bowie saying "you should never play to the gallery" meaning don't ever do something that fulfills someone else's expectations. That to me is another example of selling out. Sacrificing artistic integrity for others, sales, etc is the type of selling out that drives me mad.
But Bowie's 1980s output was done for money and Im assuming he was expected to do music which he would not normally have done
@@davidsummer8631 "Bowie's 1980s output was done for money" - Not sure how you know that. Sure 3 of his top 10 selling albums came in the 80's but I think you have to make some assumptions about what he would've/could've done differently to say that he 'sold out' simply based on the fact that he sold a lot of records during that time. I thought you might've brought up his 90's "Bowie Bonds"/10-year bonds scheme where investors could 'bet' on prior albums' future sales. Very innovative, especially for a musician. He also controlled the licensing of his music. Not really 'selling out' - more being really smart about your business dealings
@@wolf1977 Its well know he did those albums for money and later in life he looked back at those albums with disdain simply because had he not needed the money he would not have done albums of that nature
@@davidsummer8631 im glad he did lets dance for the money with stevie ray. great music
Why I like seeing The Doobie Brothers. They play some hits and some deep tracks and still put out new music and weave that into their live shows. Some of their shows can be marathons as they have an extensive catalog.
As a teen metalhead in the 80s I was very cognizant of bands "selling out". But without the internets sometimes you had to go by publicity photos, album covers or released singles. Sometimes you'd jump the gun and buy the album the day it was released and get screwed. Especially if it was a band you'd previously loved and ignored the warning signs, a la "Love at First Sting". Have still never bought another Scorps album. I didn't buy "Delirious Nomad" because of the album cover. It had sell-out written all over it. Was wrong about that one. But this was the minefield we traipsed in the olden days of yore when print media was your usual medium of information.
The interweb can be tricky too though...😎
I like all the Scorpions albums until Love at First Sting included.😃👍
Excellent show! Was thinking about Billy Joel, brought out last album in 1993 but still touring with all his hits and filling stadiums.
One who held true to his vision but incorporated different genres - Frank Zappa. Jazz, big band, hard rock, etc.
Zappa 'marched to the beat of his own drum' as the saying goes. Also kept control of his music - that's a huge part in being able to do that long term
Frank also said that the poster of him sitting on the toilet made him millions, and saved him financially. He said it was genius in marketing.
Two that come to mind are Peter Cetera going adult contemporary and Michael Bolton. He started out as a hard rocker then became easy listening. And does anyone remember when indie darling Lou Reed was in a Honda scooter ad?
It was the era of Lou "Desperately Heterosexual" Reed, bad things happened!
Or that Lust For Life cruise commercial.
The most ironic incident is with the Reagan presidential campaign using Born in the USA.
Post Terry Kath Chicago seems to be the quintessential sellout to me. I certainly felt that way 25 years ago; however, 50 y/o me now undertands the importance of making as much money as possible while you still can.
For me selling out is when a band does something against their own vision just to please someone else's strategy (or even their own strategy) with the sole intention of selling more stuff. Sometimes the albuns coming out of that can even be great but still they're selling out. One of the greatest examples for me is Celtic Frost's infamous Cold Lake, and seing that Tom G. Warrior regards it as something he should not have done is exactly why I think it's a great example of selling out gone wrong. I still enjoy it but I understand why the artist regrets it.
Who I feel started the whole "selling out" thing was Jim Morrison when he went crazy over the other 3 members of The Doors agreeing to sell Light My Fire for fair use in a car commercial without his consent,and most of their songs had equal writing credits,but technically Robby Krieger wrote Light My Fire.
Is anyone old enough to remember when Alice Cooper would guest on The Hollywood Squares game show in the 70s?? I also remember in the 80s when Yes looked like they got their clothes from the closets on The Cosby show.
Cooper on The Muppet Show too.
@@mick5137 Elton John, Paul Simon, Johnny Cash, Joan Baez, Judy Collins, Buddy Rich (great episode, the drum battle with Animal), Dizzy Gillespie...
Frank Zappa on Make Me Laugh. And The Muppet Show was great.
Mark Weiss was one of the most famous band photographers in the 1980's. A large majority of the pictures in magazines like Hit Parader , Circus , Creem , ect. had Mark Weiss's name in the corner of the pictures.
Heart to me where the best example of being forced by record company’s to conform to fashion but having integrity to go no more do lovemongers then get heart back but on there own terms and in my opinion producing absolutely amazing albums and songs fanatic red velvet car beautiful broken and fierce bliss by Ann Wilson regaining there own integrity and later admitting how why and when they felt they sold out I respect them a lot for there honesty great show Pete 🏴🍺👍🏼🎸
The term is applied very loosely by fans whenever a band they like takes a turn in a direction they don't like. I'm not sure there is a correct usage of it, but as long as the band is doing what they actually want to do it's not "selling out". If they are doing it purely for sales or airplay, even if they don't like the direction they are going, then you could call it that. Most of the time when that happens it's because of pressure from the record companies though.
I agree with Martin about Rush not selling out but taking a risk. Rush could of gone in a different direction in the early 80's, maybe new wave of British Heavy Metal or traditional metal and that would of been considered selling out. Although it would of been interesting to hear Rush do that.
My favorite band of all time is Clutch. If I heard one of their songs on a Verizon commercial I would be indifferent. Good for them for getting a big check, but now when I see them there may be a new influx of fans showing up to shows to hear that one Verizon song.
A sellout can take many forms, like when a band follows a great album with a series of terrible ones. Metallica with Lou Reed is a perfect example. Another definition of a sellout is a rock band like The Scorpions doing all ballads for MOR radio. A sellout could be a Walmart contract to sell AC/DC tee shirts or a band having a hit single with a cover song like, when Judas Priest did Chuck Berry's "Johnny B Goode." A sellout could be asking way too much for concert tickets like Bruce Springsteen or an artist cashing in by selling their entire catalogue or an artist like Paul McCartney, selling multiple versions of his latest solo album to get just one week on top of the charts. A sell out could be a reality television show or a judge seat on a pop talent show. The only way that an artist or band cannot really be called a sell out, is because they are dead, and cannot approve any posthumous releases or have any power to veto how their image is being presented and sold. Jimi Hendrix can never sell out, nor can The Doors. I understand that the recording industry is a business, but as time goes on, old music has to have another outlet in order to be heard in an era of hip hop and dance music.
Awesome discussion
Excellent stuff, yes.
The one band I thought of with this topic is Our Lady Peace. They came out with an album called Spiritual Machines and it was fantastic, one of my favorites of all time. I ended up getting their entire catalog up to that point and became a big fan of them. I don’t think it sold as much as they hoped and the changes then happened. They got rid of their longtime producer and lead guitarist and got Bob Rock to produce them and then came out with a more poppy album with Gravity and the power ballad song Somewhere Out There and then faded away, at least here in America. To hear their growth in the 4 albums they came out with from the debut thru Spiritual Machines and for that to happen was disappointing to say the least. A few friends I have that are into music and got and loved Spiritual Machines thought the same thing.
That was during the same time period as Creed. Another Power Ballad era.
The most tiring cliche is: "They got popular, therefore they sold out".
Me at about age 15...
Steely Dan is kind of the antithesis of Rock n Roll imagery. Never really touring behind any of their albums, not really promoting Rockstar personas and not really selling themselves thru merch. They just sort of made good music and didn't rely on the usual Rockstar tropes that are typical of the industry to boost their popularity, with the exception of radio play.
I saw Steely Dan live shortly after they came out. It was at a place called Big Surf in Tempe, Az.
@@nellgwenn yep, they did play out, but barely rarely as I stated. I live in Tucson.
@@scottricci5063 According to a listing of their 1970's live appearances on the net (not sure if it was really EVERY single one) there were like maybe a dozen for '72 and maybe about 70 or so for '73 (actually more than I would've thought). Then about 60 for '74. Then it says: "There were no Steely Dan concerts between 1975 & 1992". They started up again in '93 & I believe that's when I saw 'em (August 17, 1993 Civic Center/Hartford, CT)...I do have a lot of live SD recordings - my earliest is Transmision Impossible (1974)
KISS never credited people that played on their albums, especially the times Criss and Frehley left the band. Even their reunion album Psycho Circus, credited the band playing on it when actually Thayer played on all but 1 or 2 tracks. And Criss only played on 1 track as Valentine played drums on all other tracks.
And The Ramones used Daniel Rey (their sometime producer) played guitar instead of Johnny Ramone; BTW: I talked briefly to D Rey - COMPLETE A-HOLE
And Motown never credited The Funk Brothers on any of those great songs until Marvin Gaye's What's Going On album.
Selling out is a pretty vague concept.
IMO the classic definition of "Selling Out" is when a band compromises their music style and appearance in order to either fit in with the latest trend or become more of a commercial entity for short term gain or both. The music ends up becoming tepid and watered down when compared the artiaty of the early days. One of the best examples is Incubus. Their first 3 albums were experimental funk metal in the style of Mike Patton & Mr Bungle. Their later material consists of mostly soft ballads and love songs. It hardly sounds like the earlier material. They gave themselves trendy, short hair cuts, and they even changed band members to present a more MTV friendly image. Check out Nebula on the album SCIENCE for a good example of their earlier stuff.
I would say that a lot of the characteristics that Pete and Martin described apply more to older Artists. After Artists reach the age of 35 - 40, they come to realization that they can make a career out of this. They stop taking chances, and their new material just becomes a bland retread of the more edgy early period. Some classic cases are the Rolling Stones, Metallica, and U2.
Funny I could listen to New Kids on the Block or Kiss and not think of them as sell outs but when Metallica did a music video or released the Black album my alarm bells were ringing. I guess it depends how you represent yourself to the world is a big part of it.
16:30
I ❤️ that Rush put out DVD's for every tour from Vapor Trails and onward. I had noooo problem with that. They changed the setlist enough to keep it interesting and always had loads of extra bonus stuff like on R30 for example. Loved it. 😎😎😎😎😎
It's basically an artists(s) doing something that they would have never done had they not been pressured by either the corporate music industry or outright greed.
Yes but how to determine if that's what happened...?
Then Elvis was a Sell Out simply by doing all those live shows in ill health because of that corrupt contract he had with Tom Parker. The only good take-away from the movie Elvis that just came out was that situation.
KISS. That's the answer. It was the blueprint for their career. Not a bug but rather a feature of their business model.
Is a studio album selling out? Should a band only play to a live crowd?
Should a band ever be recorded? Let's just go by word-of-mouth of the people who heard 'em play🤷♂
@@wolf1977 Sucking up to a crowd of people sounds suspicious to me. Alone in the woods with a stick & block of wood is the way to go for an artist. 👍
A band "selling out" usually boils down to realizing how bad their record-deal sucks and how much money they owe the label. So the band decides to start writing hit-songs.
Or they get older, stop being raucous trouble makers, and make tamer music.
I touched on that topic in my comment.
Finding greater success by appealing to the majority.
I am only ten minutes into this video, and I am already thinking about who I think are some of the biggest sellouts in my mind. My list so far includes Chicago, Aerosmith, Genesis, ZZ Top, the RHCP, and the three remaining members of The Doors who wanted to change the name of their Morrison-less band, but the suits pressured them to keep the name, so they did.
Pete and Martin,
Good stuff. Always look forward to Friday at the Fun house! Show idea ... Great bands and artists who deserve a mulligan for that ONE song we wish they had never done. I was thinking about the greatness of someone like Stevie Wonder. Definite mulligan for Ebony and Ivory.