So, Clapton sells phones now?

[csm]

Back when EC did his beer commercial, he was a recovering alcoholic. Cognitive dissidence, anyone?

 

As for 'sell-outs' ...

 

'What happens is all the tickets go on sale for a concert,, and people go and buy them, and if as many go and buy them as there are tickets, that constitutes a sell-out.'

-- Mick Jones, replying to a question about whether The Clash had 'sold out', NYC, 1981

[CanIBDom]

I'd buy a flamed maple case like that for my cell.

['s mel gibson]

I like it.

 

It's just a skin.

[bsman]

I've never made a dime with music. Therefore, I am simon-pure and doctrinally sound. OTOH, nobody's ever heard of me, and I sit here in seclusion gnawing my nails and posting sarcastic screeds.

 

The whole term "sell-out" smacks of idealogical bull{censored} and envy of the worst sort

[sxyryan]

 

I've never made a dime with music. Therefore, I am simon-pure and doctrinally sound. OTOH, nobody's ever heard of me, and I sit here in seclusion gnawing my nails and posting sarcastic screeds. The whole term "sell-out" smacks of idealogical bull{censored} and envy of the worst sort

 

 

+1

Making music is one of the best parts of my life, save close family and friends.

I'd be ecstatic, if I could make money directly or indirectly because of my music.

Cudos to Clapton for being successful.

 

And are we forgetting the charitable things he has done, which might not have been possible without stuff like this.

[bsman]

:lol:

 

 

BTW: Best post of the day!

[Flogger59]

 

+1 Making music is one of the best parts of my life, save close family and friends. I'd be ecstatic, if I could make money directly or indirectly because of my music. Cudos to Clapton for being successful. And are we forgetting the charitable things he has done, which might not have been possible without stuff like this.

 

 

Clapton has done a LOT of charity work, but it's the rich folks kind of charity work. Take the first Crossroads auction, fr'instance. Eric donates guitars to charity and gets a big receipt for his taxes. Who do you think the largest single bidder was in the subsequent auction? That's right, Eric Clapton, and he got another receipt for tax purposes, kind of a two fer, if you will. The rich do things like that, they have much to protect, and wish to hold on to as much as possible, as would you or I in the same situation.

[RaoulDuke]

I only get miffed at stars hawking {censored} when it's geared towards kids. No worries then with Clapton; his demographic is 50y.o.+ lawyers.

 

The other end of the spectrum is Peyton Manning, who would do local gyno doctor commercials on Monday night football if they paid him enough. I guess that's why he's the MVP again. Most Valuable Pitchman.

[go cat go]

 

Clapton has been shilling for the corporations for some time now. For those who see no problem with it - fine - but I think it cheapens the music. Songs can mean a lot to someone - have very personal meanings.. then somebody takes the song (which once had a special meaning) and play it over a commercial.. special meaning to me now = buy more product. Selling out is what they used to call it.

 

 

I felt the same way. Then I turned 18 and moved out of mommy's house and had bills to pay. Ideological bull{censored} is what they call it.

[bad mutha-humpa]

 

I felt the same way. Then I turned 18 and moved out of mommy's house and had bills to pay. Ideological bull{censored} is what they call it.

 

 

so, when did you move back in? Seriously man, low blow. Being an adult with obligations doesn't require you to suddenly abide crass consumerism. I feel sorry for you if that's what it means to you.

[go cat go]

 

so, when did you move back in? Seriously man, low blow. Being an adult with obligations doesn't require you to suddenly abide crass consumerism. I feel sorry for you if that's what it means to you.

 

 

Thanks for the concern, but things have been good for the last 29 years.

 

If a song is special to me its special to me. It doesn't matter if its in a commercial, overplayed and oversaturated. If a simple commercial jades a special song or artist it couldn't have been that special anyway. It's really kind of shallow if you ask me.

 

And you're correct. It was a low blow. I'm having a {censored} day at the office and took it out on papaboom. Sorry Papaboom. I'm an ass.

[xStonr]

Remember when Clapton had his guitar collection sold off to finance Crossroads, his rehab. That was for a good cause. Was that a sell out? The Crossroads Concerts went for the same thing. Was that a sell out? Clapton is a paid endorsee of Fender. If him doing this phone commercial gets more guitars sold for Fender then good for him and Fender.

 

 

Back when EC did his beer commercial, he was a recovering alcoholic. Cognitive dissidence, anyone?

 

 

That situation was just so contradictory to my and his belief as a recovering person. I'm sure he found a way to justify and rationalize that endorsement. But I say inexcusable.

[bad mutha-humpa]

 

Thanks for the concern, but things have been good for the last 29 years. If a song is special to me its special to me. It doesn't matter if its in a commercial, overplayed and oversaturated. If a simple commercial jades a special song or artist it couldn't have been that special anyway. It's really kind of shallow if you ask me. And you're correct. It was a low blow. I'm having a {censored} day at the office and took it out on papaboom. Sorry Papaboom. I'm an ass.

 

 

cheers! To less {censored}ty days.

[Hubert Stumblin]

Christ! What a bunch of high-minded hooey over nothing.

 

"Sell out":rolleyes: What a load of crap.

 

It's not the Musical Artists Beneficence and Integrity Society. It's the music business. Always has been and, God willin', always will be.

 

Because he makes money with his music or just by being who he is doesn't in any way, shape, or form diminish his music or his reputation.

 

The way people here get all rightiously indignant.

You'd think he was peddling crack to grade-schoolers.

[RaoulDuke]

 

Remember when Clapton had his guitar collection sold off to finance Crossroads, his rehab. That was for a good cause. Was that a sell out?

 

 

Yeah, but it's not like Eric is hurting for guitars. I'm sure he didn't sell all of them except Blackie and have to borrow a guitar to play a show. These rock stars can stand to purge their bloated collections now and then. But it was for a good cause so good for him.

 

BTW, do you think Clapton plays "Cocaine" when he's doing benefit concerts for his rehab charity?

[bad mutha-humpa]

 

It's not the Musical Artists Beneficence and Integrity Society. It's the music business. Always has been and, God willin', always will be.

 

 

and that's why everyone here likes Taylor Swift and the Jonas Bros way better than Nuno.

[bsman]

...It's not the Musical Artists Beneficence and Integrity Society....

 

As Dave Barry would say, would that not be an excellent name for a rock band?

[Hubert Stumblin]

 

and that's why everyone here likes Taylor Swift and the Jonas Bros way better than Nuno.

 

 

What does it matter what anyone likes? If you like the Jonas Bros then, by all means, listen to them. Who is anyone to judge?

 

I suppose I have a certain "perspective" on the music industry or the history of recorded sound because of what I do for a living. Music has always been used "commercially". Some of the greatest musical artists of the last century have had their music used in this way. And it neither diminished themselves and their art, nor did it somehow prevent "less commercial" artists from achieving greatness.

[Hubert Stumblin]

As Dave Barry would say, would that not be an excellent name for a rock band?

 

MABIS!

[bad mutha-humpa]

 

it neither diminished themselves and their art, nor did it somehow prevent "less commercial" artists from achieving greatness.

 

 

I disagree, but I'll spare you the dissertation. Cheers.

[Sale83]

 

Clapton has done a LOT of charity work, but it's the rich folks kind of charity work. Take the first Crossroads auction, fr'instance. Eric donates guitars to charity and gets a big receipt for his taxes. Who do you think the largest single bidder was in the subsequent auction? That's right, Eric Clapton, and he got another receipt for tax purposes, kind of a two fer, if you will. The rich do things like that, they have much to protect, and wish to hold on to as much as possible, as would you or I in the same situation.

 

 

Yeah,who needs a charity work,bottom line is,don't help anyone,save your own ass,ha?....so Clapton and all the rich people do that charity work only because of the taxes?Never to help someone?So in case of Haiti or a Tsunami disaster a few years ago,or Africa,or any kind of problem,we shouldn't help them in any way,and we should let the pore bastards die,just because.if we do,rich people(who organized some kind of auction or concert or something) would get a big receipt for their taxes.

Have you ever heard of the Crossroads Centre in Antigua?That's the place where the money from the both auctions went,not for some Claptons new yacht or some fancy car,or some big mancion...and that place maybe just maybe helped someone,at least one person if not more.Is that bad?Have you ever tried to help anyone?Did some charity work?

[TruSlice]

Best phone commercial ever

 

 

 

That is all.

[Hubert Stumblin]

 

I disagree, but I'll spare you the dissertation. Cheers.

 

 

Whatever. I'll just say this: one of the biggest wastes of time and neurochemicals is intellectualizing music. At least insofar as making a determination over whether a piece of music or an artist is "sophisticated" or has integrity or not. At best that's just attempting to intellectually justify what it is you like. At worst it's attempting to intellectually justify why you listen to "hip" music when deep down you'd rather listen to the Jonas Bros.

 

Like what you like commercial or not because it moves you on some level other than intellectual or analytical. Like emotionally. Little kids listen to music in the best possible way. They don't think about it. They don't judge it. They just like it or they don't. Life's too short for any of that other bull{censored}.

[Flogger59]

 

Yeah,who needs a charity work,bottom line is,don't help anyone,save your own ass,ha?....so Clapton and all the rich people do that charity work only because of the taxes?Never to help someone?So in case of Haiti or a Tsunami disaster a few years ago,or Africa,or any kind of problem,we shouldn't help them in any way,and we should let the poor bastards die,just because. I f we do,rich people(who organized some kind of auction or concert or something) would get a big receipt for their taxes. Have you ever heard of the Crossroads Centre in Antigua?That's the place where the money from the both auctions went,not for some Claptons new yacht or some fancy car,or some big mansion ...and that place maybe just maybe helped someone,at least one person if not more.Is that bad?Have you ever tried to help anyone?Did some charity work?

 

 

Where did you get that from my post? Did I state that the rich lack all sense of altruism? Did I say that Clapton ONLY did it for the tax receipt? When I volunteer my time to spend with disabled children, am I doing it for the tax receipt? Here's a flash, I don't get one.

I do it because it is its' own reward. I'm sure that Eric feels good about his work, and the double tax receipt is a nice bonus. Many times when a wealthy person donates an expensive item to be auctioned for charity, they themselves purchase the item back, usually on an accountant's advice. "Look, you can write a cheque for $1,000,000, or you can donate the Matisse over there, and buy it back for the same million, thereby garnering two tax credits."

 

BTW I edited your post, but I'll leave it to you to find the corrections.

[bad mutha-humpa]

 

'll just say this: one of the biggest wastes of time and neurochemicals is intellectualizing music.

 

 

And yet you've clearly thought about it. What's more, you thought about people thinking about it AND you devised a lengthy post designed to refute people thinking about it.... invoking NEUROCHEMICALS no less! Thank you neurosurgeon Dr. Sanjay Gupta. If I may paraphrase what I think you meant: It's best not to think too hard about music...if you happen to disagree with me about music. Now isn't that more concise than a screed about how people justify what's hip?

 

Besides, I never knocked Clapton's music. I knocked his actions as crass commercialism. I'll just assume you think it's not worth thinking about either. Cheers.