Battle of the Bands
Now that kos is back, he's wasting no time. Which is good. But this caught my eye:
First: what artist or group hasn't been accused of selling out?
Second: is he referring to a particular genre (like modern rock) or any music group (pop, alt rock, heavy metal, rap hip-hop,R&B)? Because if it's the later, the "more money means the group stays together" theory doesn't hold water; R&B groups alone are infamous for breaking up over petty crap that has nothing to do with getting a paycheck (Destiny's Child? Hello?) Even if the chatter is about the "traditional band," a.k.a "where everyone in the group plays an instrument" there's still the potential for disharmony that has nothing to do with cash: the keyboard guy is jealous of the bass player; the drummer wants more solos, everyone wants to take turns being the lead singer; and of course groupies/fans.
Third: To equate "keeping it real" to not "making great music" is kind of a stretch. Rather, staying underground just hurts your chances of getting your music out in the mainstream. But with the Internet, who gives a Carebear? You can set up your own site (or use places like Blogger, You Tube or MySpace) and a good chunk of the PR side without begging some exec to listen to your demo tape. Some of the best music I've ever heard -from any genre- has been off the radar because they don't have some suit telling them "what the people want." But then again, the underground musicians I know have other means of income and don't rely on their bands/music to make them gobs of money: in other words, they make music because the like making music.
And I could go into how numerous politicians have been accused of "selling out", and how this is viewed so differently by people, but since the subject was music and not politics, I'll stop here.
Apparently, the topic of bands "selling out" has become one of the hottest topics in the blogosphere. Really, I'm not quite sure why people care if their favorite bands make money. The calculation is easy -- the more money they make, the more likely they are to stay together making the music their fans love so much. If they've got to slave away in obscurity for some quixotic quest for "keeping it real", then chances are they won't be making that great music for long.
Same goes for your favorite bloggers too, btw.
First: what artist or group hasn't been accused of selling out?
Second: is he referring to a particular genre (like modern rock) or any music group (pop, alt rock, heavy metal, rap hip-hop,R&B)? Because if it's the later, the "more money means the group stays together" theory doesn't hold water; R&B groups alone are infamous for breaking up over petty crap that has nothing to do with getting a paycheck (Destiny's Child? Hello?) Even if the chatter is about the "traditional band," a.k.a "where everyone in the group plays an instrument" there's still the potential for disharmony that has nothing to do with cash: the keyboard guy is jealous of the bass player; the drummer wants more solos, everyone wants to take turns being the lead singer; and of course groupies/fans.
Third: To equate "keeping it real" to not "making great music" is kind of a stretch. Rather, staying underground just hurts your chances of getting your music out in the mainstream. But with the Internet, who gives a Carebear? You can set up your own site (or use places like Blogger, You Tube or MySpace) and a good chunk of the PR side without begging some exec to listen to your demo tape. Some of the best music I've ever heard -from any genre- has been off the radar because they don't have some suit telling them "what the people want." But then again, the underground musicians I know have other means of income and don't rely on their bands/music to make them gobs of money: in other words, they make music because the like making music.
And I could go into how numerous politicians have been accused of "selling out", and how this is viewed so differently by people, but since the subject was music and not politics, I'll stop here.
Comments