Guns ‘N Roses guitarist Slash is a legend in his own right, but calling modern musicians “sell-outs” looks a little petty.
“I think what was great about Guns N’ Roses is that we made it on our own integrity and we didn’t give up anything to anybody and made it on our own merit. The early gigs didn’t pay well at all. We actually looked forward to getting paid after a gig, but it was usually for the beer. I kept a straight job for a while.”
He says of fame-hungry modern rockers: “Everybody else is making compromises and concessions so that they can make it big and get their picture on the cover of Teen Beat or Us Weekly or whatever, you know, so, so…There’s a sort of, kind of, selling out to that.”
To that, The Audio Perv replies with a bootleg video of Slash performing “Sweet Child of Mine” with… Fergie. Of all people.
Even better is that lawyers for Guns ‘N Roses are suing the makers of video games Guitar Hero and Rock Band for more money, forgetting that Slash is front-and-center on the packaging for Guitar Hero 3 — and I’m sure richly compensated for that honor. The sour grapes are news to us, since he played “Welcome to the Jungle” at a GH3 press event in January.
What was that about compromises and concessions?
Related posts:
- Joe Simpson Selling Rights to Baby Photos Ashlee Simpson’s fiancé Pete Wentz was pretty pissed off about...
- Selling Ammo to the Enemy? Lindsay Lohan has been watching her movie career wither and...
- Rachel Bilson is an Awesome Fashion-Designer-slash-Ripoff-Artist When all you’re known for is your work on a...
- John Mayer, Guitar Villain John Mayer crapped all over everyone’s fun and criticized Guitar...
- Fergie Blows on The Today Show Fergie went on The Today Show this morning to perform...
Any entertainer who accepts money for performing — whether live or recorded — has no right to expound on “selling out”. No entertainer is so totally altruistic as to play for no pay.
Thank you for saying it, Discordia. Saved me from typing just about the same thing.
I just read in Entertainment Weekly that Gun n’ Roses said they will “offer a track off Chinese Democracy exclusively through Rock Band.” Solid evidence shows that Motley Crue sold more tracks through Rock Band than on Itunes. Following in their footsteps, no?
It’s fine if you want to sell your crappy music for big corporate gain, because in my opinion good music died in the seventies. Just don’t try to convince us that you’re “in it for the fans” and the integrity of your music.
It’s true, the majority of artists today owe their careers to pure hype and marketing. For Slash to cry “sell-out” while he pimps himself out to play with Fergie, one of the WORSE no talent ear bleeders, while she murders a rock classic is truly a class A hypocrite.
How can any major rock star complain about fellow stars “selling out”?! Slash definitely isn’t playing his music just for the pure enjoyment of his fans… he makes sure those paychecks keep coming in… So… who’s the sellout?!
I can’t believe 20 years later we’re still talking about Guns ‘N Roses, Motley Crue, etc. All I’ll need to see is some clown with a mullet, a Union Jack t-shirt and a Japanese “Rising Sun” bandanna tied around his leg and it’ll be 1987 all over again.
Why can’t “rock stars” have the good sense to flame out like they used too back in the 60’s, and the 70’s?
What we really need now is something that really rocks. Like Nickleback, or Hinder.
*laughing satisfied with myself at that joke*
Isn’t he a sell out too? He gets paid for his music (god knows why). If not, why doesn’t he go back the old days and not get paid at all. At least he gets to do his ‘own’ music….
If I had a dime for every time I heard that drivel like that, I’d be richer than Slash.
“Waaaah! Today’s musicians are sellouts! Baaaawl! They didn’t pay me enough for the video gaaaame.”
Oh please, that GH3 commercial had to have paid him a nice paycheck. How much more money does he need? That just makes him look like a tool.
Oh. Wait…
Discordia wrote: No entertainer is so totally altruistic as to play for no pay.
I don’t disagree with what Discordia wrote, but I do want to add that there was a musician who was unique; Keith Green. After negotiating a release from his contract, he would no longer charge for his albums or concerts. He walked the walk. An interesting read from Wikipedia; be sure to read the short paragraph about his Ministry.
Chris
Duh, I forgot to add the link regarding Keith Green: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Green
Chris
I laugh out loud when I hear any kind of musician throwing down the sell out card — even moreso if said musician is rolling in riches from album and concert ticket sales, endorsements and appearances. Face it — a true artist is true to only himself and doesn’t give a shit about money, which makes true artists far and few between. One of the most recent issues of Playboy (I’d link, but I’m at work) describes the disgustingly filthy and poverty stricken conditions Guns ‘n Roses lived in during their early days. Does he want to go back to living in a warehouse, pissing in the corner? Don’t be a crybaby when you’re rolling in cash and have your image on a video game cover.
“Any entertainer who accepts money for performing — whether live or recorded — has no right to expound on “selling out”. No entertainer is so totally altruistic as to play for no pay.”
Discordia, are you saying that even if they’re performing for a living (not the stars of today, but someone who plays coffee shops and bars and sells their ten dollar CDs in a box by the stool their sitting on, strumming their electroacoustic guitar, etc, etc), they’re selling out? Or do you mean just the musicians who go off and make the big bucks?
I always equated selling out with letting people use your music for commercials or letting people use your image to sell things (didn’t Slash do that with vodka???), not so much selling the actual music to fans. I guess I mean if the musician does something for the exposure or the paycheck when they don’t NEED exposure or a paycheck, then they’re selling out. I just don’t think that when you do it enough to make a living and not much more that you’ve sold out.
*they’re sitting on
I never get this argument. Music for sale is a commodity. How can you “sell out” when you’re making a product to sell?
“selling out” used to mean diluting the meaning (or ruining the meaning) of your music by letting other people give you money to use it or tweak it to their own ends. The idea being that if you were getting paid a fortune but making the music the same as if you weren’t, you weren’t a sell out.
But, making music for sale is still making a product to sell, the same as with jeans or soda or fur coats. So all the crying about sell-outs is a bit funny.
No cock rocker on this planet has any right to complain about people selling out.
And Fergie? One would hope a metal god like Slash would somehow feel some sort of unholy radiation coming from her that would make his presence incompatible. I guess he isn’t that much of a metal god now, though, is he?
What everyone seems to forget is that it is called the music BUSINESS for a reason. Thats what it is a business. True artistry in music died long ago. No one would ever accuse a stock broker or realtor of ’selling out’ because they charged for their services. The problem here is not that musicians or artists sell out, but that they or their managers or labels or PR reps try to sell us on their integrity.
Who cares? Have you seen Slash’s hair? Totally Radical dude! I wonder if he uses conditioner?
Excellent point, lords8n. Everybody tries to promote themselves as above commerce because the music press and fans too young to have a real job/money have an obsession with “authenticity” and the working class hero myth. I’m almost 40 and I see all of that stuff as a bigger sham than slapping your mug on a game cover. Give me a proud entrepreneur any day of the week over somebody making poses about integrity.
Well, I beat Slash in the guitar battle (Guitar Hero) and now I pwn him.
And the “lawyers for Guns-n-Roses” are actually lawyers for Warner Music Group, not GNR or Slash specifically. If you use circuitous logic, as is often the case with Deceiver, you could make it look more significant than what it really is. I don’t think Slash is the one whining about more money.
Making a living or getting rich is not selling out. Compromise for those things is selling out.
Pretty weak, Deceiver, pretty weak.
I am just surprised that any of the members of GNR still have the ability to complete sentances. I thought those guys drank themselves stupid in the 80s.
llamasrule- you don’t think him playing with Fergie, one of the worse music hos around is a compromise? Did you actually see that performance? I think it’s you should present a better argument that he didn’t compromise before you accuse Deceiver of being weak.
How is Deceiver “weak” for this story? They aren’t the ones who started throwing around selling out comments. Even if slash isn’t the one whining about not making enough money off Guitar Hero, he surely had to give his consent to be featured in it. And I’m guessing he was paid for it. Much like the Fergie performancel Meaning he still should be careful about throwing around sell-out jibes.
Just because perhaps one instance of his being hypocritical might not be as direct doesn’t invalidate the other reasons he shouldn’t throw stones.
Well Trompi, it seems your comprehension skills are on a par with Bruce’s. I said Slash was not the one sueing the video game industry. Not even lawyers for Slash, directly. Not even on his behalf. Warner Music Group wants more money for Warner Music Group, not any of the artists they represent. The article said Slash has sour grapes. On the contrary, he is happy with his arrangement with the video game people.
As to Fergie, I don’t know. I don’t listen to that crap. But a quick google will confirm that he was at her show and she asked him to come on stage and he did. He gets around the music scene and generally is known for going on stage with just about everybody from Lenny Kravitz to Aerosmith to Michael Jackson and get this, he does it for FREEEEEEE.
But thanks for caring Trompi. You’re entitled to your opinion but stay off my ass. Slash might like her, even if no one else does.
But even if he did the thing with Fergie for free, AND he’s perfectly happy with his deal with guitar hero, that still makes him a guy who’s whining about how modern artists are selling out after happily lending his image to a faux-music video game.
And he did that for a bit more cash than free.
So how is it not hypocritical of him to bitch about other artists when he’s happily doing the same thing?
There is no mention anywhere of Slash performing with anyone for FREE, I highly doubt he ’s just at the show and it asked to come up spontaneously. These things are planned, and his guitarist skills are payed for, sure he may actually like her or he may like the money her record company pays him. Maybe he’s partially deaf after all these years of rocking? Hehe, that would explain how he could stand her warbling.
I’m pretty sure that all he’s saying is that there’s a difference between making it big on your own merits and then ’selling out’, and ’selling out’ straight away in an attempt to get big. Which I think is a fair point, although I don’t think it’s necessarily a modern phenomenon. And I think the quote makes it clear that he was hesitant to use the words ’selling out’, presumably ’cause he knows that he’s sold out now himself and that some people would think that makes his argument weaker (which I don’t, but obviously a lot of commenters do).
Actually, Slash isn’t an official member anymore, so I doubt GNR are getting any money for him being on the cover.
If Axl wants money why doesn’t he, oh, I don’t know… release Chinese Democracy?
I think G’N'R did turn the music scene around back in the late ’80s, in that they were a dirty, rude, messed-up antidote to the hair bands around at the time. And from what I’ve read about them, they paid their dues, in that they did get ripped off, sleep in the van, live in warehouses and all that stuff. I guess, too, looking at their history, they did mostly do things on their own terms - well, actually, on Axl’s terms, until that got too much (finally) and they left him to it.
I guess what he means is that they were more “old-school”, in that they didn’t sell their songs to a jeans manufacturer, tie their album in with i-Tunes or a Sunday newspaper, advertise hairdye or cosmetics (although they probably could’ve), or any of the multi-media synergy that goes on now. On the other hand, neither were they particularly against the business side of things - if you want to see a good example of that, check out Fugazi and Ian McKay. This is a band that’s never “sold out” - no major label contract, ticket prices under $5, no Ticketmaster or iTunes involvement … There’s a moral cohesion there that I admire, but it comes at a cost. No McMansion for Ian. I’m not particularly saying that one is better than another, just that it is possible not to “sell out”. Up to a point, for Mr Hudson;)
To all the kids on here who are misusing the word “sellout”: When someone says “sellout” what they mean is that the artist in question is liscensing their music out willy-nilly to any linsey lohan movie or microsoft viral that comes along. Being paid for performing and providing your music in a format (cyber or otherwise) for sale to the public is NOT considered selling out. That’s considered doing honest work for honest pay. When Jim Morrison found out that Ray Manzarick sold Light my Fire to be used in a commercial he went ballistic. Sadly those days are gone.
Dude Slash at one point lived in a public storage shack. He paid dues so you can’t accuse him of selling out. And he didn’t sell out to MTV or VH1 by doing that ridiculous singer search show, I don’t know the name of it beacuse i don’t watch crap TV.