Pop, is it corporate garbage or does it have it's merits? (alternative, metal)

~~Oomph!~~ · 04-09-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Kid A: Burger King are clearly a corporate entertprise.

Oomph: No they're not!

Kid A: Of course they are, you find ads for them like everywhere you freakin' look, dude.

Oomph (thinking really hard, scratching his head): Yeah, well guess what, McDonalds are even MORE corporate than Burger King are. So there!

"Intelligent debate and critical analysis", eh? Suuuurrrreeeee.

That isn't the point I was trying to make you are all wrong. Terrible metaphor/analysis

Sparky · 04-09-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oomph!

I believe Germany is the biggest country they have influence in, lesser countries don't really mean as much (regarding thier marketability)

Thier market is no where near as corporate and commercial and large as ours is. EVEN in Germany they aren't 'huge', they're a band that is pretty popular amung the metal/hard rock types. It doesn't mean they are a corporate band or that they comprimise thier music for money...

Know who's popular in Germany?

Rainard Jalen · 04-09-2008, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oomph!

That isn't the point I was trying to make you are all wrong. Terrible metaphor/analysis

It is exactly the point you were trying to make. You bring up some other band, also coincidentally signed to Sony (lozzles!), and point out that they have merchandize too. Well guess what, A: nobody mentioned RATM in the first place. B: RATM are a load of steaming stinking horse excrement like Oomph are. C: all you proved is that RATM are even more of a corporate enterprise than Oomph.

Supporting leftist causes while being signed to Epic. L.M.F.A.O

~~Oomph!~~ · 04-09-2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Sudden expert on Crass now are we?

So a band who were formed from an anarchist commune who lived in squats , were signed to a tiny independent label and who used most of their royalties to promote loads of anti globalization , anti war , feminist & enviromental causes were 'selling the rebellious anarchist' image.

OK then

Yes they promoted 'causes' so does U2, one of the most rediculously commercial bands there is, U2 was just better at it.

Using music to label and promote a cause (as oppose to express it without wheedling or rallying your audience) is a very sell-outy/dishonest thing to do. If someone wants to use music to express thier feelings on an issue, sure that's fine, but 'rallying the troops' into a political organization using your music as a label for that idea instead of leaving your music alone as simply a piece of expression or art isn't as ok, it's compromising.

Oomph does not do that, nothing about thier music is some political beacon to appeal to anything outside of music and music alone.

Piss Me Off · 04-09-2008, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oomph!

At some point or another the band had to give permission to someone to make thier merchandise. And please don't confuse me I'm not saying Crass is corporate sell out I'm simply juxtapositioning them against Oomph to show that simply having some little trinkets of merchandice does not = selling out.

I agree but the same is true for Oomph, if thier label wants to manufacture merch so be it, but the band themselves are not compromising thier music for things like MTV, or to be in the background of commercials or to be covered by 'Kidz Bop' or to be played during American Idol or to be mass downloaded as a ringtone (.99c a piece or something) or to be put on NOW music CDs or what not.

Ok, one time Oomph let the German soccer team use one of thier songs as thier entrance theme, and they also made a song for AVP2, which was a side project, and that's the entire extent of thier music going outside of thier albums commercially. That's it.

Like its been said before, once the band have split up the label can do what they want with the image and allow merchandise to be made.

They allowed one of the songs to be used as an entrance theme for a NATIONAL football team. Thats a hell of a lot of exposure, eh? Not having a dig or anything but thats the same as letting NOW put one of their songs on their CD's, loads of people are going to hear it either way.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 04-09-2008, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oomph!

Yes they promoted 'causes' so does U2, one of the most rediculously commercial bands there is, U2 was just better at it.

Using music to label and promote a cause (as oppose to express it without wheedling or rallying your audience) is a very sell-outy/dishonest thing to do. If someone wants to use music to express thier feelings on an issue, sure that's fine, but 'rallying the troops' into a political organization using your music as a label for that idea instead of leaving your music alone as simply a piece of expression or art isn't as ok, it's compromising.

Oomph does not do that, nothing about thier music is some political beacon to appeal to anything outside of music and music alone.

Dear oh dear i'll reply to that when i've stopped laughing.

~~Oomph!~~ · 04-09-2008, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

It is exactly the point you were trying to make. You bring up some other band, also coincidentally signed to Sony (lozzles!), and point out that they have merchandize too.

No the point I was trying to make is that merchandise does not make mean a band is compromising thier music, I used RATM because I thought they generally symbolised anti-corporate leftism and all that, I didn't really know you guys didn't think that way of them so that was my only mistake, but non-the-less, you're wrong about my arguments principal.

Quote:

A: nobody mentioned RATM in the first place.

Yes they did.

Quote:

B: RATM are a load of steaming stinking horse excrement like Oomph are.

That's not even a point. I don't care about RATM I'm not a fan of thiers and I'm not familiar with them that much...

Quote:

C: all you proved is that RATM are even more of a corporate enterprise than Oomph.

Supporting leftist causes while being signed to Epic. L.M.F.A.O

Again, I'm not defending RATM.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 04-09-2008, 04:32 PM

Still laughing

~~Oomph!~~ · 04-09-2008, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piss Me Off

Like its been said before, once the band have split up the label can do what they want with the image and allow merchandise to be made.

Listen this is getting off topic and it's hair splitting, I'm not calling Crass corporate I'm saying simply having merchandice (trinkets might I add) does not make them sell outs.

Quote:

They allowed one of the songs to be used as an entrance theme for a NATIONAL football team. Thats a hell of a lot of exposure, eh? Not having a dig or anything but thats the same as letting NOW put one of their songs on their CD's, loads of people are going to hear it either way.

That doesn't mean they compromised thier music in order to get exposure or generate sales. If they are going out of thier way to sell then why are they only 'considerably popular' in thier biggest market, Germany, and in the US no one's heard of them? They have the ability to make corporate music and be just like the bands we are talking about and clearly they chose not to. These motherfuckers know how to use a synthesizer (and they are quite good at it), they could make little catchy pop rock songs if they wanted to but they don't.

What recognition they have they earned from genuine fans, in fact they deserve even more than they have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Dear oh dear i'll reply to that when i've stopped laughing.

I look forward to it.

Rainard Jalen · 04-09-2008, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oomph!

No the point I was trying to make is that merchandise does not make mean a band is compromising thier music, I used RATM because I thought they generally symbolised anti-corporate leftism and all that, I didn't really know you guys didn't think that way of them so that was my only mistake, but non-the-less, you're wrong about my arguments principal.

I know full well why you brought up RATM. Yes, they did claim to symbolize anti-corporate leftism. Which seems fairly at odds with being signed to Epic, a subsidiary of SONY RECORDS.

It's all image, mate. If you buy into it, you're a sucker. And apparently, you have. Any band signed to a major label CANNOT POSSIBLY be anti-corporate, that's about as much of a paradox as you can get. Anybody serious about being anti-corporate and against the system would be with a tiny underground label and "staying real" so to speak - or alternatively, no label at all.

Furthermore, if Oomph were with a tiny label I guarantee you would probably have never heard of them at least not prior to the myspace digital era. I'll guarantee as a certainty one thing, anyway: it may not be possible, but if you were to go down the chain of links that it took to finally reach you, you'd eventually inevitably come across somebody or something which was reached via their corporate label marketing prowess. No freakin' doubt about it.

04-09-2008, 04:32 PM	#178 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	Still laughing __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.