SellOuts...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrgen

But it is a fact that success has destroyed many good bands.

Examples: OOMPH!, In Extremo, Rammstein, Metallica, etc.

---

You claim it is a fact but it is moreso an opinion. If it was a fact then these bands wouldn't even sell half of the seats at their concerts nor would they have their albums bought or downloaded (legally or illegally). And I'm sure you'll find that a lot of the folks that still listen to these bands have been with them since the beginning. So obviously it's not a fact, it's an opinion that you and some others believe.

Let's be completely honest here. Imagine that you are an artist. All you want to do is express your creativity every day without anything to hold you down (such as a full time job). Do you think you can make your dream a reality without working to be a successful band? More than likely not. You have to get your name out there and perhaps you may get a record deal that will allow you to focus on nothing but your creativity.

And seriously, if any of you were in a band and some record company saw one of your performances and offered you a crap load of money to record an album for them, you wouldn't agree to? In the end, no one can live out their dreams for free. I don't deny that it is sad that one can't, but that is the reality of most people's situations.

Haven't been in a debate for ages. Feels kind of good. xD

St. Anger pretty much proves how Metallica changed in order to make more sweet dolla, y'know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowdust

You claim it is a fact but it is moreso an opinion. If it was a fact then these bands wouldn't even sell half of the seats at their concerts nor would they have their albums bought or downloaded (legally or illegally). And I'm sure you'll find that a lot of the folks that still listen to these bands have been with them since the beginning. So obviously it's not a fact, it's an opinion that you and some others believe.

---

All those bands already had very strong fan bases before they changed their music for the worse. Making music more appealing to the public did give them a lot more fans, but this only shows that the money is what changed their musical style and not creative evolution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by faster skating penguin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Mullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GooeyToast

Almost all mainstream rap/rock/punk nowadays.

---

---

---

I think Counting Crows have sold out ever since I heard "Accidently in Love" from the Shrek movie. I mean compare their first album "August and Everything After" to that one song, and I think its pretty obvious that their just trying to gain fame again. Its ok for a band to experiment with different sounds, but once you've written a bubblegum-pop song for a kids movie, then I think you're trying to get back into fame a little too hard. And that's kind of pathetic, because they already have a pretty large fan base, and when you have that, who cares if you get another #1 song on the radio. They need to except that they will probably never be as popular as they were 10 years ago, and just go back to their old sound and write music for the fans they have now, before they start losing them too.
There's nothing wrong with being being a very famous singer/band that gets heavy radio play, just as long as they don't change their sound to be that. I miss the old Counting Crows :(.

The Post-Black Album stuff from Metallica(But the 80's stuff they released is some of my favorite music)
Linkin Park
Green Day

On the punk scene I think there is too much emphasis on selling out. A band signs to a bigger not even major label and they have sold out. Pfft. A band has to make money. Sure, it might be nice to stick to the punk ethic and play gigs in dirty pubs travelling about in a rusty van, but ethics don't pay the bills.

You need to make money, and in our society that is unavoidable.

I do find it amusing when an anti corporate band, such as Anti-Flag goes and signs to a major label. Hmmmm.....there is such a thing as doing a U-turn in all you believe to make money.

And someone asked what the grime scene was? Uh, as far as I know its an offshoot/similar genre of UK garage music. Basically urban music, fast MC'ing over digitaly produced sampled tracks with fast beats. Called grime because...as far as I can tell, it has a grimey feel to it. I've heard a fair bit of it, it grows on you after a time. Although the only MC I can remeber the name of is Wiley the Eskimo Boy. I think. Typically a "black" music genre of the urban variety started in London.
You can get some very impressing MCing, very fast and stuff. Mind you, you also get some rubbish. Best bit I heard was "You think you're so cool cos you got a beard but I just think it makes you look weird."

Chaos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chaos

And someone asked what the grime scene was? Uh, as far as I know its an offshoot/similar genre of UK garage music. Basically urban music, fast MC'ing over digitaly produced sampled tracks with fast beats. Called grime because...as far as I can tell, it has a grimey feel to it. I've heard a fair bit of it, it grows on you after a time. Although the only MC I can remeber the name of is Wiley the Eskimo Boy. I think.

---

Thats pretty much a good description of Grime, but what do you mean by

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chaos

Typically a "black" music genre of the urban variety started in London.

---

If you mean ethnic wise, thats very not true, im white and kniw lots of people/Mc's that are white too, even if they arent well known

Tis the standard stereotype from where I am. As I dont identify myself with this scene I can only give what knowledge I have, which is it is a mainly black scene. I'm guessing I only hear the more 'well known' grime artists. But having said that, I wouldn't be able to tell a well known one from an unknown. It isn't meant to be racist or whatnot, just the same as any music generalisation like all reggae is from Jamacia etc.

Chaos

I didnt take it racially in any way, its cool