No, Dylan, you have not offended me in the least. I think you are a very smart person who I respect and I like discussions with you. It is nice to be on different sides for this reason.

But back to the subject:

Yeah, I know what you are saying about music you like being associated with something like Orange Crush or Saturn Wagons. I don't mind that so much. Association can also work backwards too. For instance I associated Phil Collins' Genesis with two of the most firm, gorgeous breasts I have ever been allowed to be near and eventually touch. Though I am not a fan of Phil, somehow he still makes me smile... What I mean is that we all will associate stuff with other stuff, good or bad. It's not a big deal to me. I would rather hear a minute of music that I like than a minute of music that I don't like. If I do not want to hear it, I can turn it off.

I think your idea about the band or song being the original product is an interesting one. I have to think about that a little more. I see your point to an extent but also wonder why the distinction between 'selling' other things with their music. Does their song being played on the radio become a commercial for their record? Yes, I think so. Why is that different? And if it is the same or different, why is it a bad thing? Is a live show a commercial to sell 'product'. Is a t-shirt or knit cap with a logo on it some sort of advertising for the band? Well, partially I guess. It is a crude way of looking at it but there is a certain reality about it. I am not sure why this is that different (and less objectionable) than letting others use your music for other purposes.

I suspect this line of thinking goes along with the idea of popular bands = sucky bands. Or that the song/band you like is now liked by many so it is no longer a good song/band. I try not to make such distinctions. Actually, I just do not have time to keep up anyway. I try and like what I like and let the equation be that simple, no matter how popular it is or how many times it is used for cruise ship vacation commercials. Those things just are not important to me.

Also, an interesting point that relates to how this thread started. That Touareg spot with Richard Buckner... it is a nice spot. The song is really really nice. I like it a lot (as the original poster does as well). I don't care that I heard it on a commercial. I will not feel like a sucker if I search out that album to hear. I do not just eat everything that is served to me in popular culture. I go through it and find what I like. I am not so picky of where such things maybe found. I feel I am still decerning just not snobby.

What does bother me is when one thing is presented as something but is really somehting all together different... When someone perports to be one thing just to suck you in for a buck. That kind of stuff is what offends me. Dishonesty makes for very hollow 'art'. I do not care to be tricked or thought of as trickable. I do not like people or companies that try to get one by the suckers. Seems like there are better ways to live and work.

Anyway, I assume I am on the 'harder to defend' end of this on this particular forum which I guess makes it that much more interesting to me to discuss it here. It helps me clarify my beliefs and convictions.

the only thing i care about in this regard, thinking of myself, is that i would never want my music to be used in a commercial for a product i ultimately didn't like. if it's a product i do like, say for example Toyota, or Monster energy drink, i would be thrilled to get money for licensing the use of a song to them. being associated with them wouldn't really bother me, provided the song wasn't like, something i wrote for my mom as a birthday present or something, something that in a sense no longer belonged to *me*. but if it's still mine to do with as i please?

if it's a piece of music i came up with, i have a few things i'd like to see come of that... i'd like for people to hear it. people hearing music is good. and if i could get paid a decent amount of money for having written some music, which i wrote regardless of even the concept of money, i'd LOVE that. why not have an opportunity to not have a day job? no day job = more time to write and play music. sounds dreamy to me.


what about that song that Vonage (and, i think, a couple others) have used in their recent commercials, the country-ish song with a vocal that goes

woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo,, woo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo

it's not a bad song, to the contrary, it's a very good song. it's not the type of music i would sit and listen to all the time, but when it pops on during a commercial break, it still doesn't bother me after a million times hearing it, and i can very easily see the talent that went into writing and performing it. it's a fine song.

i think they've used it in other commercials with people wiping out or something? anyways, did that guy write that song specifically for Vonage and people-wiping-out-product-XYZ, or did he maybe just write himself a song, and he doesn't have to put on a suit and go to an office to pay his rent and bills?

for me, i write songs with the hope that a whole mess of people will like them. because... i *like* songs, and i like to like songs, and of course then i like when other people like songs, etc. so getting a song i wrote, that i like, on a teevee commercial where literally millions or tens of millions or hundreds of millions of people are going to get a chance to hear the song, WTF, no question i'd LOVE to get paid money to have that opportunity!

...PROVIDED it's a product i personally like or, ideally, feel good about it, believe in it. like a commercial for "support cancer research" or something. obviously that would be a case of being really proud to be able to do it for no money whatsoever. a corporation that makes products i dig? i wouldn't do that for free, definitely for a friend, but not for a big corporation.

Mark, i think you really said something that sums it up perfectly: a good song is better than a bad song. until i'm in a world where there are no commercials, i'll take good songs over bad songs all day long. during the commercials i mean. and i guess, yeah, all day long for that matter.

I don't know if this has been said yet, because I haven't read this entire post (I am from appalachia), but how is it a bad thing when great bands that can't keep themselves afloat make a little scratch by having a song in a commercial? The sellout argument is so old and lame.

Has anyone seen the old navy commercial with that Old Skull song in it?

toomanyhelicopters wrote:what about that song that Vonage (and, i think, a couple others) have used in their recent commercials, the country-ish song with a vocal that goes

woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo,, woo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo

i think they've used it in other commercials with people wiping out or something? anyways, did that guy write that song specifically for Vonage and people-wiping-out-product-XYZ, or did he maybe just write himself a song, and he doesn't have to put on a suit and go to an office to pay his rent and bills?

For the record, that song is called "Whoo-Hoo," and it was written and first recorded in 1959 by members of a group from Richmond, Virginia called the Rock-a-Teens (no relation the the later band with Kelly Hogan on Merge). It was a minor hit back in the day, but the group called it quits not long after, leaving behind only one album released by Roulette in 1960. The version in the Vonage commercial is a cover by the 5,6,7,8's. I have no idea if the guys in the band can support themselves of of "Whoo-Hoo" royalties these days ... somehow I doubt it, but who knows, maybe that TV spot allowed one of 'em to put a new roof on the house or take a vacation with his wife or something else you'd do with a bit of a windfall. Nothing wrong with that.

So far as I'm concerned, most independent musicians don't make a whole lot of money off of their music, so if someone wants to pay them for fair use of it in a commercial or a movie, why not? The song will still exist in its original context, and maybe the exposure will prompt someone to seek out their recordings. Using "Pink Moon" in a Volkswagen commercial did wonders for sales of Nick Drake's back catalog, and I don't imagine that's a bad thing. Pete Shelley has said that that car commercial which used "What Do I Get" is helping him put his kids through school, which wouldn't happen by, say, playing Vans Warped all summer, which strikes me as a whole lot more humiliating.

has anyone seen the paris hilton/carl's junior commercial yet?!!?

mama mia!!

Mark Lansing wrote:

toomanyhelicopters wrote:what about that song that Vonage (and, i think, a couple others) have used in their recent commercials, the country-ish song with a vocal that goes

woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo
woo-hoo,, woo-hoo
woo-hoo, woo-hoo-hoo

i think they've used it in other commercials with people wiping out or something? anyways, did that guy write that song specifically for Vonage and people-wiping-out-product-XYZ, or did he maybe just write himself a song, and he doesn't have to put on a suit and go to an office to pay his rent and bills?

For the record, that song is called "Whoo-Hoo," and it was written and first recorded in 1959 by members of a group from Richmond, Virginia called the Rock-a-Teens (no relation the the later band with Kelly Hogan on Merge). It was a minor hit back in the day, but the group called it quits not long after, leaving behind only one album released by Roulette in 1960. The version in the Vonage commercial is a cover by the 5,6,7,8's. I have no idea if the guys in the band can support themselves of of "Whoo-Hoo" royalties these days ... somehow I doubt it, but who knows, maybe that TV spot allowed one of 'em to put a new roof on the house or take a vacation with his wife or something else you'd do with a bit of a windfall. Nothing wrong with that.

More trivia:
The 5,6,7,8's are a Japanese female trio, they are featured in the movie "Kill Bill, Vol. 1." The song "woo-hoo" is featured prominently in the movie, as the entire duration of the song is spent on a single "crane" shot, if memory serves. It's right before Uma Thurman goes 'nam and the movie turns to black and white as she starts chopping the hell out of the Crazy 88.

The DVD has a video of their entire live performance. I'm pretty sure they're pretty well off, since they get royalties from Vonage *and* probably royalties off the DVD sales of Kill Bill and maybe some of the box office as well. At the very least, they've gotten completely overexposed. Especially for a song where they're completely off-key.

I would sell out, given the opportunity. I hate my day job, and would much rather get paid to have my song rammed down the unwilling gullet of the unwashed masses than have to work.

But, it's unlikely that I will ever be given the opportunity. It's like that interview with Steve where the question was, would you rather use Pro Tools or kill a puppy? It doesn't matter 'cuz realistically, you'll never have to choose between those two things.

I think Steve said he'd kill the puppy. I might be paraphrasing here.

JUST BUST A TUNIC!

Mayfair wrote:For instance I associated Phil Collins' Genesis with two of the most firm, gorgeous breasts I have ever been allowed to be near and eventually touch.

He's not that fat anymore, is he?

Angus Jung wrote:

Mayfair wrote:For instance I associated Phil Collins' Genesis with two of the most firm, gorgeous breasts I have ever been allowed to be near and eventually touch.

He's not that fat anymore, is he?

Zing!

Oh wait, he zinged me. Doh.