Now,what I mean by that,is to suggest there are many ways forward...some people get respect due to their musical prowess,some by their song writing skills,some people aspire to their selected musical style,without making an effort.
What I would like debated would be....
Who here thinks that the best way forward is to...
1. Sell yer soul for(any kind of music)Rock n' Roll,may that mean to take any musical style,play with it a bit(ie. modernise),with the general vibe of being accepted by the mainstream.
2. Put forth your music because it comes from the heart,ie. because you're passionate about it.
3. Do it because you love it(musically) and it makes you happy.
In doing steps two and three one unwittingly sells ones soul anyway along with anything else that will make money so that one can buy their ultimate guitar and amp combo. Is that not what its all about? "Working" in a band to BEG FOR, STEAL, BORROW and 'EARN' money to buy new gear?
Tried route 1 with the last foamboy album, too pop for the indie kids and not pop enough for the pop kids, so decided to just do whatever I want to do and it's had better results with Cruz and I'm hopeful Team Horse will get a look in too.
Still having a blast after oh, 16 years of trying! :lol:
If I don't like the music I'm making, I stop. Then i try to make music I like.
You can't second guess whether or not anyone else likes it, although it is a gratifying surprise when someone does. As for money? I'm too old and ugly to ever think I have a shot at 'making it' at this stage.
It is amazing what some bands will go through in order to get 'exposure'. I was watching Nut TV whilst inebriated the other night and was amazed that the presenters couldn't even remember the bands name (I can't even remember it now but they are featured in NME quite a lot), not just throughout the interview but throughout the entire show. They didn't call them by name but by what clothes they were wearing;
"Guy in red sweatshirt, have your balls dropped?" or something along that line. The dozy kids in the band didn't seem to notice.
I'm all for successful 'older bands' who have a tad more respect for themselves and the music that they play.
Up the 2s and 3s because music means nothing to the artist unless they still respect their own integrity!
Well I don't look my age and will feasibly pass for 23. Hence the distinct lack of press shots :wink:
No really, it depends on how you quantify the big time. There are lots of great artists doing their thing and getting good recognition for their music and it matters not a jot what they look like as the fan base doesn't care.
I have made music now in one form or another for goin on 20 years.
I've done the band thing a few times in all kinds of bands. I like playing in bands. I like playing gigs. I like playing in my garage, recording for fun etc. I've done the commercial record thing a little. Been told "more of this, less of that - the kids will love it". If I want to be a whore I'll stick some lippy on and go down the albert clock and sell some good honest sex.
I will no doubt continue to make music till I die, as it is part of who I am and what defines me. Like drinking good beer and loving my kids.
I love making music. Playing. Writing. Doing it for *me*. It is a selfish act for the most part.
There is no way forward. This is it.
I think it makes a big difference that I like my job and am for the most part fulfilled in what I do. I get the opportunity to be creative and make an impact. I've been in bands with guys who nearly "made it" in the past - "I'm 34 you know, if I don't make it soon there's no chance"... I didn't share their desperation. Guess I didn't want "it" as much as they did.
I'm with Anto on this (As if I wouldn't be :wink: )
But 2. and 3. are the only way forward for any band that stay together and actually have "a Career".
Let me give you an example.
One of the best bands in history as far as I'm concerned. They battered on with 2. & 3. throughout their "commercially unsuccessful" early years and refused to change and adapt 1.
They waited until the "scene' came to them and were rewarded with commercial success eventually.
But in regard 2. & 3. they were always successful. I remember listening to the John Peel show when he first played them, and I remember my heart filling with pride when Disco 2000 was blasting out of every radio in the summer of 1996.
Compare this to the career of Oasis.
They embraced 1. wholeheartedly, and although I wouldn't argue they didn't have a bit of 2. & 3. they were certainly were more 1. than 2. & 3.
And that's why they ended up so ridiculous by the year 2000 and have disappeared up their own asses since while trying to cling on to 2. & 3.
If you enjoy something, you're passionate about it, and you want to keep on doing it.
If, however, you keep on doing it [i:cc7fbd6367]because[/i:cc7fbd6367] you're passionate about it, it smecks of "yeah, like man, these are, like, issues, and we're like, passionate about them, and we therefore feel the need to pontificate about them to a mass audience, because we're so like, passionate about it."
If "passionate" means you just love it, then 2 and 3 are the same. If "passionate" means the above, then it's a lot of ballix, we don't want to hear what, like, issues you're, like, passionate about. Save that for the priesthood, your lectures on political science, or your mates in the bar.
In short, I think you should only make music because you love the tunes, and the way the words fit the tunes......I think pretty much all attempts at, like, getting a message across, man, are balls, because it's just music. It doesn't qualify you to tell us all about, like, important issues, man. you're just some p[b:cc7fbd6367][/b:cc7fbd6367]rick with a guitar. If you want to get a message across, away and write a dissertation, or run for public office.
and I don't think 2 really fits Pulp, as Raymie suggested. They kept at it for years, just because it's the kind of music they loved, and wanted to do. They obviously weren't "passionate" about it, where "passionate" means anything more than just loving it. They didn't assume that it was such an important thing to be passionate about that they should spread that passion to a mass audience....they just kkept doing the kind of gear they wanted to do.
Again, if passionate just means "loving the kind of gear you're doing", then 2 and 3 are identical
Jesus marty you're turning in to an awful f*cking oul moanbag this weather.
All this gear: you should be like this, but not like this, cause this is class, but this here isn't cause it's a bit like this other gear which isn't class. Passion has to mean this, but not this and all.
My thinking is, if it's in ye, get it out of ye, whatever way you want. If your putting out what's not in ya, then it's balls, if it's in ya and you're not letting it out then that's balls too.
If it's in ye, get it out ye, theso's we can all see what it is. :-D
All I'm saying is, sometimes it's in ye, and ye get it out ye, which is good. that's the way to do it.
But sometimes what ye had in ye is a load of ballbeg, so maybe you should have kept it in. Surely that applies sometimes.. I mean, in principle, yes, get it out ye. But surely sometimes ye think, "f[b:f05500393f][/b:f05500393f]uck, i wish he hadn't bothered getting it out him, for it wasn't worth it. Keep it in ye!"
i mean, everybody should get out what's in them, but then ye're gonna end up with a lot of balls, because that's what's in a lot of people.
But no, in principle, i do agree.
And I'm not an oul moan, it's my last day in work, and I've f[b:f05500393f][/b:f05500393f]uck all to do. :-D
Fire it up ye, stick it in ye, fling it down ye, then wing it out ye :-D
[quote:f05500393f]I like all the mad oul balls that's in people[/quote:f05500393f]
This is where we disagree......I like the odd bit of mad balls that's in people, but it's got beyond a joke where every mad ball has to get shared with everybody else. What's the word - "mutual validation" probably.
I'm not that interested in every mad ball belonging to all and sundry, and neither am I interested in sharing my own mad balls, except with that special someone :-D
This idea that we all have to share all of our mad balls to makes ourselves feel better about the balls of our own, seems a bit desperate, needy, and weak. :-D
Yes Pulp are absolutely brilliant. I particularly like Death Goes To The Disco.
Now, I really am off to get blockoed here, it's Friday aft. Carry on ball sharing
I'm just back in the house after driving around bellowing along to Pulp's [b:ec1aab3f95]His and Hers[/b:ec1aab3f95] and [b:ec1aab3f95]Different Class[/b:ec1aab3f95]. I was nearly weeping with excitement when [i:ec1aab3f95]F.E.E.L.I.N.G.C.A.L.L.E.D.L.O.V.E.[/i:ec1aab3f95] started playing. I think I want it played at my wedding, just to confuse people.
Definitely the best British band of the 90s, Radiohead notwithstanding (since they were, like, the best band in the world. Evaar).
I like all the mad oul balls that's in people. And only some people will think it's balls regardless, cause a lot of people have the same load of balls in them and they see some other eejit getting it out of them and go, "F*ck he's full of the same balls I am, sound"
That's what it's about in my book. People sharing their balls. Who's with me for a balls-sharing session?
I'd go for 3 (I think),
I write because I can't help it, it's something I have to do I can't help myself.
I write what I write, what has come to me, what I find hooks me and pulls me in. Then We (Darwy) start to play it and that's when it becomes us.
I have no concept of what "style" of music we are (and I like that), people have said to us
"stick to this or that style",
"just pick a style of music",
"you're all over the place",
But we like it and we do what we do.
It makes US happy, and in the bigger picture, if you hear one of our songs and like like it, you might come back for more, on the other hand if you hear one and don't, you might wash us off as crap. (but hey we don't need that kind of closed mindedness anyway)
I don't see a problem with any of the methods, just depends on the artist.
1. Sell yer soul for(any kind of music)Rock n' Roll,may that mean to take any musical style,play with it a bit(ie. modernise),with the general vibe of being accepted by the mainstream.[/quote:7fe899ec68]
IF you get signed, sell lots of albums, play lots of gigs and thats what you get off on, thats great. I've read a lot of posts where people are moaning about producers etc 'popping' up songs and commercialising music. So what, 99% of the general public get off on it and isn't a producer just another piece of artistic vision for your songs who can spot mistakes or point out bits you have overlooked?
[quote:7fe899ec68="Ooopsapocalypse"]2. Put forth your music because it comes from the heart,ie. because you're passionate about it.[/quote:7fe899ec68]
Doesn't all music come from the heart? To go through the process of writing, recording, producing, releasing and promoting a song takes passion. And even if the guys who write for popstars make millions (or not so many millions these days) they still must have heart, passion and a hell of a lot of musical knowledge and experience.
[quote:7fe899ec68="Ooopsapocalypse"]3. Do it because you love it(musically) and it makes you happy.
More or less the same as the above point, but the music business is so hard to make a living out of. And I think music must make anyone in the music industry happy and they must love it or else they would be out of it so fast.
Personally, 3 is the ideal method for me but I'd take 1 or 2 if the opportunity came along. I doubt anyone one this forum would give up a record deal with a major even if the label wanted them to 'sell out' sure beats a normal job.