Am I a sellout?

[Melorock]

(when I get a band and things going) I want to write good songs that make general people happy and that they like listening to it, who doesn't right? In order to do that thought, I need to change my stuff a little to be a little more 'poppy' so to speak. I need to simplify on guitar and etc. (It'll break my heart to cut some killer riffs and solos). But I realized that people generally don't listen to the arrangement as much to the vocals and lyrics.

 

songwriting>technical playing

 

I feel guilty, what are you're thoughts about making your music appealing in general? I want to write better songs.

[cuppycup]

There's nothing wrong with trying to make your stuff commercially viable. You can save some of your solo work for live performances.

[Chicken Monkey]

You're talking about the difference between masturbation and intercourse. If you're creating for other people, you should definitely be thinking about what they want to happen.

[captain average]

that "musical masturbation" argument is bull{censored}. do what the {censored} ever you want to it. play it a different way every time if you want. who gives a {censored}. 3 minutes later, you're doing something else anyway.

[blue2blue]

I think the masturbation analogy is pretty spot on.

 

That is not -- at all -- to say you should play down to your audience or insult their intelligence. After all, how pleasurable is that for your "partners"?

 

But you probably should (from some perspectives, anyhow) think about the people you're playing for. I mean, unless you're paying them to be there, in which case you can play as many irritating, self-indulgent solos as you want (if that's what you're into) and, as long as the checks are good, who's to complain?

 

 

Otherwise -- and perhaps especially if they are paying to be entertained -- I think it's just part of being a good craftsman, service provider, entertainer, and maybe even artist (jury's out there ) to give some serious thought to how what you lay down will be picked up.

 

 

I mean, I'm not exactly someone who is a stranger to outsider music; I love Captain Beefheart, Pere Ubu... lots of weird, thoroughly "uncommercial" stuff. But the artists I like may make highly specialized, definitely-not-for-everyone music but, by and large, I think they strive to give their audience what that audience came for... with the understanding -- of course -- that an audience that came to see Celine Dionne would understandably be horrified. As it should be.

[eeglug]

 

If you're creating for other people, you should definitely be thinking about what they want to happen.

 

 

If that's the way it's always been we would have no change in music over time. But clearly things do change. Some artists give the people something they didn't know they wanted before.

[Chicken Monkey]

 

If that's the way it's always been we would have no change in music over time. But clearly things do change. Some artists give the people something they didn't know they wanted before.

 

 

I think I'm being interpreted more broadly that I intended. Chuck Berry, Bob Marley, Run DMC and the rest of them brought in something new, but it was built on the foundation of strong hooks, catchy lyrics and the rest of the "things that people want".

[egelmett]

 

(when I get a band and things going) I want to write good songs that make general people happy and that they like listening to it, who doesn't right? In order to do that thought, I need to change my stuff a little to be a little more 'poppy' so to speak. I need to simplify on guitar and etc. (It'll break my heart to cut some killer riffs and solos). But I realized that people generally don't listen to the arrangement as much to the vocals and lyrics. songwriting>technical playing I feel guilty, what are you're thoughts about making your music appealing in general? I want to write better songs.

 

 

On the otherhand...

 

I don't know what you sound, or sounded like, but how do you know your stuff doesn't make people happy already?

 

I think the worst thing you can do is be dishonest with yourself, and second to your audience. I mean, if you want to write what you like to write, that's all you can do.

 

I realized a long time ago that no matter what I do, what style I write in, or anything...I'm there. I can't escape me. You'll free yourself if you stop worrying about what you think people want and just do what you do.

 

What's the goal? To create music and express yourself, or to sell a marketable product? Do you know any market good enough to target one? Will you be happy doing something you think is not your best?

 

I think the best advice I ever received is to do it to be happy. Don't try to make your music be liked, just make it. No matter what you do, some people will like it, and some won't regardless how 'likeable' you make it. If you go all art-core, you'll be may be right in that in general, fewer people will appreciate it. And if you write your version of "poppy" you'll be slagged for being poppy. I don't think it's wise to write for other people. Write for you. At least when anybody has some criticism of your music, you know you're being honest and there's nothing more anyone can ask of you.

 

It's all art. But, if you want to sell something, cars is a good start. And we all know how likeable most car salesmen are. Be honest with yourself above all.

[BlueStrat]

Once you enter your art into the martketplace and put a price tag on it by accepting payment, you've already sold out. The only question is one of degree. And there's nothing wrong with it.

 

Look, if I'm going to sell something in the marketplace, I'm going to try to make sure a) it's what someone else wants to buy and b) I can get as much for it as possible.

 

If I build a house, and I build it to suit me, I've potentially eliminated a lot of potential buyers. it doesn't mean I create a generic box with all neutral tones. It means I build it with other people in mind.

 

Musicians do this all the time. Where do you think the structure and three minute format of pop songs came from?

 

If you're going to sell out, you may as well sell out big. If not, make art and keep it in your living room to admire. The fact is, though, that thirty years from now, having a hit song still generating income for you could be a great thing. It may be all you ever get out of the business side of music.

[Melorock]

I mean I got a song/idea that has like a 1 1/2 min maybe more intro of guitar riffs, and I think that It wont 'hook' people. I'm just trying to edit to where it has good structure and they sound good. I'll still love the songs but not every song needs a solo and etc. I won't quit playing what I love to play, but I do want to change the mood on some stuff. Not everything has to be dark, and/or inspirationally melodic (lol hence the name melorock).

 

I love appealing music. Some of the best stuff out there just has that certain simplicity and very easy to sing along with, and I guess that's my goal without completely changing everything.

[egelmett]

 

I love appealing music. Some of the best stuff out there just has that certain simplicity and very easy to sing along with, and I guess that's my goal without completely changing everything.

 

 

I think this is the flaw in your thinking that will trap you unnecessarily.

 

What is appealling anyway? To have the ultimate goal to make music people like is not is bad one, but not wise to make your it only goal. Now, to write simple songs with memorable hooks and your twist on it all is a fine approach yet still, some people will not like it. The question is at that point, do you like it?

 

Do you really think some musicians consciously think "I'm going to make unappealling music"? I think just about any musician out there would concede that you make music and you hope to find an audience for it. Whether or not the audience finds it appealing is to be seen. But, every musician hopes his/her audience likes it, or at least appreciates it.

 

I mean, there are lots of different ways to be appealling, and you have no control on what they are. Chances are, if the music you write pleases you - and this is no easy task, at least for me - it will please others.

 

You can't take a poll on what people like and then do that. Perhaps, if you have one person in mind, and you know what they like you may have a chance with the philosophy that you can predict what others want...but only maybe.

 

I've been at the songwriting thing for a long time and I find the hardest person to please is myself. Whether through self doubt or self editing, or the imprisoning mindset that I want others to like it, it all comes back to just me. Do I like it?

 

You know, when I post links to my songs on these and other forums, the question I have for others is not "do you like it" but moreso about the technical aspects of the mix or structure or arrangement. The content, you either like or don't like. There's no better music. That cannot be judged or quantified. I do care if people like it, I don't care if they don't. I hope people like what I do, but I am realistic enough to know now, that not all people will like it.

 

I remember back in 2000, my writing partner and I went to master our CD in Hollywood with a well known (in the industry) mastering engineer. We agreed in advance that we would NOT ask his opinion as to what he thought of the music or whether or not HE liked it, or what he thought its potential would be. He had gold records on the walls and knew a lot of famous artists. But, we were paying him for the job he was to do and it did not matter what he thought. I mean, we hoped he would like it but it was not necessary that he did to still do a good job. Through most of the session, he did his thing, then he got to my favorite song, one I poured my heart and soul into, as well as six months of listening and refining. This song he did like, and his attention to it as art was delightful but certainly not solicited. So, it's nice surprises like this that make it worthwhile, but they can't be counted on.

 

Just write songs to please yourself. Forget whether or not they're appealling because chances are, they will be written with no more effort spent than your question on this post. But don't trap yourself in the question if other people like it. It's a waste of time.

 

Ed

[snd4c]

The only way one becomes a sellout is if you have good quality music with lots of emotion and soul in it and then you start writing music JUST AND ONLY FOR THE SOLE REASON OF CASH MONEY.

 

Changing your style doesn't make you a sellout. I've heard people say the Goo Goo Dolls used to be death metal, Listen to them now they're still good as hell.

 

Just cause you change your style doesn't mean your a sellout.

[kurdy]

 

(when I get a band and things going) I want to write good songs that make general people happy and that they like listening to it, who doesn't right? In order to do that thought, I need to change my stuff a little to be a little more 'poppy' so to speak. I need to simplify on guitar and etc. (It'll break my heart to cut some killer riffs and solos). But I realized that people generally don't listen to the arrangement as much to the vocals and lyrics. songwriting>technical playing I feel guilty, what are you're thoughts about making your music appealing in general? I want to write better songs.

 

 

I would start by staying within the pop song form--verse, chorus, verse, chorus, bridge or solo (optional), chorus. And keeping the song roughly four minutes or less. Not that it can't go a bit over in length, but you should at least aim for that time frame. You can always extend the song, tack on a few solos at the end and really jam out on it when you perform the song live, but the song in its basic form should be concise.

 

Also, there's nothing wrong with bending the rules every now and then, but this should at least give you a good starting point, if you want to make your songs more accessible to the general public.

[mddawso]

just because something isn't technically complicated doesn't make it bad. If anything it shows restraint from "showing off".

[R.J.S.]

You`re not a sellout if you do what you really like, but if you do it only for money then yes, you are. It seems like you do what u like, so... don`t worry and keep writing.

[tamoore]

There is no such thing as a 'sell out'. It's a crazy concept.

 

Making music is like writing mortgages, or flipping cakes at the iHop. People do it for money.

 

I don't see anyone thrashing on a house painter because he wants to get paid a premium price for his work...

[R.J.S.]

No, tamoore, you`re wrong. It`s just tells us that you`re sellout, cause money is not your first aim if you are musician.

[tamoore]

No, tamoore, you`re wrong. It`s just tells us that you`re sellout, cause money is not your first aim if you are musician.

 

Says who?

 

 

Should money be my first aim if I am an engineer?

 

I am an engineer because I'm good at it, and I've worked hard at training to be good at it.

 

I'm a musician for many of the same reasons....

 

 

So.... Now what? If I take an engineering gig to make more money, am I a sellout engineer?

[cherri]

I'm seeing a theme that writing for mass appeal is somehow a lesser artistic pursuit than writing for a smaller, more musically sophisticated audience. Doesn't that argument goes across all forms of artistic expression, not just music?

[uncle psychosis]

Were there any tickets available for any of your shows? If not, then you "sold out".

 

Mick Jones definitely had the right idea about this

 

Sam

[Dubb]

Making music is like writing mortgages, or flipping cakes at the iHop. People do it for money.

I've never made a dime off my music. Neither have many of my musician friends. Obviously there's a flaw somewhere in this theory.

[tamoore]

I've never made a dime off my music. Neither have many of my musician friends. Obviously there's a flaw somewhere in this theory.

 

Just because you haven't, doesn't mean that people who have are 'selling out'. It can mean several things.

 

 

A friend of mine has never had a job other than being a musician. It's how he pays the bills. You could call him a 'sellout', but I'd call him a musician... Just like he'd call me an engineer.

 

[Dubb]

I'm not calling people who sell their music "sellouts" by any means. Indeed, if I got the chance to get paid for making music, I would of course go for it. What I am saying is that making music is not comparable to flipping pancakes. I play and write music to have fun and to express myself. Making money would be nice, but it's not my primary... even secondary motivation. It's a bonus.

[tamoore]

 

I'm not calling people who sell their music "sellouts" by any means. Indeed, if I got the chance to get paid for making music, I would of course go for it. What I am saying is that making music is not comparable to flipping pancakes. I play and write music to have fun and to express myself. Making money would be nice, but it's not my primary... even secondary motivation. It's a bonus.

 

 

 

Right. But, that's you. You're not everyone. Some people make music a career. Doing so doesn't lessen the value of their work. That's my only point.

 

And, that even includes tailoring their 'work' to fit into areas that may be profitable..... IMO.

[Dubb]

Doing so doesn't lessen the value of their work. That's my only point.

Agreed.

But I'm willing to assert that if most of these professional musicians suddenly found themselves fired from their label, kicked out of their band, and forced to flip pancakes at IHOP, they would still play/write music in their spare time. The point I'm alluding to is one of motivation - and while it's impossible to know to what extent a musician makes music for profit vs pleasure, in the end I believe that for most musicians, pleasure is a bigger factor (as it should be). After all, the vast majority of "professional musicians" out there aren't exactly livin' large - they're getting by. Unless you're part of the fraction of 1 percent of musicians who "makes it big," then there are many way more profitable careers. So in the end, my definition of a "sellout" is someone who only makes music to pay the bills. Metallica comes to mind... these guys have admitted in interviews that they don't even like hard rock or metal anymore. But they gotta feed the monkey...