#1
Time for another installment of Sashki's Dumb Questions.

I was reading an article about Les Paul. When asked to comment on his success not only as an inventor, but also as a musician, he said, "I play what the people want to hear".

In most industries, you need to cater to the demands of the public, but is the same true for music? It seems that if a musician only plays what the people want to hear, they are bowing down to the pressure, and compromising their own integrity.

Many of the most highly regarded musicians did not try to follow what was in demand at the time. They kept "doing their thing" until their efforts were recognised. Unfortunately, not every persistent musician's work is appreciated, but that's another story.

If a young musician had quoted Les Paul today, would he have been called a sell-out?
What is the cause of this distinction?

Discuss.
#3
If you want $$$, you gotta play what the people wanna hear. Be sure to please yourself, but its not likely you'll get money unless your own songs fall in line with an audience's musical taste. For the most part, people don't take the time of day to see a band, even if its a friend of theirs, live and with the huge amount of music being peddled online its easy to get lost amongst other artists trying to get exposure. If you wanna shake things up, stick to your guns and good luck, but be ready to whore yourself out if you wanna be making money from music
#4
"reasonable people adapt themselves to the world, unreasonable people make the world adapt to them. All progress comes from unreasonable people." - Paul Arden
You who build these altars now

To sacrifice these children
You must not do it anymore
#5
You should play whatever you want and just how you want it. Its supposed to be your way to express yourself(at least for me it is) so whats the point in playing something you dont like in the first place just to please other people and make money(assuming you dont like what these "people" want to hear.)

Theres an endless list of ground braking musicians who went against what was popular at the time and did their own thing.

Ofcourse this is all relevant if your into doing your own thing and not just making money and gettin' with hoes.
Listens to Jazz

Quote by Local666Union
each time I piss in the dark I'm afraid that some wierd plant is going to eat my dick



#6
The best artists can succeed at both.
“Just to sum up: I would do various things very quickly.” - Donald Trump
#7
Part of the art will always be in manipulating the audience, controlling the flow of energy through the crowd, and altering their mood to make them a part of their own experience with your music.

If you can't do that, you are not an artist, you are just masturbating with a guitar.
#8
Quote by the bartender
"reasonable people adapt themselves to the world, unreasonable people make the world adapt to them. All progress comes from unreasonable people." - Paul Arden

Pretty much this.

You can play what others like and make money, or you can play what you like and be successful.
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#10
You have to balance out the music you want to make with music that people will like. Too much of the latter and you make turgid boring music you don't particularly care for and it will show. Too much of the former and you end up barely making enough to live on whilst you tour local art centers playing micro-tonal minimalist jazz to 5 people.
OUT OF ORDER
#11
If you want to make bank, you should sell out and write what you know people want to hear.

If you want to enjoy what you do, you will write the type of music that you love.

Simple as that.
#12
This.

I've notice the most famous bands seem to be those who play mainstream stuff like pop or reggae as opposed to something like heavy metal. Of course imo,they will be forgotten about in 10 years or so. Like how Barry manilow went up American Idol and his album went back to number one. Because there is so much good music out there that gets forgotten about because it doesn't sell a product. Just listen to any mainstream song and listen to references to stuff like pimple cream.
#13
Quote by PowerOfGlove
where are all the good threads!?!?

Why don't you make one?
___

Quote by The_Blode
she was saying things like... do you want to netflix and chill but just the chill part...too bad she'll never know that I only like the Netflix part...
#14
Quote by sashki
Time for another installment of Sashki's Dumb Questions.

I was reading an article about Les Paul. When asked to comment on his success not only as an inventor, but also as a musician, he said, "I play what the people want to hear".

In most industries, you need to cater to the demands of the public, but is the same true for music? It seems that if a musician only plays what the people want to hear, they are bowing down to the pressure, and compromising their own integrity.

Many of the most highly regarded musicians did not try to follow what was in demand at the time. They kept "doing their thing" until their efforts were recognised. Unfortunately, not every persistent musician's work is appreciated, but that's another story.

If a young musician had quoted Les Paul today, would he have been called a sell-out?
What is the cause of this distinction?

Discuss.


people have trouble realizing there are so many different facets of music. just like anything. there's music for education. there's music for entertainment. there's music for advertising. there's music for environment. there's music for art. people make the mistake of assuming that 1) it's all art or 2) that anything not intended to be art is somehow lesser.

i used to be in a band called the highlight reel. our mission statement from the beginning was to have fun and be fun. people had a blast at our shows. but we had no delusions. we didn't think we were making some artistic statement. we were just making fun music for people to dance to and sing along with. you may perceive that to be selling out; i perceive it as providing a service. people always came up and told us how much fun our shows were and how they hadn't danced at a show in years. because all the other bands around at the time just took themselves so damn seriously with their hipster "art" music.

look at reel big fish. they're not making art. people call them sell-outs. they don't care though. that's not what they're about. they're just about having fun, making fun music and providing a fun environment. musicians need to stop taking themselves so seriously. some people are definitely geared towards an artistic vision of music. yes. and good for them, we need that. but we can't just blacklist anything that wasn't made according to some artistic paradigm-shifting musical exploration blah blah blah. music exists for many reasons, but universally and historically the two biggest reasons have been for religious purposes and for dancing/entertainment. sure, there is protest music and art music. but if you look at the trends of music in america (or anywhere in any period), what was popular was what made the people dance. why did jazz fade away? because swing gave way to bebop which was art music. why did rock give way to hip hop? because the evolution of rock became such that hip hop was better to dance to. how can ANYONE explain disco except for that it was something people good dance and have a good time to.

we need to embrace musical diversity, not condemn it. music for entertainment is just as important culturally as music for art. besides, who's to say the two are mutually exclusive? louis armstrong was a great showman AND a kick ass musician. i just saw lou donaldson a few weeks ago. same for him. retardedly good. and at 85 still cracking jokes and telling funny stories over 12 bar blues.
#DTWD
Last edited by primusfan at Mar 6, 2012,
#15
Quote by primusfan
*big 'ol post*

this.

I always find myself agreeing with you.
___

Quote by The_Blode
she was saying things like... do you want to netflix and chill but just the chill part...too bad she'll never know that I only like the Netflix part...