How does a tour equate to being a sell out? I feel the term "sellout" has to do with changing your music to appeal to the masses, rather then to your core fans who appreciated your music for what it was. "Selling out" isn't a completely negative term, as it often leads to more success. It just means that you chose to abandon your roots to go down a path that would gain you more widespread popularity, often at the expense of original fans. Again it is semantics though.
In this case, if these bands "commercialized" the music they were putting out, then I would say yes, they are sellouts. I am not familiar with much Slayer, so I cannot comment on them. Megadeth is still putting out the same music that they started with, so I have to say IMO, they did NOT sellout. Anthrax has been less active, and I am not familiar with their last 2 albums, so I cannot comment on them. Before that they seemed to still keep their edge.
Metallica is one of the bands I have seen most, and their contribution to the popularity and success of metal music is unmatched. But actually, I think the fact that Metallica wanted to re-associate themselves with the other bands only further solidifies their "sellout" image. They probably thought that it might help them to shake the wimpy prima donna diva image that they have developed.
Again though, this is all opinion. And some may feel that bands learn to grow and change, thus they are NOT selling out...they are improving their sound.
I asked because a lot of metal fans label Metallica as sell-outs because, well, they got HUGE. I am a Metallica fan (if my handle is any indication
). I don't neccessarily like everything they put out, but I respect everything they've tried, whether it sucked balls or rocked my socks. I never quite got into Slayer or Anthrax, and I likes me some Megadeth, but don't care for Mustaine's gritty/whiney voice.
I'm only 24 so, unfortunately, I wasn't around for the "glory" days of when these bands were in their prime. I've gone to every Metallica concert that has come around the Wisconsin area in the last 8 years (which isn't very many shows). Hetfield's voice sucks, but they can still play and get the crowd into it. They also haven't played any song of theirs from the 90s, and nothing from St. Anger, at the last two shows I went to.
I keep going because I know the end is near for them and want to get my piece before the band is no more.
And I don't label myself hardcore or a purist or anything. I listen to whatever the hell I want to. I'll like what I want, and I'll dislike what I want! :rockin:
I tried and failed. GTFO.
I actually think "sell out" is one of the laziest negative critiques of a band out there. It's one thing to say that you don't think a particular direction a band has taken is appealing for some reason. That's a taste issue. Once you accuse them of making a change in direction to "sell out", it suggests you think you know exactly what motivates people. Sure, it's money most of the time but have your tastes in music ever changed? When you play with the same basic group for 30 years, you're bound to mix it up a bit now and then and you get three different generations accusing you of selling out every few years.
In other words, if your followup album varies at all from your debut, you're a sell out because obviously you've changed it to sell more albums. Then again, if you DON'T sell more albums, you go back to flipping burgers and make no more albums (but save face in light of your idealistically small fan base). Rambling...
I don't care for the term sell-out, either. I just used it because it's commonly attached to certain bands/artists, and I wanted to know what people thought of the bands that call other band sell-outs, and then joining forces with the "sell-outs."
It's about the money. Given the opportunity, most artists are going to take the route to get more money and make a good living selling their art...
If someone offered me money to distribute my music, you bet yer buns I'd be takin' it.
