Where do artists obligations lie?

[Dread]

The Metallica thread has opened my eyes to the bizarro world of 'fandom', the nutty folk who grow to love a band, but hate when that same band experiments with their sound and evolves into something new.

Personally, I rate each album on its merits, rather than comparing it to other work by the same artist.

But anyway, that led me to wonder. Where should a bands obligations lie. Who should they be loyal to? What should be of the most utmost importance?

Should it be to the fans who helped them grow? If the fans are demanding more of the same, more of the same, should a band be compelled to agree?

Should it be to their own musical integrity? Doing what they feel is best, and ignoring the wants of the fanbase? Playing music that they enjoy playing?

Or something else?

Discuss.

 

[Once Dead]

The answer to this question is...

Put yourself in the position of a band starting out...what music do you make? Music that you like, of course, and nothing else...unless you want to be a huge pop star...I guess, music they like playing is what they should stay loyal to

 

[carcharias]

If bands kept making the same sounding records they would end up sounding like oh um ....the living end.........ouch!

Whom I don't mind by the way.


People seem to think writing songs is easy.

we'll it is easy to write a crap song but to write a classic is virtually impossible.

Bands "selling out" might be more a case of running out of good songs than chasing dollars.

 

[SP]

bands experiment all the time with what type of music they want to create, sometimes it works out for some, while others crash and burn

and the fans who whinge about it arent thier true fans

 

[Eskimo Sharkie]

There's a good quote from Michael Pare's character (Eddie Wilson) in Eddie and the Cruisers. They've just put together an album that is about 20 years ahead of its time and the record execs hate it because it's not what the paying public would want to hear. Eddie says, "I want something great. I want something that's never been done before!" and later on "It's all about the music".

I think you need to be in the music business because you love the creative side and enjoy pushing the boundaries. If you are there purely for the money or fame, and think that you need to put out an album every year or two years because that's what the fans want, or try to re-create one of your old "hits", I don't see that it can be sustainable. In the long run, I think that is what the fans want too.

 

[Eelementary]

That's what happened with Matchbox 20 - their first few albums were pretty good, but their latest album was a disaster.

 

[Alex28]

Artists ultimately owe the public nothing besides what we are prepared for. If they want us to pay for an album, then they produce a good album. If they want to sell tickets, they produce a good live show. Besides that, they owe us nothing.

 

[strewth_mate]

Lock a band away in a box (figuratively speaking) and they'll produce music the way they want to. Subject that music to the public and eventually the public will get bored and impatient because they have no empathy with the band. Subject the band to the public and they will more often than not adapt in their approach in order to put food on the table and try and write music for someone else. Generally speaking.

The problem with a band being accused of going stale and not producing hit singles comes from them being in the public eye in the first place and an inability to remain distanced from public opinion. If I became a famous musician, I would want to do things the way I want to, but would have a hard time explaining this to the fans.

 

[carcharias]

another reason is the old saying
You have your whole life to write your first album and about 6 months to write your second one.

I think thats why you get one hit wonders.

 

[brook]

That's what happened with Matchbox 20 - their first few albums were pretty good, but their latest album was a disaster.

no

matchbox 20 have never written a good song let alone a good album

 

[carcharias]

no

matchbox 20 have never written a good song let alone a good album

Hard to argue with that.

I don't know who sucks more .....the singer from M/box 20 or the drummer from Metallica.

 

[choc_soldier]

To themselves, for sure.

Music is about artistic expression... but it's a fine line sometimes, as they do rely on public support to sustain themselves.

Record companies play a massive role in this too. Which is why there is very much a sameness with music in the mainstream - because there is no willingness to do something different.

 

[HevyDevy]

C'mon, let' be honest here. If a band wants commercial success it MUST pander to the wants of the record label which means sticking to a very simple formula:

- Must be in 4:4
- Must be no longer than four minutes
- Must go verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus, chorus.
- Must sound the same as everything else in the charts.

It's why I never listen to the radio - all crap.

Oh and Dread, you just don't get it do you. You still believe that the Metallica thread is about 'fandom'. I'm not even a big Metallica fan. Don't own every album. But I know when I hear crap and the last three Metallica albums have lacked inspiration, talent or any qualities that make me want to hear them ever again.

That, I believe, is rating each album on its merits.

 

[carcharias]

Must be in 4:4
- Must be no longer than four minutes
- Must go verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus, chorus.
- Must sound the same as everything else in the charts.

explain Pink Floyd , Bjork, radiohead, Air .......

 

[HevyDevy]

Okay

Pink Floyd: I'm talking 2005, not 1975 - plus Floyd were an albums band rather than a singles band. Hard to do these days.

Bjork: I didn't realise shge featured so prominently in the charts ...

Radiohead: Became popular with a song that absolutely stuck to that formula - their success since has largely been built on the loyal fanbase they built from there.

Air: :lol:

 

[Misty Bee]

Bands obligations? I guess to themselves and whatever contract they have signed. By being themselves, they at least maintain integrity. A lot of the time, when bands 'sell out' is because they haven't reproduced what they did the last time. And if they did, they would cop the 'same old, same old' criticisms.

EG, Van Halen produced a great album in the early 1980's "Fair Warning". Warner Brothers ordered them back in the studio to cash in, and the band wasn't ready. So they game them 40 minutes of music including 4 covers - Pretty Woman, Where have All the Good times Gone (Kinks), Big Badd Willy (a jazz sone with Jan Van Halen on clarinet), and Happy Trails, a couple of simple rockers and SFA else.

Sales dived.

When they had a bit of time and pressure of, they gave them "1984", which sold something like 16 million copies.