Rolling Stones...

[JBarbour]

So we are still on this? I thought the subject would of changed by now! It was more fun with the trolls defending the ticket prices, how Glastonbury would be lucky to have them and how you don't deserve a glasto ticket if you are not a fan of the stones.

[The Nal]

Mmmmm I just can't see that. If the event and attaching song was that meaningful to you, hearing on an advert wouldn't change that imo. Let me give you an example, my mum passed away 4 years ago and I sometimes catch one of her favourite songs on an advert, a song I am very fond of because it reminds me of my mum. I don't suddenly think "damn them, they've ruined the memory of my mum!", it simply reminds me of my mum and makes me smile.

Totally fair enough and I'm glad it doesn't ruin anything for you.

If you're suddenly forgetting why that song was so dear to you, simply because it is on something you don't want it to be on, to me sounds a little spoilt and the fact that it is on an advert is a stronger feeling to you than the memories of why it was so special.

I'm not saying that. I'm just saying, for me, and Tony too from what hes written, it can mean less as its become a little diluted.

I'm not saying anyone who it doesn't have an impact on is wrong. The reality is that artist/commercials are on the increase so its me who needs to get over it if anything. I'm picturing a 50 year old me sitting in a corner somewhere with a handful of crappy quality Son House records, listening to the letter he got today about his wife being dead, while I stare at a huge pile of discarded "formerly credible" CDs.

But I can't, and won't, get over it. It pisses me off no end.

Just my opinion, but then I am a tory twat

Stiltskin?

In reality once Levi's had drunk the "soul classics" well dry they moved to unknowns. That "Spaceman" tune for example, or "Mr. Oizo". Both were number one singles on the basis of the advert.

They're good shouts yeah. The exception rather than the rule though.

Mr. Oizo. Thanks for putting that in my head!

Edited November 1, 2012 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

you want me to ....

No I don't want you to do anything. You can do whatever you like, as I said when I said ignore it if you like.

But that will only give you a worthless discussion. You cannot talk about the worth of an artform when you are not referring to only artform.

As I said in my original post - and meant only literally - ignore it if you want.

If you've still not got it, I don't give a fuck about the subject under discussion. I don't care if you wish to spout worrthless empty meaningless words; it does concern me a little that you feel so earnestly about something you're talking utter crap about, but that's your choice.

Edited November 1, 2012 by eFestivals

[Wooderson]

Mmmmm I just can't see that. If the event and attaching song was that meaningful to you, hearing on an advert wouldn't change that imo. Let me give you an example, my mum passed away 4 years ago and I sometimes catch one of her favourite songs on an advert, a song I am very fond of because it reminds me of my mum. I don't suddenly think "damn them, they've ruined the memory of my mum!", it simply reminds me of my mum and makes me smile.

If you're suddenly forgetting why that song was so dear to you, simply because it is on something you don't want it to be on, to me sounds a little spoilt and the fact that it is on an advert is a stronger feeling to you than the memories of why it was so special.

Just my opinion, but then I am a tory twat

A Tory twat you maybe but with clarity of thought on this issue.

People bleating on about music and business intertwining comes across as naive at best and bratty at worst to me. Why are endorsements or appearances of music in other media (like footie highlights shows) acceptable but dogfood is distasteful (ouch, see what I did there dog haters!)...

WHATS SO WRONG WITH DOGFOOD?

People will stand around hand wringing and whining over an artists attempt to commercialise their oeuvre and/or lofty notions of credibility loss (like that means anything) whilst simultaneously consuming music via a variety of free sources (Who hasnt used Youtube) with the artist not making a bean.

I say bravo to the Beatles for the use of Tomorrow Never Knows in Mad Men, just as I celebrated "Alive & Kicking's" use in the launch of the Premier League all those years ago. If I don't like a band in the first place *cough* Dylan for example, then I don't care if his stuff turns up on a catfood advert. My life is too busy to give a shit lads.

[russycarps]

Mmmmm I just can't see that. If the event and attaching song was that meaningful to you, hearing on an advert wouldn't change that imo. Let me give you an example, my mum passed away 4 years ago and I sometimes catch one of her favourite songs on an advert, a song I am very fond of because it reminds me of my mum. I don't suddenly think "damn them, they've ruined the memory of my mum!", it simply reminds me of my mum and makes me smile.

If you're suddenly forgetting why that song was so dear to you, simply because it is on something you don't want it to be on, to me sounds a little spoilt and the fact that it is on an advert is a stronger feeling to you than the memories of why it was so special.

Just my opinion, but then I am a tory twat

have to sa you're making some good points here.

I'm with you on this one, Gideon

[MEGABOWL]

To me one of the main problems here with fans disappointed because a band has "sold out" or ruins a special song for an individual because they've allowed it to be used for an advert, is that there seems to me to be a perception of "ownership" by the fans of that band or its music, purely because they think a band or a specific song is special to them.

It's like "I love that song, how dare they allow it to be used on a dog food advert, that's ruined that song for me!". To be fair artists generally release material to make money, as we all work in our day to day jobs to earn money. Just because they produce a song that we attach ourselves to because of something going on in our lives, is not the bands fault or concern, it is their song to do with what they want surely?

The only hypocrisy is those artists that have sold themselves all along as non commercial, non sell out artists, who then have a massive turnaround and do exactly that. But that said, it's their decision to make and yes, they may lose respect off a number of their fans who like them for the non commercial nature, but hey, the use of their songs on an advert will probably open them up to a new audience and they'll replenish the lost income.

Anyway if you're that shallow to stop liking a song you've loved for years, because it's on an advert, you can't have liked it that much in the first place and it was just a audible crutch at the time!

Hang on a minute. You're telling me that because I, for whatever reasons I see fit and personally apply to me, don't like music being sold for advertising that my liking of that music is 'shallow'.

I genuinely have to stop here and count to ten before I test the boundaries re. how much swearing would lead to a banning from this forum

[MEGABOWL]

unless I close my eyes, I can't disassociate what product is being promoted from the song.

I don't thing anyone is wrong for not bothering about a song being used in an ad... it's just that I am

No, no. You're 'shallow'. Accept it.

[jimmyk83]

Hang on a minute. You're telling me that because I, for whatever reasons I see fit and personally apply to me, don't like music being sold for advertising that my liking of that music is 'shallow'.

I genuinely have to stop here and count to ten before I test the boundaries re. how much swearing would lead to a banning from this forum

It's a shame you're not as hot headed as your avatar. I would have quite liked a Tuckeresque rant in response

[Big Vern]

Hang on a minute. You're telling me that because I, for whatever reasons I see fit and personally apply to me, don't like music being sold for advertising that my liking of that music is 'shallow'.

I genuinely have to stop here and count to ten before I test the boundaries re. how much swearing would lead to a banning from this forum

No, I am saying if you begin to dislike a song that you have held dear to your heart for whatever important life event that made that song so important to you, because it has been used on an advert, which then creates a feeling of such intense dislike for that song which in turn overides that original feeling of endearment for the song, then yes, I think you have to be a tad shallow (in regards to liking that song) and in reality that song cannot have been that important to you in the first place, to so easily forget why you liked it just because it is now on an advert.

[Big Vern]

Sorry, I was responding to previous comments such as The Nals -

"I've never really had the experience thankfully. But its the exact opposite of "shallow". People holding a deep affection for the song are the ones who could be the most pissed off and let down by it.

How do you think early 60s counter culture kids who lived by The Times They Are a Changin' (and there were plenty!) felt when Dylan sold it to a fucking bank a few years ago? Rightly gutted I'd say. Nothing shallow about that."

Each to their own of course, but I just can't understand if you had such a deep affection for a song how you can not like that song any more just because it is now on an advert, you must have to tell yourself not to like it?

Edited November 1, 2012 by Big Vern

[Big Vern]

or you must have to tell yourself that it doesn't make any difference

choices... it's all about choices. That's yours.

All very true fella, all very true, but it must be harder work to tell yourself not to like it, when you have done up to that point. I guess it's all a case of your own moral and ethical standing, both of which I clearly lack!

[eFestivals]

and I spout worrthless empty meaningless words, and I feel so earnestly about something I talk utter crap about it

seriously Tony, how do you think anyone can reach a fully considered answer when they're only considering half the question?

You only get the perfect output with perfect input.

[mrtourette]

Poor Big Vern, I've don't think there's another poster who writes so well and gets so much grief while doing exacly what others do, just on the opposite side of the argument.

[mrtourette]

I sincerely wouldn't suggest you lack anything.

I don't think it's harder for me to 'tell myself' how much I love, truly love, some music and how I don't like it 'polluted' (ooohh, hark at him!) by outside influences... it's very easy. It's what I am..

or what I've decided to be

And yet you present your belief/insistence that hearing music on an advert dilutes or devalues it as fact and then answers with "how can it not?" when questioned.

The answer to "how can it not?" is simple - other people think differently on the subject.

[The Nal]

Sorry, I was responding to previous comments such as The Nals -

"I've never really had the experience thankfully. But its the exact opposite of "shallow". People holding a deep affection for the song are the ones who could be the most pissed off and let down by it.

How do you think early 60s counter culture kids who lived by The Times They Are a Changin' (and there were plenty!) felt when Dylan sold it to a fucking bank a few years ago? Rightly gutted I'd say. Nothing shallow about that."

Each to their own of course, but I just can't understand if you had such a deep affection for a song how you can not like that song any more just because it is now on an advert, you must have to tell yourself not to like it?

Its not black or white.

I've not said I instantly stop liking a song. Pissed off, let down, gutted. Doesn't mean you still don't like the song. It just dilutes it. It means a little less. Spoils it a bit.

[STEVEYBOY]

Can we get back on topic now ? Will the play at Glasto or not ? Enquiring minds want to know

[The Nal]

Can we get back on topic now ? Will the play at Glasto or not ? Enquiring minds want to know

Nobody knows yet so we're all talking shit in the meantime.

[mrtourette]

Let's face it, we'll still be talking shit after they're confimed as playing or not.

[The Nal]

Let's face it, we'll still be talking shit after they're confimed as playing or not.

True.

Neil - Any news on the open Hyde Park tender for next summer?

[Vanderlyle]

I quite like it when songs I love are on adverts. Or videogames. Or TV shows. More people listen to them.

But I think it stems from the fact I have nothing against marketing/advertising or big business. They're only spending the money because people buy into it for whatever reason (thinking the product is cool or whatever). I don't really see the evil there.

[JBarbour]

Have LN stopped negotiating for Hyde Park now?

What other location they got in mind?

What other promoter will take on Hyde Park now, have any of them got deep enough pockets?

Are Aeg still for sale?

[The Nal]

are you suggesting all songs are 'products' and not 'art'?

I think Neil was saying some songs are created as "products" and some are created as "art"?

So, that Tonights Going to be a Good Night cobblers from the Black Eyed Peas was created as a "product" (ie to only make money) where as say, a post Blue Joni Mitchell song was created as "art" - to express where she was at the time and couldn't give a fiddlers about any money it does or doesn't make. Although I think that can be said for all her output.

You can still sell both mind you.

Edited November 2, 2012 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

are you suggesting all songs are 'products' and not 'art'?

Nope, I'm saying all songs are either one or the other.

Once you know which a song is, only then are you able to work up a discussion around that song &/or artist about its use.

[eFestivals]

Neil - Any news on the open Hyde Park tender for next summer?

yep. It's not open any more.

Details soon(ish). I'd like to say right now but there's good reason why i'm not.

[The Nal]

Details soon(ish). I'd like to say right now but there's good reason why i'm not.

Because it going to be Bon fucking Jovi?