CanwllCorfe

I don't think I was ever familiar with the term. I never really liked a band when they were "underground" and then hated them when they become popular. The way I see it, if a band becomes popular they were always destined to be popular. I usually only like a couple songs from a couple albums anyway regardless of when they were released (pre "sellout", after "sellout"). Although on one fateful album I enjoy every song, which is Sortsind's Sår. That just happens to be their only real album Ah well.

However their videos have a good amount of views on YouTube.. that's not very kvlt.

__________________
Your eyes were never yet let in to see the majesty and riches of the mind, but dwell in darkness; for your God is blind.

Halpert

A band that signs to a major label and has no right to their music so the producers make it sound like 80's hair metal. Listen to White Crosses and you'll know what I mean.

__________________
My last.fm
http://last.fm/user/af-halpert

Freebase Dali

Exactly.
But I don't really worry about defining the term 'selling out' at all. If I stop liking a band/artist's music, I simply stop listening to it. I don't stop listening to the music they've made that I do like though.
In one regard, I couldn't care less about the status or the money they make or don't make. If I like the music, that's all that matters.

Let's take Pendulum for instance (since between me and you, we could relate on the Electronic end of the spectrum)... I used to listen to them before they got really big and started deviating from their original style so much, but I don't look at their deviation as a result of fame... instead, I see the fame as a result of the deviation because they've made their music more accessible to the mainstream. Regardless of the motive behind the change, the change in the music itself is what I don't like because that's the factor affecting me.

The sticky part of it, especially with Electronic music, is that evolution is inevitable and encouraged. I like hearing new and creative music. But it's unreasonable to assume that all roads will lead to a destination of your own preference or choosing, so I'm pretty accepting in that regard.
What I don't like, however, is when those changes are made and then serve as enticements for other bands/artists I enjoy who may then follow the same formula simply because it's successful.

Ultimately, I know success is necessary to survive as an artist, but it can seem like a losing battle when all the success hinges on the opinion of a mainstream audience you may not agree with.

CanwllCorfe

I completely agree. Especially with the bolded part. I was trying to figure out how to explain that point. I think that same thing can be said for a lot of the "sell outs". Lately it seems a lot of Electronic music has almost seemed to lose its boundaries. For example, Trance. Trance was a commercial genre and now it's like an amalgamated version of House, Electro, and some semblance of Trance. Mainly because House and Electro are now the commercial genres of choice. Unfortunately it seems other genres have picked up on this as well and seems like even artists like Noisia are getting in on it. Although, quite awesomely, kickass Ferry Corsten was making Electro influenced Trance all the way back in 03 so he was way ahead of the curve.

But, as you said, Electronic music is a sort of love/hate thing. There's always innovation and evolution so you don't get bored, but then the artists you've come to enjoy will always somehow change and not always for the better. You can never really "expect" anything from anyone.

__________________
Your eyes were never yet let in to see the majesty and riches of the mind, but dwell in darkness; for your God is blind.

Engine

I certainly would have rather painted caves than chase mastodons off of cliffs or whatever. And the mythological creature thing is certianly true - aren't whole religions based on that kind of thing? But I mean the really creative cavemen who had to paint regular hunting scenes or dragons or demons or whatever was popular at the time - and then at night they were too tired from painting other people's stuff to express some great idea they had.

true - it's a weak term. Like how people call songs that they don't like by bands they do like 'filler'

Totally true for me as well. How can we ever know why a band sucks anyway? Maybe they 'sold out' or maybe they just naturally began to suck at some point. I really don't care why. The term 'sellout' is used by people who have sold out expressive language

__________________

Like an arrow,
I was only passing through.

Violent & Funky

Yeah, that's a false statement. Check your facts and get back to us...

__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/ohio0808

sometimes I don't thrill you
sometimes I think I'll kill you
just don't let me fuck up will you
'cause when I need a friend it's still you

Dom

I think Wikipedia's definition is the most accurate personally:

I've read through a lot of the debate on this thread and what some of you seem to be missing is that whether or not the artist is good they can still be a sellout, whatever their motives - changing your art to make more money isn't necessarily a bad thing and I think the shame of "selling out" is exaggerated. Sellout is really just a term used by music elitists to shun mainstream bands who began underground.

__________________

TheCunningStunt

/thread.

Selling out only pisses me off if the music goes poor due to them making an album that will hopefully make them money. People who shun underground bands gone mainstream for no real reason is just dumb.

Halpert

I was doing an example of a band that sold out..

__________________
My last.fm
http://last.fm/user/af-halpert

Rhovanion

For me a sell out would be a band or artist that used to make the kind of music they and the fans wanted to hear regardless of style, genre or popularity, but is now only going for the kind of music that radios and mainstream media think is "in".

__________________