Forums → Popular Media → What constitutes a band or artist as a "Sell-out"?

You might of posted this in the wrong section...
However, the Wikipedia states this=

There are two distinct forms of selling out in terms of music. The term 'sell out' referred to those who signed for major labels and those who licensed their music to companies for use in advertising that contradict their apparent values, and more recently it can also refer to those who sacrifice their musical integrity through a change in their musical sound, sometimes due to pressure from major labels or in order to gain profit by making their music more appealing to a mainstream audience.

You might of posted this in the wrong section.

you can also take it a step further like fred durst (limp bizkit). start a company to make music and just do it for the money. no matter that you hate the music you make. if it sells then we play it.
that kinda attitude.

more sell out then limp bizkit, it doesn't really go.

I define a sell out as someone who doesnt care about making art anymore and only cares about making money now. So they continue to make music to make money, not because they want to be creative. Or someone who changes their music so that it makes more money or is more popular just for the money/popularity.

Also. There had to be artistic integrity in the first place. For example, Kesha is not a sellout because her music has always been purely about using a computer to make her voice sound good and partying.

Oh, and handing rights to your music over to anyone with a bunch of cash who is only interested in selling things. Like putting your music in a car commercial. In a movie/soundtrack it makes a lot more sense, as music paired with video can be very artistic. But not when the music is placed over video of a skateboarding Fiat...

However, the Wikipedia states this=

[quote]There are two distinct forms of selling out in terms of music. The term 'sell out' referred to those who signed for major labels and those who licensed their music to companies for use in advertising that contradict their apparent values, and more recently it can also refer to those who sacrifice their musical integrity through a change in their musical sound, sometimes due to pressure from major labels or in order to gain profit by making their music more appealing to a mainstream audience

I define a sell out as someone who doesnt care about making art anymore and only cares about making money now. So they continue to make music to make money, not because they want to be creative. Or someone who changes their music so that it makes more money or is more popular just for the money/popularity.

I feel like the term "sell-out" is such a subjective and individualized term when used by the average fan. The way I see it, there's two criteria that an artist has to "meet" for a fan to consider them a sell-out: 1) the artist has changed their sound such that it is no longer enjoyable to that fan, and 2) the artist has accrued more mainstream attention. But no one really knows if a band has sold out other than its members and possibly closely affiliated persons. It's a pointless discussion, as it's just a dysphemistic way of saying, "I used to like this band but not anymore." And honestly, that's all that should matter: whether or not you enjoy the music.

Of course, but then..how do we tell when a band has sold out? At what point does the line become crossed of a band pushing their artistic boundaries to them changing their ways for a heavier cash flow?