Is anyone else disappointed that biffy are playing the secc?

[Old Gold]

If you protest against earning money and playing your music to people who like your music you're a bit of an idiot to be fair.

I sort of agree with you. I was just speaking hypothetically in retaliation to the 'selling out is a term fabricated by unwashed kids' thing.

[Alkaline]

The arguement was that you're "selling out" if you take part in what you protested about in the first place.

Not "you're an idiot if you are against playing music to people"

You misunderstand what i'm saying royally. I don't like Anti-Flag's music at all but they are still as opposed to the things they were before they signed to a major. They, in one way, are just exploiting the people who they despise for exploiting others (ironic not hypocritical and kicking one back at the "man" in the eyes of many). There's nothing wrong with that essentially. Any business is not exactly high on the moral stakes. If you work for anyone at all chances are along the line you will be either exploited yourself or responsible for the exploitation of others at some point in your working life.

You'd better stop wearing all clothes, listening to any of the many CDs that you bought from somewhere other than straight out of the bands hands themselves and eating all foods because otherwise you're being a bit of a hypocrite yourself.

Hypocrisy is one of the things i find funniest about humankind. Embrace it my good fellow.

[Guest Jake Wifebeater]

you're "selling out" if you take part in what you protested about in the first place.

That's about the size of it.

There's no point getting bent out of shape about it, though. If you don't like a band's actions, don't spend any money on them. Simple as that.

[Chris]

Or you could view it as they're spreading their views to a larger audience. Biggest example of that in recent times would be Anti-Flag.

Surely the biggest example is Rage Against The Machine. Though that may be stretching your definition of recent...

[Alkaline]

Though that may be stretching your definition of recent...

That is correct.

[Stupot]

You really can't imagine a hypothetical instance in which you would deem an artist as having sold out? I mean... by definition, a musician who's lyrics deal with anti-capitalism signing to a major label for lots of money would be selling out. End of story.

Not that I think Biffy are necessarily selling out by playing the SECC. It's their choice if they want to play in an aircraft hangar I suppose, and they probably know what their fans want.

Biffy are professional musicians, it's their job, ergo they can't sell out. If they change their material to appeal to a broader market, it's economic good sense. They'd be stupid if they released stuff that everybody hated.

Selling out...the last resort of the untalented, the amatuer, the purveyor of outdated 19th century political thought and the child.

[Old Gold]

Biffy are professional musicians, it's their job, ergo they can't sell out. If they change their material to appeal to a broader market, it's economic good sense. They'd be stupid if they released stuff that everybody hated.

Selling out...the last resort of the untalented, the amatuer, the purveyor of outdated 19th century political thought and the child.

I didn't say Biffy sold out, frustrating person.

[lovers_spit]

Biffy are professional musicians, it's their job, ergo they can't sell out. If they change their material to appeal to a broader market, it's economic good sense. They'd be stupid if they released stuff that everybody hated.

Selling out...the last resort of the untalented, the amatuer, the purveyor of outdated 19th century political thought and the child.

Yes but music isnt meant to be about good economic sense is it? Its about making what music you want to, not to cater for popular demand.

If every band were to follow this system of "good economic sense" then we'd all be different shades of grey.

Selling out does exist. They have traded their artistic integrity to make money.

[Ian_Brown]

Biffy are professional musicians, it's their job, ergo they can't sell out. If they change their material to appeal to a broader market, it's economic good sense. They'd be stupid if they released stuff that everybody hated.

Selling out...the last resort of the untalented, the amatuer, the purveyor of outdated 19th century political thought and the child.

What a ridiculous comment. Of course a band can sell out and Biffy largely have sold out. Obviously a band has to make money but a band should always produce the music they want to create as opposed to the music that they think everyone will buy.

If you take a band like Radiohead, they are doing what they want and because they are good at it, they do well. a lot of their stuff really isn't that commercially viable but still they're huge.

I'm sure singing the Kaiser Chiefs singing about 'Nannanananana' is good sense economically. In terms of music as an art form though it is cringe worthy and embarrassing.

Sadly modern day music is all style over substance. Would the pigeon detectives and enemy have got half of the airplay 10-15 years ago? I doubt it.

[Stupot]

Yes but music isnt meant to be about good economic sense is it? Its about making what music you want to, not to cater for popular demand.

If every band were to follow this system of "good economic sense" then we'd all be different shades of grey.

Selling out does exist. They have traded their artistic integrity to make money.

It is if you rely on it for your living.

If you're a leisure, hobby musician, then of course you can make the music you like.

If you're signed to a label or management company, just try it and see how long you keep your deal for.

Radiohead is a bad example. They've been building their fanbase for years, making shedloads of money in the process. They can afford to do what they like these days.

You'll never hear anyone who actually works in the music industry, as opposed to wishing they did, talking about selling out.

[The Milner]

Yes but music isnt meant to be about good economic sense is it? Its about making what music you want to, not to cater for popular demand.

If every band were to follow this system of "good economic sense" then we'd all be different shades of grey.

Selling out does exist. They have traded their artistic integrity to make money.

i love reading posts by people like you, people who can easliy sit there and spout off this moral high ground nonsense. Im pretty damm sure 99% of bands who are full time need to make a decent living and make sure they have enough to grow old on "artistic integrity" only exists when youve got no real chance of making something of your band. (this isnt a personal dig as such btw just a generalisation)

[Stupot]

i love reading posts by people like you, people who can easliy sit there and spout off this moral high ground nonsense. Im pretty damm sure 99% of bands who are full time need to make a decent living and make sure they have enough to grow old on "artistic integrity" only exists when youve got no real chance of making something of your band. (this isnt a personal dig as such btw just a generalisation)

Exactly. In the real world of artists who actually possess the talent to make some kind of living out of music, market forces come into play and they find themselves having to adjust to the trends and fancies of the market to keep on making a living. Kylie and Madonna being prime examples of this.

I'll change my statement though: selling out AND artistic integrity-only for amatuers and no hopers.

[RF Scott]

Exactly. In the real world of artists who actually possess the talent to make some kind of living out of music, market forces come into play and they find themselves having to adjust to the trends and fancies of the market to keep on making a living. Kylie and Madonna being prime examples of this.

I'll change my statement though: selling out AND artistic integrity-only for amatuers and no hopers.

I think that's a little too black-and-white really, when you take Tom Waits for example, who has made a very nice wee living off of music, without adjusting to 'trends and fancies' of the market - sure you can probably find his music on itunes, but he's hardly getting Mark Ronson to produce his new record, is he! Even someone on a smaller scale, like Mike Watt, is making a living doing exactly what he wants without changing. I do think the notion of 'selling out' is a valid one, but it's often misapplied to bands/artists/whoever simply becoming popular. People also change their minds!

[lovers_spit]

i love reading posts by people like you, people who can easliy sit there and spout off this moral high ground nonsense. Im pretty damm sure 99% of bands who are full time need to make a decent living and make sure they have enough to grow old on "artistic integrity" only exists when youve got no real chance of making something of your band. (this isnt a personal dig as such btw just a generalisation)

What a heap of shite.

Thats completely wrong. You can still make a decent living on music without whoring out and changing your music to appeal to the masses. And there are plenty of bands who decline being a "full time" band as a career, purely for the reason that they'd have to change their music completely.

Having your band as your living should come around from people liking the music you made, not you making music specifically to sell cd's and tickets.

[all_his_engines]

i love reading posts by people like you, people who can easliy sit there and spout off this moral high ground nonsense. Im pretty damm sure 99% of bands who are full time need to make a decent living and make sure they have enough to grow old on "artistic integrity" only exists when youve got no real chance of making something of your band. (this isnt a personal dig as such btw just a generalisation)

Sorry mate, but selling out does exist, and it's easily defined. When someone deliberately changes their music in order to make more money, it's called selling out. Now, I'm not making any moral judgement about such actions, but if you decide that you want to make money rather than make the music that you're passionate about then you shouldn't expect anyone to take you seriously as an artist.

A lot of bands who make the most interesting and rewarding music around are still dirt poor, precisely because they have refused to bow to market pressures. But people seem to have forgotten that financial income is not the only measure of success.

[KarmaTsunami]

I'm a little gutted. I used to be a massive Biffy fan, to the point of queuing for hours before their Forum gigs. Alternately, part of me is a little chuffed having seen them go from playing to about 25 people in Kef before Blackened Sky was released to the SECC now. Didn't they support Feeder or someone there? I guess their new 'arena-friendly' sound will suit it pretty well, but I won't be making the trip because unless i'm seated I tend to miss everything that's happening on stage.

'Vertigo of Bliss' is still brilliant, and makes me feel like I'm 18 all over again.

[Cloud]

Having your band as your living should come around from people liking the music you made, not you making music specifically to sell cd's and tickets.

But isn't the object of every band to sell cd's and tickets, ultimately? Even where a band doesn't care less - if they can't sell tickets, then they won't be asked to play gigs. And if they can't sell CD's, then they're making less money for themselves.

How many people are in bands that truly do not care less about getting to play gigs?

[Guest idol_wild]

But isn't the object of every band to sell cd's and tickets, ultimately?

Surely not?

Surely the object of every band is to write and perform songs that they truly believe reflect who they are, what they believe in, and exactly what they want to sound like...

[The Milner]

Sorry mate, but selling out does exist, and it's easily defined. When someone deliberately changes their music in order to make more money, it's called selling out. Now, I'm not making any moral judgement about such actions, but if you decide that you want to make money rather than make the music that you're passionate about then you shouldn't expect anyone to take you seriously as an artist.

No its called making a good living for yourself, just as a football player tries to get a better contract at another club or as someone would move jobs to get a better pay packet, selling out is a term used by snobs who feel they are better than other musicions.

A lot of bands who make the most interesting and rewarding music around are still dirt poor, precisely because they have refused to bow to market pressures. But people seem to have forgotten that financial income is not the only measure of success.

name me some of these bands if you could so i can check them out.

[Guest idol_wild]

name me some of these bands if you could so i can check them out.

I can name you one straight-off: The Twilight Sad. The vocalist is still on the dole.

True story.

[The Milner]

Surely not?

Surely the object of every band is to write and perform songs that they truly believe reflect who they are, what they believe in, and exactly what they want to sound like...

it has to be one of the main thoughts if your trying to make your living out of it, otherwise you wont and anyone will tell you playing in the tunnels to ten people, even if your playing your fucking life story in song form note perfect, sucks balls and will get boring very quickly,

[Guest idol_wild]

it has to be one of the main thoughts if your trying to make your living out of it, otherwise you wont and anyone will tell you playing in the tunnels to ten people, even if your playing your fucking life story in song form note perfect, sucks balls and will get boring very quickly,

I guess that's where you and I differ then. The thought of even attempting to make a living out of music is completely alien to me - it is not a motivational factor at all.

PS - sort out your ability to differentiate between your and you're. I think some people may take you more seriously if you did.

[The Milner]

I guess that's where you and I differ then. The thought of even attempting to make a living out of music is completely alien to me - it is not a motivational factor at all.

its not a motavational factor for me either, i gave up trying to "make it" a long time ago, i would just rather have people in a venue watching me other than the bar staff and sound tech.

PS - sort out your ability to differentiate between your and you're. I think some people may take you more seriously if you did.

it will take a lot more than just sorting out my spelling, but with you keeping an eye on it for me i should be just fine .

[Guest idol_wild]

it will take a lot more than just sorting out my spelling, but with you keeping an eye on it for me i should be just fine .

I'm happy to supervise, comrade.

[all_his_engines]

No its called making a good living for yourself, just as a football player tries to get a better contract at another club or as someone would move jobs to get a better pay packet, selling out is a term used by snobs who feel they are better than other musicions.

.....

name me some of these bands if you could so i can check them out.

Do you honestly need me to give you examples of bands who make good music but aren't wealthy? There are dozens I know of who work as music teachers or shop assistants in their spare time to pay the rent. And that's without mentioning all manner of smaller, local bands both in Aberdeen and all over the world who are making quality music. There is no guaranteed link between financial success and the quailty of the music in question, owing mostly to the fickle tastes of the public.

For me, your football/work comparisons don't hold up. You can't compare music to sport or business, because music is (in theory) an artform. Music is meant to be about creating something special that you want to bring into the world, not pandering to the market. Business and (these days) professional football are all about money, and there isn't the same intrinsic, non-pecuniary reward that you get from creating something like music - both for the artist and listener. Fair enough, if someone just wants to make money from music, they can do that by tailoring their tunes to the public taste. But then their creation merely becomes a mass-consumable product, no different from the row upon row of generic items you might find in a supermarket.

I'm not looking for an argument, but it's clear that our perceptions of music are different. I see it as possibly the most important form of human expression that there is, and I believe that all good musicians are in it first and foremost for the passion they have for their art. If they can make a reasonable living out of it, more power to them, but that isn't the core idea.

You seem to be of the opinion that musicians should primarily be concerned with how to sell their product to a potential target market. I'm not saying you're wrong to think like that (indeed you're perfectly entitled to), but for me that is anathema to what music stands for.