What it takes...

[AfaraWayland]

great points DT!

[brandondrury]

If you believe band democracy is complete horseshit, and actually hurts the band, and decide that one person should make the final decision, you're being a douchebag.

If you really want your troops to conquer the Chech Republic, Romania, Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, France, and a big chunk of the Soviet Union you really need to be the only one making decision. Of course, Hitler ended up being the bad guy. Whadaya Gonna Do? (Tony Soprano style)


It takes self confidence to be a douchebag bag. I think every person at one point or another tries to beat out another person in one way or another. If you like a chick and another dude likes a chick, you are being a douchebag for not just letting him stick it in her.

Everytime I send out the Recordingreview.com newsletter, I'm being a douchebag thinking that what I have to say is important.

Self promotion is always a clear sign of a douchebag.

If you score a touchdown, you are being a douchebag.

If your business succeeds (and therefor someone else didn't, you are being a douchebag).

If you beat out others for the big job after college, you are a douchebag

I think it's important to not overthink this douchebag concept. If a person is a winner, they have made countless other people lose. It's how it works. A winner is a douchebag.

It's ironic that most musicians tend to be less competitive than others. The average football player will embrace competition. The average musician tends to shun away from it. Of course, music isn't a competition, but you do have to compete with other bands for gigs, fans, cd sales, etc.

One other thing, if you feel insulted because someone called you a douchebag, you are not a douchebag. You are a pussy!

Brandon

[metrio]

Is there really that much of a difference between "selling out" and "being true to your roots"? Even If you are "selling out" or whatever... aren't these still mostly your songs, being played by you? Won't it be inevitable that whoever it is you are will come through it? Unless you are under some spartan super-restrictive record deal, nobody's stopping you from recording five different versions of each song... one version sounding completely sold out, another version not so much, third version completely your own, fourth polka-style, fifth barry manilow-style. And you can play them in all these ways at your shows and see which way does better, and in which town...

[tatteredstudios]

I don't wanna be a Douchbag, I wanna be the part that gets inserted !!!!!

[DT Chris]

Originally Posted by metrio

Is there really that much of a difference between "selling out" and "being true to your roots"? Even If you are "selling out" or whatever... aren't these still mostly your songs, being played by you? Won't it be inevitable that whoever it is you are will come through it? Unless you are under some spartan super-restrictive record deal, nobody's stopping you from recording five different versions of each song... one version sounding completely sold out, another version not so much, third version completely your own, fourth polka-style, fifth barry manilow-style. And you can play them in all these ways at your shows and see which way does better, and in which town...

Exactly. If anyone says you 'sold-out' or try to put rules and boundaries on you as far as expression and creativity are concerned... tell them to fuck off.

[brandondrury]

one version sounding completely sold out, another version not so much, third version completely your own, fourth polka-style, fifth barry manilow-style.

This is a VERY interesting statement that I must have missed before. What exactly is the "sold out" version of a song? You are talking about different versions which illustrate different arrangements and different mixes with different instruments and such. How in the world do you make a song sound "sold out"? Which instrument do you use for that? I'm confused.

[metrio]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

This is a VERY interesting statement that I must have missed before. What exactly is the "sold out" version of a song? You are talking about different versions which illustrate different arrangements and different mixes with different instruments and such. How in the world do you make a song sound "sold out"? Which instrument do you use for that? I'm confused.

In this case, by sold out I mean whatever, in each particular situation, is beleived to be the most "sellable" version of a song (the one that the largest segment of the customers is going to like). It really depends on a situation. But I can give some specific examples.

A long time ago I wrote and recorded several songs in a pop-rock kind of manner. Later, I got a little tired of rock and roll, and got into Latin music. So I re-worked a few of these and added some Latin flavors to them (changed the beat, spiced up the bass lines, replaced guitar solos with trumpet solos, added accordion in one case, completely got rid of distortion on guitar). However, from the feedback I get, it seems that many people still prefer the old pop-rock versions of the songs. A dishearteningly large proportion of them, actually. However, personally, I am bored with that old style, mainly for two reasons:

1. To me it seems that although it gives music power, the distortion on guitar tends to muddy up the harmony in a song and makes it harder to express intricate harmonic flavors. Musically, I am now more interested in harmony than in power (but it seems that many people do not share this with me).
2. Personally, at this point, I am bored with pop/rock and roll rhythms (they just seem very simple and bland). Again, many listeners don't care. They still want rock-n-roll rhythms (even though I am bored with them).

In this case, a "sold out" version would be a poprock version with distortion. I am really rather bored with the poprock versions of my songs... but I suspect that I would probably please more people if I played them that way. This is a tough dilemma for me.

But like I said, it depends on each particular situation.

[brandondrury]

In this case, a "sold out" version would be a poprock version with distortion. I am really rather bored with the poprock versions of my songs...

Okay, so there is no "sell out" method of producing. Instead, you've just changed your mood and tastes. I get it.

However, if your "boredom" is the reason the old song styles are "sell out" what about other forms of discomfort? What about the sweat of playing a show in a building with no AC in August? What about the pain in the ass factor of carrying guitar amps up stairs? What about the drummer who gets a huge callous in the middle of a show? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I've just never made the connection between "artist displeasure" and selling out before and I'm wonder if this "displeasure" extends into other areas.

In this particular example, if you decided that you were bored with harmony and missed the power, you could go back to the "sell out" style and in fact, it wouldnt' be a sell out style anymore. Right?

So we are really talking about motive. I personally think that it doesn't really matter what the person intends. The guy that wrote "I Swear" (huge country and R&B hit) was a hardcore punk dude who wrote the song as a joke. That song is probably the favorite song of 3,000 people and is responsible for even more illegitimate babies. What difference does it make that the guy who wrote it didn't like it? It sounds like the singers mean it when they perform / recording it.

Food for thought.
Brandon

[metrio]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

Okay, so there is no "sell out" method of producing. Instead, you've just changed your mood and tastes. I get it.

I did not say that there is no "sell out" method of producing. I just said that there isn't that much difference between "sell out" and something else. My point was that the true nature of the musician will still come through.

Originally Posted by brandondrury

However, if your "boredom" is the reason the old song styles are "sell out" what about other forms of discomfort?

No, that's not how I look at it. My boredom is not the reason that they are considered "sell out". The reason they are "sell out" in this particular case is because more people seem to like those versions (or at least so it seems at this point), and because I feel like I have grown as a musician since I came up with those old versions, and for me to go back and play them the old way would feel a little bit like going back "to the previous level" of my development or something of the like. It might be fun. And I would do it if I got paid well. But it's not a direction into which I, as an artist, truly feel like taking my music. However, If much of the audience really prefers the old way, I'd rather keep both versions around and play both ways, depending on the mood and who I'm playing for. That's what I was talking about earlier.

Originally Posted by brandondrury

In this particular example, if you decided that you were bored with harmony and missed the power, you could go back to the "sell out" style and in fact, it wouldnt' be a sell out style anymore. Right?

I agree. It wouldn't be sellout if I truly felt like going back. But more than likely it wouldn't happen that way. It's hard to imagine going back in a completely reverse direction. More than likely, what will happen is yet another blending of influences, something new yet again.

Originally Posted by brandondrury

So we are really talking about motive. I personally think that it doesn't really matter what the person intends. The guy that wrote "I Swear" (huge country and R&B hit) was a hardcore punk dude who wrote the song as a joke. That song is probably the favorite song of 3,000 people and is responsible for even more illegitimate babies. What difference does it make that the guy who wrote it didn't like it? It sounds like the singers mean it when they perform / recording it.

I think that it would make a difference if the writer himself performed it and he truly didn't like the song the way it was anymore. My original point was that there isn't that much of a difference between selling out and not (no matter what stye you play or switch to, your creativity will still shine through). But there obviously is such a thing as selling out... that means sacrificing your creative path to please the audience. To solve this dilemma, I am all for having several versions of the songs, and for playing them all (of course, if there is a certain song that's been on the radio a certain way, and the audience presumably "expects" to hear it in the same exact style, then I'd play it like the audience wants; but there's room for play with other songs). This might actually be very good for an artist because it might clue their audience's into the artist's direction and expand their musical taste. This will increase further mutual understanding and synergy between the audience and the artist in the future.