Comments on: Soul Doubt http://www.meandthestereo.com/2009/08/06/soul-doubt/ Lifestyle and Music Tue, 17 Nov 2009 03:57:50 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: meandthestereo http://www.meandthestereo.com/2009/08/06/soul-doubt/comment-page-1/#comment-32 meandthestereo Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:04:22 +0000 http://meandthestereo.wordpress.com/?p=412#comment-32 The difference between a major life change in someone's life, i.e. changing jobs, moving to a new city, birth of a child, loss of a loved one, and the life change involved in having mainstream success are too different. Isolation, constant touring, interviews, photo shoots, video shoots, recording; this is the life of a popular musician, no working man or woman can truly relate to that. And you're right, that type of lifestyle has its own issues, and song writers can always write stories or use memories, but I don't believe it could ever be the same as when they were in that moment. I think that stands for all musicians. I believe there comes a time where you just can't write a good sad song, because you're way too happy in life, or can't make a pop hit because you're far too angry. You may say that shouldn't stop someone from writing songs about things like that, and you're right, they shouldn't, but the connection between song and audience will not be as strong. I do think bands attempt to sell out for a larger audience, I was not trying to say they sold out because people listened to them. Selling out is always something a band does. But selling out is also something a fan feels, regardless of whether or not the musician is responsible. That was what I was trying to convey with this post. "why are we, as fans, concerned about something we didn’t make being used as a product to raise money we don’t deserve?" The difference between a major life change in someone’s life, i.e. changing jobs, moving to a new city, birth of a child, loss of a loved one, and the life change involved in having mainstream success are too different. Isolation, constant touring, interviews, photo shoots, video shoots, recording; this is the life of a popular musician, no working man or woman can truly relate to that. And you’re right, that type of lifestyle has its own issues, and song writers can always write stories or use memories, but I don’t believe it could ever be the same as when they were in that moment. I think that stands for all musicians. I believe there comes a time where you just can’t write a good sad song, because you’re way too happy in life, or can’t make a pop hit because you’re far too angry. You may say that shouldn’t stop someone from writing songs about things like that, and you’re right, they shouldn’t, but the connection between song and audience will not be as strong.

I do think bands attempt to sell out for a larger audience, I was not trying to say they sold out because people listened to them. Selling out is always something a band does. But selling out is also something a fan feels, regardless of whether or not the musician is responsible. That was what I was trying to convey with this post.

“why are we, as fans, concerned about something we didn’t make being used as a product to raise money we don’t deserve?”

]]> By: Neto http://www.meandthestereo.com/2009/08/06/soul-doubt/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Neto Thu, 06 Aug 2009 21:56:44 +0000 http://meandthestereo.wordpress.com/?p=412#comment-31 While its true that the new experiences that come with being a popular band could change the meaning of their music, the same could be said for any major life change. Sure it may be a little hypocritical to try and write songs about the problems of the common man when they don't have the same problems but who's to say that that they can't remember these problems and write about them? Would you have all writers stop writing songs, books, films about teenagers once they turn 20? And its unfair to say that a band could sell out just because others found them. They have little control over how many people decide to listen to them. I prefer to think of selling out as something that a band does and not something that is thrust upon them. While its true that the new experiences that come with being a popular band could change the meaning of their music, the same could be said for any major life change. Sure it may be a little hypocritical to try and write songs about the problems of the common man when they don’t have the same problems but who’s to say that that they can’t remember these problems and write about them? Would you have all writers stop writing songs, books, films about teenagers once they turn 20?

And its unfair to say that a band could sell out just because others found them. They have little control over how many people decide to listen to them. I prefer to think of selling out as something that a band does and not something that is thrust upon them.

]]> By: meandthestereo http://www.meandthestereo.com/2009/08/06/soul-doubt/comment-page-1/#comment-30 meandthestereo Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:09:01 +0000 http://meandthestereo.wordpress.com/?p=412#comment-30 I am claiming that being a sell out may rest in other issues, ones which delve deeper than the on-the-surface issues of selling out. I agree, that just signing with a major label is not grounds for disowning a band. However, musicians know what follows behind striving for a larger audience. Get that audience, and you get yourself a completely different world. I believe that this completely changes a band or musician, and that fans recognize this. Bands like AM! and Weezer and Bright Eyes embodied a band that could be really good, but just comprised of normal people who have issues like we all do. They won't be able to connect the same way now that their audience has expanded, the tours have gotten larger, and the money has started to roll in. They may have similar issues to sing about, but they're not experiencing what the standard American could be experiencing anymore, and just knowing that makes their ability to speak to the audience so much more difficult. I believe that even if the words and actions don't contradict, lifestyle vs. words and actions does contradict. I think listeners are affected by that. I am claiming that being a sell out may rest in other issues, ones which delve deeper than the on-the-surface issues of selling out. I agree, that just signing with a major label is not grounds for disowning a band. However, musicians know what follows behind striving for a larger audience. Get that audience, and you get yourself a completely different world. I believe that this completely changes a band or musician, and that fans recognize this. Bands like AM! and Weezer and Bright Eyes embodied a band that could be really good, but just comprised of normal people who have issues like we all do. They won’t be able to connect the same way now that their audience has expanded, the tours have gotten larger, and the money has started to roll in. They may have similar issues to sing about, but they’re not experiencing what the standard American could be experiencing anymore, and just knowing that makes their ability to speak to the audience so much more difficult. I believe that even if the words and actions don’t contradict, lifestyle vs. words and actions does contradict. I think listeners are affected by that.

]]> By: Neto http://www.meandthestereo.com/2009/08/06/soul-doubt/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Neto Thu, 06 Aug 2009 18:16:17 +0000 http://meandthestereo.wordpress.com/?p=412#comment-29 The concept of selling out is a difficult one. I would define it more clearly as "Compromising your music or your fans for the sake of money or treating your music as a commodity rather than as art." This extends from the axiom that art is shared, commodities are sold so when, say, Metallica starts a crusade against a piece of technology that seeks to make it easier for people to listen to their music, it is easy to see how that can be seen as selling out. But I think, sometimes, change can be seen as selling out. If a band signs with a label that is better able to promote their music, that may not be selling out. What band doesn't want their music to be heard by more people? But if said band wants to be promoted more only to rake in the monies, that is selling out. It's a fine line that may be hard to judge. One can only look at a band's words and actions to see if they contradict... or you could just forget about it and enjoy the music. The concept of selling out is a difficult one. I would define it more clearly as “Compromising your music or your fans for the sake of money or treating your music as a commodity rather than as art.” This extends from the axiom that art is shared, commodities are sold so when, say, Metallica starts a crusade against a piece of technology that seeks to make it easier for people to listen to their music, it is easy to see how that can be seen as selling out. But I think, sometimes, change can be seen as selling out. If a band signs with a label that is better able to promote their music, that may not be selling out. What band doesn’t want their music to be heard by more people? But if said band wants to be promoted more only to rake in the monies, that is selling out. It’s a fine line that may be hard to judge. One can only look at a band’s words and actions to see if they contradict… or you could just forget about it and enjoy the music.

]]>