Biggest Sellouts Of The 70s

[Rocky4]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they all set out to make a million? Isn't that the very definition of "selling out?"

 

If all bands shot for the pop charts, we wouldn't have much good music to listen to. You can't tell me you like Crying better than Back In The Saddle. You can't like I Can't Fight This Feeling better than 157 Riverside Avenue. When It's Love better than Sinners Swing. Babe better Suite Madame Blue.

 

In most cases, it's the singer who is guilty. Speedwagons' Cronin was in and out of the band for musical direction reasons. When they hit the big time, it was Richrath that got the boot.

[milod]

Frankly I think we're talking about a number of dynamics internally and externally in given bands and I'm not certain whether "sellout" is necessarily what we're now discussing.

 

The Byrds may be almost a classic example. Started with folk-rock, Dylan and Dylanesque stuff, angled more "country folk rock" increasingly; band members changed as much in ways from interpersonal dynamics...

 

So... did they "sell out" or simply make shifts depending on the times, inclination for different music and finally implosion at least partly due to interpersonal relationships?

 

Again, until the Internet, you could "make it" and stay alive as an organization - and a band certainly is an organization - if you could keep yourself in front of a public with relatively narrow sets of choices. Now? Wow, it's a game changer and I'm not sure anybody knows how to control it to the sort of "big time band" we had in the century prior to the Web.

 

m

[WahKeen]

If all bands shot for the pop charts, we wouldn't have much good music to listen to. You can't tell me you like Crying better than Back In The Saddle. You can't like I Can't Fight This Feeling better than 157 Riverside Avenue. When It's Love better than Sinners Swing. Babe better Suite Madame Blue.

 

In most cases, it's the singer who is guilty. Speedwagons' Cronin was in and out of the band for musical direction reasons. When they hit the big time, it was Richrath that got the boot.

 

I wish Cronin would have shut his pie hole in the middle of 157 Riverside Avenue, and it would have been THE perfect boogie song. Would have been too good to be true

[Rocky4]

I wish Cronin would have shut his pie hole in the middle of 157 Riverside Avenue, and it would have been THE perfect boogie song. Would have been too good to be true

 

Try to stay awake as the host talks

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC_IYyKg0Dw&feature=related

 

[WahKeen]

I've seen that one, Rocky. That's a great one! I meant the LIVE one that we had to "live" with when Cronin ruined it, and the one Gary let loose on more than the older versions (ya know, You Get What You Play For). Yeah, that dude is like on codeine. How did he get that job? lol Nice post!

[Zonkers]

REO, Journey and Styx were pretty much the same level or rock to me, Aerosmith selling out hurt the most. VH didn't surprise me.

[brundaddy]

If all bands shot for the pop charts, we wouldn't have much good music to listen to. You can't tell me you like Crying better than Back In The Saddle. You can't like I Can't Fight This Feeling better than 157 Riverside Avenue. When It's Love better than Sinners Swing. Babe better Suite Madame Blue.

 

In most cases, it's the singer who is guilty. Speedwagons' Cronin was in and out of the band for musical direction reasons. When they hit the big time, it was Richrath that got the boot.

 

I don't really like any of the material you mention.

 

A lot of you guys love the Beatles, and they expressly set out to outsell the Brill Building and Tin Pan Alley.

 

If a band gets a major record deal, it's a bald-faced pursuit of record sales.

[jaxson50]

I don't really like any of the material you mention.

 

A lot of you guys love the Beatles, and they expressly set out to outsell the Brill Building and Tin Pan Alley.

 

If a band gets a major record deal, it's a bald-faced pursuit of record sales.

So what you are saying is, as soon as a artist or a group signs a record deal they suck....but then every rocker every band sets out make it rich!!!! But not by "selling out"..

So which would you rather be a starving blues or jazz artist who dies broke and unknown but goes out with his artistry intact?

Or would you rather be the "Next big thing"?

By the way, The Beatles stated their goal as a band was to avoid having to work for a living anf to meet a lot of girls, so they never really sold out did they?

[Jeff-7]

So what you are saying is, as soon as a artist or a group signs a record deal they suck....but then every rocker every band sets out make it rich!!!! But not by "selling out"..

So which would you rather be a starving blues or jazz artist who dies broke and unknown but goes out with his artistry intact?

Or would you rather be the "Next big thing"?

By the way, The Beatles stated their goal as a band was to avoid having to work for a living anf to meet a lot of girls, so they never really sold out did they?

Pretty much. Some people do it for the passion of making music, some do it for money, and others do it for both. It is a business after all, some get lucky and make it big without selling out, but most work hard and find the route to success by pleasing as large a group as possible.

 

Edit: And it's not all the artists fault, recording contracts give a lot of power to producers and companies to mold the music as they see fit. Very few artists have full creative rights to their work.

[dbreslauer]

i think kiss should be on that list too: one listen to "i was made for lovin' you" should drive the point home. they were desperately trying to cling to their mid 70's success, and tried just about everything...

 

but in the list, i'd have to say styx, if only for trying to sustain the success of "paradise theatre". domo arigato, mr. roboto?

 

 

 

Don

[jaxson50]

Pretty much. Some people do it for the passion of making music, some do it for money, and others do it for both. It is a business after all, some get lucky and make it big without selling out, but most work hard and find the route to success by pleasing as large a group as possible.

 

Edit: And it's not all the artists fault, recording contracts give a lot of power to producers and companies to mold the music as they see fit. Very few artists have full creative rights to their work.

How do you "make it big without selling out"? I guess Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison are examples, but how many are willing to pay the price they did to prevent selling out?

The only artist I can think of that was world famous without ever having a commercial hit is Segovia...

I think we need a clear definition as to what makes you a "sell out"...Some bands or to be more to the point, acts are what I would call a sell out right out of the blocks;

Kiss would be one of these acts...Lady Gaga is a sell out..Elton John was certainly a sell out...but I still like some of his work. And maybe Lady Gaga will actually make music someday instead of orchestrated cheer leading..

Bob Dylan was perhaps the largest Folk Music artist in the history of Folk Music. But when he decided to go electric and hired the Band he was declared a "sell out" by the Folk music community. But some of his greatest works came after that "sell out".

I don't know...just because your a success doesn't mean you have lost your artistic value, it ebbs and flows..

[cookieman15061]

Doesn't matter who you are or what line of work you do. We all make sacrifices and decisions that in effect change our path.

Plus ya gots to pay the bills and that warrants some level of success.

 

If a band simply rehashes their first album over and over (ala Boston) they are criticized about their lack of growth. If they change direction and morph into something different, they risk loosing the fans that were on board for their initial success.

 

Sorry I don't believe in the "sell out" theory. I don't even think you can define it.

 

Everyone of the bands mentioned had some level of talent and the work ethic to make it in a business (yeah that's right the MUSIC BUSINESS) that chews up and spits out most of its participants.

 

Nobody sets out to be a " starving artist". You don't wanna be a sell out? Stay home and play for grandma.

 

As for the Beatles, they wanted to be bigger than Elvis. Once they accomplished that they were free to create what they wanted and the record company couldn't say d!ck.

[Jeff-7]

How do you "make it big without selling out"? I guess Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison are examples, but how many are willing to pay the price they did to prevent selling out?

The only artist I can think of that was world famous without ever having a commercial hit is Segovia...

I think we need a clear definition as to what makes you a "sell out"...Some bands or to be more to the point, acts are what I would call a sell out right out of the blocks;

Kiss would be one of these acts...Lady Gaga is a sell out..Elton John was certainly a sell out...but I still like some of his work. And maybe Lady Gaga will actually make music someday instead of orchestrated cheer leading..

Bob Dylan was perhaps the largest Folk Music artist in the history of Folk Music. But when he decided to go electric and hired the Band he was declared a "sell out" by the Folk music community. But some of his greatest works came after that "sell out".

I don't know...just because your a success doesn't mean you have lost your artistic value, it ebbs and flows..

That's why I said it doesn't happen often Jax. A definition of selling out will vary according to who you ask, and I don't claim to know what everyone thinks. Some people go into an uproar the moment a band changes anything about their format and call them sellouts, even if all they were wanting to do was expand a fan base or grow artistically. At the end of the day artists have to provide for themselves, their families, and all the others who depend on their success for their livelihood.

[1984 Guy]

Well said! I think alot of folks love to use the 'sell out' term to justify their dislike of a certain band or genre of music. Its the easy way. Its the puss way to create a aura that you know best what real music is or isn't. And yup, its folks on forums like this that love to create that image of 'no it all-ism'. Who wants a band that puts out the same stuff everytime? You just have to take the good with the bad. Yeah, go play for gramma if you want to keep it oh so real.

 

Doesn't matter who you are or what line of work you do. We all make sacrifices and decisions that in effect change our path.

Plus ya gots to pay the bills and that warrants some level of success.

 

If a band simply rehashes their first album over and over (ala Boston) they are criticized about their lack of growth. If they change direction and morph into something different, they risk loosing the fans that were on board for their initial success.

 

Sorry I don't believe in the "sell out" theory. I don't even think you can define it.

 

Everyone of the bands mentioned had some level of talent and the work ethic to make it in a business (yeah that's right the MUSIC BUSINESS) that chews up and spits out most of its participants.

 

Nobody sets out to be a " starving artist". You don't wanna be a sell out? Stay home and play for grandma.

 

As for the Beatles, they wanted to be bigger than Elvis. Once they accomplished that they were free to create what they wanted and the record company couldn't say d!ck.

[dbreslauer]

Nobody sets out to be a " starving artist". You don't wanna be a sell out? Stay home and play for grandma.

 

+1

 

[S t e v e]

can't fight this feeling - reo speedwagon = one of my guilty plesures

 

p.s i don't hate anyone for cashing in...you gotta do what you gotta do! who cares!

[jaxson50]

That's why I said it doesn't happen often Jax. A definition of selling out will vary according to who you ask, and I don't claim to know what everyone thinks. Some people go into an uproar the moment a band changes anything about their format and call them sellouts, even if all they were wanting to do was expand a fan base or grow artistically. At the end of the day artists have to provide for themselves, their families, and all the others who depend on their success for their livelihood.

+1

[FirstMeasure]

Timbuk 3 never sold out....the really need to fix the whistley face :-"

[milod]

as for Dylan...

 

He tried to be a rocker first, don't forget that. But it took a time as a "folksinger" to get sufficient "name" to get away with the electric stuff.

 

m

[Rewddawg]

I was going to add Def Leppard, but they weren't a 70s band.

 

You can say Def Leppard. They actually were a 70's band. Their first album was called "On Through The Night" if I remember right. Then came High N Dry. It was all downhill after that.

[Daryl M]

I'd vote the DeYoung influence with Styx crossed too far into Sap Land. Tommy Shaw probably would agree.

[Big_Guitarra]

REO Speedwagon was the one that became the "sweetest" of the bubble gum Pop.

Disgusting, considering what Gary Richrath was capable of.

 

REO Speedwagon.......practically became the Bay City Rollers! sheessss,,,

[ksiegel]

The Doobie Brothers - when Michael McDonald joined, they started to suck rocks in a big way. Especially the Disco Doobies.