Is Nickleback that bad? The nature of selling out

[Bells]

So, here is a thing... a lot of people tell me that Nickleback is a bad, bad, bad band... like, terrible songs, no talent, no voice...

Yeah, i see that. Ok. I saw the side-by-side comparison and hwo they recycle their own songs from time to time... i have to wonder that they are not really the only ones to do it, but most likely one of the few to do it poorly or get caught doing it.

And yet... they have songs i like. "Someday"? I like that song... some of their singles? I can dig it. Like, i'm not music expert, so i can't really tell "Oh this beat is so poorly designed" most of the time i either dig the lyrics or i just tune the lyrics out and run the beat in my head.

Or when i'm writing, quite often i use music as a mood setter, so it's actually pretty easy for me to design scenes and set pieces that play out on the pace and beat of a certain song...

But this is not just about Nickleback. I just thought to bring them upfront cause i just know they WILL get mentioned... There is also Linkin Park to talk about.

Again, i can usually find 1 or 2 songs in every linkin park album that i like. Like, "listen multiple times" like. I also completely understand that they are 100% a Studio band. Their music is mostly digital ,it only exists in an editing room. Most of their Live stuff is waaaaaaaay below any margin of good they have.

But one thing i never saw them as was Sell outs. Totally honest about this. Here is why... you see, for me, a sell out is the band that makes a video clip of a new hot single with the sole purpose to display that new Motorolla phone that has nothing to do with the song, but Motorolla wants to pay for the video so they can show the phone in it, so people do it. And that's fine.

To be honest, even that i don't really have a problem with... i mean, fuck it! Just do it... a huge company wants to give you hundreds of thousands of dollars just so you can market yourself more and show up holding a new phone for a few seconds? Yeah... no brainer.

But on Linkin Park for instance, they recently did a song for Medal of Honor Warfighter, "Castle of Glass". Now... if i just take the song, completely detached from the fact that is next to a shitty game... i like the song, i even like the clip. I like the lyrics, i like the beat i like the build up... i enjoy that song and i thought the clip was quite nice.

But of course, to the eyes of many, that was just Linkin park selling out... but is it really? That's a band that has a known history of interacting with games and midia cause the members of the band really like that stuff.... hell, they have their own Limited Edition Gundam Model Kit cause their song "Catalyst" was the opening theme of an Gundam Arcade Fighting game! And they displayed the Wing Gundam on at least one of their earlier clips... cause some of the members of the band actually like that stuff, and are fans...

I see it similarly with something like Medal of Honor, i mean... why shouldn't they? If they are gamers, if they like games, if they like Medal of Honor, why would they refuse the opportunity to be a part of it? Make a song for it, a video... it's corporate marketing, OF COURSE. For both sides... but is it really "Selling Out"? Is there any rule that a singer or performer is not allowed to get involved with things they personally enjoy?

So, just some food for thought i guess... what really is the nature of a band "Selling Out"? What does that even mean today? I Mean, it's a new world and a new marketing world and bands need to make money or a name somehow... using tools that weren't around 10 yeas ago.

So what really is Selling out? Who actually does that today?

Also, feel free to shit on Nickleback

[Shyria Dracnoir]

People in creative industries such as music, film and games are constantly fighting to balance what they want to do and what actually makes money, and it's a rare case where an artist is able to do both. If an artist wants to associate themselves with a commercial project because they genuinely enjoy it, that's their right. Likewise, I don't wholly fault artists who take certain jobs to make bank; they need to eat and that project may still turn out entertaining one way or another (see any piece of So Bad it's Good media).

As a result, I think properly "selling out" if you can call it that involves a certain degree of hypocrisy or a specific portrayal of previously established traits and values that cannot be attributed to a natural evolution of technique or interests over time. A true sell-out resembles a petitioner of Hell's Vestibule in Dante's Inferno: someone with zero agency of their own who changes commitments based on what's most advantageous at the time. (See Mitt Romney's 2012 Presidental campaign)

[Aerozord]

Nature of music, or art in general, is pushing cultural boundaries. That is the very reason art is supported by society, it causes it to grow and evolve. But for the purposes of making money that means the more artsy you are the less popular. Look at all the top ten songs from 60's and 70's. Chances are 9 out of 10 you have never heard of and the one you have heard probably isn't at the top. Good and popular are rarely the same thing. Dont blame musicians for trying to make a living blame our culture for being so closed minded that 90% of all our songs are about the same thing. Seriously look at modern pop songs and try to find 5 that aren't about relationships. You will be there for awhile.

Ultimately I look at it like this, you can worry about your artistic integrity when you aren't boiling your shoes for supper.

Not every band can be They Might Be Giants

[CABAL49]

Nickleback is what rednecks listen to Bells. Maybe it is just personal bias, but I have been around way too many drunken rednecks who listen to Nickleback, and find the band distasteful. And Rednecks are never the fun drunks.

[Seil]

tl;dr

But yeah, I don't get the Nickleback hate, either. Yeah, they're not the greatest band in the world, but they've got a few good songs.

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Honestly a lot of the hate is because they are popular, and their songs use to be played on the radio a little too often.

[Nikose Tyris]

I like Nickelback.

Therefore it's awful.

[Bum Bill Bee]

The Drumbeat carries on is the only Nickleback song I could stand to listen to more than once.

But Lips of an Angel and Rockstars were my absolute least favorite.

Maybe I listen to a song's message too much?

[Bells]

for me is someday

-VMFdpdDYYA

I just like the tune, i can even sing along with it, good for a walk or a tedious bus ride.

[Ryong]

Nickleback is what rednecks listen to Bells. Maybe it is just personal bias, but I have been around way too many drunken rednecks who listen to Nickleback, and find the band distasteful. And Rednecks are never the fun drunks.

So you don't like it because rednecks like it? Are you scared people will say you're one?

[Flarecobra]

What's wrong with being a redneck?

[CABAL49]

Is there anything right about being a drunken degenerate?

[Flarecobra]

Not all rednecks are drunken degenerates.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Literally everything I associate with the term redneck is negative- what positive connotations does it have

[Flarecobra]

I consider myself a bit of one.

[tacticslion]

I like Nickelback.

Therefore it's awful.

I have to say Nik, that if you like something, I, at least, am more likely to give it a second chance, and presume it may not be awful. Whether or not I like said thing has no bearing on whether or not said thing is objectively awful. (Unless I'm engaging in conversation with certain people or on certain topics on this forum.)

(P.S. Sorry for ruining the joke, I just felt I needed to mention that you're pretty cool, and I respect you.)

Similar to what Shyria noted, I'll just elaborate by saying this: "Selling Out" in music terms is what happens when a band makes a big deal about being one thing, but ultimately literally accepts money to betray said ideals. I'm not saying that a band should be ideological champions, or anything, but an example would be that if a band constantly talks about bucking the system, rebelling against the man, and being the puppet of no one, but then signs up with a big record company and ceases to have any personal creative input. There is nothing wrong with them getting a paycheck, but the impression and image they're attempting to cultivate is suddenly very undermined by the fact that they literally have masters - the big record company that pays them and controls what they put out - and are subject to someone else's whims. In other words, as Shyria said more succinctly, hypocrisy.

That said, taking your definition of selling out - accepting a (hopefully) regular paycheck from said company in order to create stuff for them - isn't automatically a Bad Thing. It is simply the thing they do to survive. Food and shelter is a very necessary thing, after all, and there's nothing wrong with also desiring creature comforts (because, you know, such things are pleasant).

It's when a band (or any artist, or even anyone at all, really) attempt to cultivate an image, message, ideology, or other strong presence yet will literally "sell out" the thing that they've represented or that represents them in order to acquire money that there starts to be an unpleasant dissonance or disconnect between what they say or appear and what they do in reality.

Again, I'm not accusing record companies, big or small, of being evil monomaniacal organizations bent on world conquest, but large amounts of money causing someone to abandon what they once seemed to hold dear (and thus attracted many of their "current" fans) naturally leaves a sour taste in the mouth of many of those who enjoyed them prior to the "Sell Out" (whether or not said Sell Out is justified). Selling Out can even be a good thing: if the artists in question were all for a bad thing, but were talented, and then "Sold Out" and thus channeled into a non-bad thing, that's a net gain for the world. It would still understandably feel like a betrayal to their fans who loved the idea of the bad thing they once seemingly championed, but over all it would be a good change or "Sell Out".

That... doesn't seem to be the most common thing that happens, though.

I do think that too many people are too quick to point a finger at something and decry as "Sell Out" what is merely "Make money to survive and continue the lifestyle to which we're accustomed... possibly to do something fun and/or even different for us at the same time." which are quite different.

EDIT:
Guys, get off the "Red Necks". It's not on-topic, and the term has lost any real semblance of meaning across cultural boundaries: some associate it with themselves in a positive light, others mean it as a slur against a people group that they don't know or understand, but find it convenient to attach a label upon so that they can hate without just cause. Others have poor experiences with said people group, and thus attach a readily-available slur-label and presume all who are identified (self or otherwise) as such fall into the same category as they've seen or experienced. It's roughly akin to saying "Everyone from Britain is stupid." or "All New Yorkers are stuck-up arrogant jerks who hate humanity." or "Man, I hate those dumb, obviously-inbred, entirely-evil US Citizens who live in the Southern States (exempting certain parts of Florida or some larger cities) descended from mostly European ancestry." ... in other words, fallacious reasoning.

Is it a joke? Sure. But to seriously presume that an entire people-group falls into a neatly organized category like that isn't really well done. It's a trope and a stereotype for a reason, yes. But all tropes and stereotypes exist for a reason, and that's reason is rarely "Because everyone fits into the negative mental image I have for them." In other words, its a caricature: a false image conjured for the purpose of a humorous broad-spectrum characterization. The problem is, like all caricatures, it's taken on a life of its own and people presume its real.

These boards tend to be very pro-tolerance in many cases, but in specific, strange instances very intolerant.

Anyway, I'll likely get in trouble for backseat modding. Sorry mods. I'll likely disappear from the boards again for a while, soon, so... eh.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

That doesn't answer the question.

[Bells]

So... every single rapper in the last 20 years is a sell out?

Also i don't see it as much as just focused on "for survival" cause quite frankly any band that gets a Motorola or Eletronic Arts deal is hardly starving. But, like in the Linkin Park thing... if the band actually likes that stuff, why not merge business and pleasure y'know?

[Premmy]

Literally everything I associate with the term redneck is negative- what positive connotations does it have

Redneck is a slur/Stereotype. Some people are attempting to "reclaim" the term.
The idea being a economically disadvantaged group from a certain environment embracing the culture that has developed around their lifestyle. Associating themselves with a term used to describe them by outsiders in an act of defiance and solidarity.

Previous examples of such behavior (I.e. "Nigger/Nigga" "queer" "gay") aren't quite the same as they aren't "reclaiming" slurs so much as acknowledging the social dynamics of improper nouns that have fallen out of fashion within the larger culture(despite/because the social dynamics of such still existing). It's close, though.
Literally everything I associate with the term redneck is negative- what positive connotations does it have
Let's break down the word... (http://www.anyclip.com/movies/wild-wild-west/west-hanging/#!quotes/)

RE: Selling Out: The Black Eyed Peas. Bought a Pretty White Girl to sing pop, Got rid of their(more pretty) brown Soul singer Girl and stopped being a hip-hop group to get rich. That is what selling out looks like.

[CABAL49]

I consider myself a bit of one.

You live in Florida. You cannot be one. Florida is not considered to be culturally part of the "South." Florida is culturally different from Virginia or Georgia. But there is a difference between being a Southerner and being a redneck. I am a Southerner. Reclaiming redneck is like reclaiming douchebag. But I was asked my impression of Nickleback and I gave it. I don't want to hurt Bell's feelings by derailing the thread further.

[Lumenskir]

You live in Florida. You cannot be one. Florida is not considered to be culturally part of the "South."
Hmm, what I'm reading here is that you've never been to the panhandle.
RE: Selling Out: The Black Eyed Peas.
Will.I.Am is like musical cancer. I remember reading a profile on him where he bragged about bringing spreadsheets and projections to meetings with the recording company to demonstrate how much they would sell. Fergy just seems like a tool to further that. I do feel bad for the Other One and the Other Other One.

[Bells]

I don't want to hurt Bell's feelings by derailing the thread further.

:ohdear:

How the hell did we wind up like this? Why weren´t we able To see the signs that we missed and tried to turn the tables?

I wish you´d unclench your fists and unpack your suitcase, Lately there´s been too much of this, but don´t think it´s too late. Nothin´s wrong just as long as you know that someday I will...

Someday, somehow I´m gonna make it alright, but not right now. I know you´re wondering when.

(You´re the only one who knows that)

[tacticslion]

Premmy: you're awesome. Well done doing everything I failed at briefly and succinctly.

Bells: Using Nickelback to respond to a Nickelback hater. Nice.

So... every single rapper in the last 20 years is a sell out?

Also i don't see it as much as just focused on "for survival" cause quite frankly any band that gets a Motorola or Eletronic Arts deal is hardly starving. But, like in the Linkin Park thing... if the band actually likes that stuff, why not merge business and pleasure y'know?

While I admit I'm guilty of using the term "for survival", I did also mention,

Food and shelter is a very necessary thing, after all, and there's nothing wrong with also desiring creature comforts (because, you know, such things are pleasant).

Mostly the "problem" with selling out is when someone tells you they feel/exist/represent/behave/believe/etc one way, and you empathize with that and enjoy based on that notion, but then they spin around and behave in a way that is contrary to the way they told you earlier. That causes a feeling of betrayal. Whether they owed you anything or not... well, that's... kind of iffy. You did pay them money, after all, to get what you wanted. I'd tend to say "no", as in, they don't owe you, in particular, but at the same time creating such a bond (willingly forking over cash actually creates a strange psychological emotional connection with the person or object for which you're forking over cash) and then severing it can still be understandably painful to those who've been severed and didn't get anything out of it.

Effectively (as money is presumtively representative of our time, work, and mental energy), you've worked hard in order to continue enjoying a particular artists work, but that avenue of escape, that bond that you forged over a shared passion, has now been severed, at least emotionally. Betrayal is a natural emotional response.

Again, this makes no judgement call about whether or not "Selling Out" is a bad thing. It does make justifiable emotional sense that someone would feel betrayed, however.

Also, I didn't mention anything involving whether or not someone could do something because they love a particular medium or idea. Really, there's nothing wrong with that at all. That still might cause dissonance when fans realize that the stars they've idolized (a problem on the part of fans) are actually people with desires and tastes that differ from their own. And it looks especially egregious if they do such a thing "for money". Still doesn't make it wrong, but it is where emotional turmoil semi-understandably comes from. Not necessarily correct, but understandable, at least.

[Flarecobra]

You live in Florida. You cannot be one. Florida is not considered to be culturally part of the "South." Florida is culturally different from Virginia or Georgia. But there is a difference between being a Southerner and being a redneck. I am a Southerner. Reclaiming redneck is like reclaiming douchebag. But I was asked my impression of Nickleback and I gave it. I don't want to hurt Bell's feelings by derailing the thread further.

Three words: Swamp. Buggy. Races.

[Nique]

1) Nickelback is a if not the primary example of a band's succuess hinging on them leveraging the popularity of the grunge sound and there are a ton of post grunge bands and it is a terrible sound.


2) Flordia is totally the south.

[Magus]

People only comment on their badness because they are also perversely popular. It's like when people talk about how shitty Madonna or Cher is--sure there are numerous similar artists equally bad but why bother bringing THEM up?

They also go back and forth between saccharine love songs for the female audience and sexist diatribes for their male audience to ensure maximum market intrusion. You have the Lips of An Angel, and therefore You Would Look So Much Cuter With Something In Your Mouth, etc.

[PyrosNine]

I think Nickel Back gets over played, but I also thing everything gets over played and there should be more genuine rotations on radio stations.

As for why Nickelback's okay I guess, is that they're a band, an average okay band with a great singer, and their style of music is a weird mix of country and grunge, and that their cue of songs is the same as any other band ever that isn't trying to push an image but instead play music.

The reason why people hate NickelBack is that they see how much it's played, and how many people know, listen to it, and don't see the well, HyperRockFameExplosion of other bands that have just as much airplay, and think that Nickelback is an inherently inferior band that just gets as much airplay because of hax.

It's the kind of hype fad-ish meme whatever where something's hated not necessarily because it's bad, but because there's this vague consensus that it should be hated, and when a person is called out on their professed dislike, they have to spring up a small pet peeve to justify their binary decision making so as not to seem like someone who is merely jumping on a bandwagon.

Nickelback is just as good/offensive as anything else on the radio (except the gorillaz, they're awesome and yet intentionally sell outs) and it's just become a fad to vocally express a distaste for NickelBack with the intent to immediately establish one's internet personality as being "hip" and having "taste."

Cajun florida is Cajun South. Florida-Florida is actually some weird mix of California/Mexico/Tourism. And Cajun south is very different from South, too. Lazy stereotyping is lazy, done by lazy people who don't realize that North Carolinians think South Carolinians are hicks, and that Louisiana wonders what the hell is wrong with the states surrounding it.

[Magus]

As for why Nickelback's okay I guess, is that they're a band, an average okay band with a great singer, and their style of music is a weird mix of country and grunge, and that their cue of songs is the same as any other band ever that isn't trying to push an image but instead play music.

The reason why people hate NickelBack is that they see how much it's played, and how many people know, listen to it, and don't see the well, HyperRockFameExplosion of other bands that have just as much airplay, and think that Nickelback is an inherently inferior band that just gets as much airplay because of hax.

Well I also hate Godsmack but for the reason that I basically confuse them with Nickelback. They sound pretty similar. Is Godsmack as popular as Nickelback? I assume so...

Nickelback is just as good/offensive as anything else on the radio (except the gorillaz, they're awesome and yet intentionally sell outs) and it's just become a fad to vocally express a distaste for NickelBack with the intent to immediately establish one's internet personality as being "hip" and having "taste."

Again, why would people vocally express distaste for a shitty band no one's ever heard of? It's hardly an argument that people call them out because they are popular. That's the only reason they would bother.

If you want to establish yourself as having good taste in my book you have to listen to mostly '70s progressive rock unless you are a King Crimson or Porcupine Tree fan or something. It's not based on disliking Nickelback. Disliking Nickelback is simply a consequence of having any taste at all in anything.

Other factors of note in having good taste: Mello Yello is superior to Mountain Dew. BMWs are the best car in the world. Reebok or New Balance is perfectly acceptable; only flashy imbeciles buy Nikes.

[Hatake Kakashi]

The Drumbeat carries on is the only Nickleback song I could stand to listen to more than once.

But Lips of an Angel and Rockstars were my absolute least favorite.

Maybe I listen to a song's message too much?

Not to derail the thread further, but wasn't "Lips of an Angel" performed by Hinder?

Carry on, carry on as if nothing really matters.

[Magus]

Yeah, is Hinder another one that has music that sounds almost the same? Doesn't rhyme properly with Nickelback and Godsmack, though.