Music and advertising

kirn

So before 40 Year-old Virgin (fairly crap flick, but anyway) there was 8 or 9 ads, selling various different products, but all had a running theme - all ads had an alternative sounding song (and most sounded very good) very prominent in the ad.

eg:
Club Orange (skipping in the street one)
Toyota Ayra (or something)
Miller (cyling down the hill to the offie)
Lucozade (zombies)
etc.

so - with bands seemingly having no problems selling out to adverts these days, does it actually affect the band? Even bob dylan has done it. Does it take away credibility from art - or is that just being precious?

honru

Couldn't believe Voodoo Lady by Ween is on the Club Orange ad. That was surprising.

Most of the time, I don't think it takes any credibility at all. Music should be played in all shapes and forms possible. Even if I dislike the product that their music is used for the ad, there's no real reason to get into the deep specifics of why I should dislike the band more.

I also don't think artists decide to lend their music to adverts. I think it has to do more with the record label and their control over the whole thing.

In the case of a band becoming successful through an ad, I'd actually feel more sorry for them having to be sorely taunted by the masses for "that song".

Doctor J

I like it when a band says no, Coldplay being a prime example (was it £80 million they turned down? Total ****ing respect) though I can understand it being very hard to turn down publicity and exposure which you'd get paid for. I'd hate to have some of my music associated with a product, for example at Witnness a few years back when The Walls started playing their famous song, the first thing in my head was AIB, then later at The Dandy Warhols and zing! Vodafone. I realise all bands are commercial operations but there is a big difference in selling your song and your song selling something. Music is often emotionally attached to something by the listener, the sort of thing that can bring back vivid memories after many years when it gets played on the radio. Nowadays those memories which might have been the soundtrack to your first kiss or whatever are being hi-jacked by brandnames. Who wants to think Vodafone in a few years when they hear an old song on the radio? As for artists, do you really want your audience thinking what mortgage solution is right for them at a gig or when they listen to one of your cd's?

Tyrrial

Coldplay turning down 80 million is nothing to band that's already made it.
Sigur Ros, after they're second album turned down 2 million for 13 seconds of a song they did to be used in an add.. it's a lot more meaningful to a band that has very little money..
with that said, i think they were idiots. any small band offered a brake like that should take it

for people that have seen Dig! it was having they're song used in the Vodafone add that got the Dandy Warhols famouse! so more people know they're music AND they have more money.. nobody loses...

whiskeyman

Tyrrial wrote:

Coldplay turning down 80 million is nothing to band that's already made it.

Agree with the point on Coldplay - if anything, they should have taken it and used the dosh to "make trade fair"... I would have more respect for them then!

I dont think it ever harms a band.
At most, it may affect some hard core fans, but it'll bring a number-fold increase of new fans.
At the end of the day, it's more money in the bank and a greater audience.

Pitseleh

Does it affect the band? Oh Yeah. The Dandy Warhols have been mentioned but the success of Moby's "Play" could be put down partly to his willingness to let advertisers use it - he didn't let this happen with subsequent albums though.
It evokes curiosity in the general public which is good for the band - just look at the amount of "what's the song off ..." threads around. 'Tis of little harm except for the hardcore fans who are oh so willing to ditch the band like a fox when they "sell out" and become "corporate" or whatever.

Smurfpiss

Tyrrial wrote:

Coldplay turning down 80 million is nothing to band that's already made it

80 million?
as if. No company would ever pay that... what was it, the drug trade??
and 80 million is a stupid amount of money for a band who wouldn't be completely rolling in it. yeah they got 3 massive selling albums but they're tied to a record contract, so that amount of money would probably double their bank balances.(if split each way)
Still I say fair play if they turn down any advertising fee but Im not going to hate a band if they do...and much like the OC and other shows like that its a great way for a band to gain a following if they're just starting out..

garypope

if you do an ad - you're off the artist role call - FOR LIFE.

you should sell your music - but your music shouldn't sell anything else.

goo

I think it's weird hearing a song I like in an ad. The only recent example I can think of is Devendra Banhart's "At the Hop" in some beer ad (which, in fairness, wasn't screened here and I'd never heard of the brand) and Joanna Newsom in that Orange ad.

I don't mind it, I mean, a band goes to the effort of making music, feels like they deserve to be recognised, then get offered to be paid to have their song played on tv - it's fine by me if they take the oppurtunity.

I can't remember any examples, but I remember noticing some songs being changed to fit the ad...I don't like that idea. I would consider that compromising yourself for the money.

John

goo wrote:

I think it's weird hearing a song I like in an ad. The only recent example I can think of is Devendra Banhart's "At the Hop" in some beer ad (which, in fairness, wasn't screened here and I'd never heard of the brand) and Joanna Newsom in that Orange ad.

Seriously? As much as I like both of them I can't imagine them being useful for advertising. I mean Newsom's voice is incredibly annoying unless you're into that sort of thing.

Winter Slide

garypope wrote:

if you do an ad - you're off the artist role call - FOR LIFE.

you should sell your music - but your music shouldn't sell anything else.

Thats a ridiculous comment. It makes perfect sense for a band to get exposure by allowing their music to be used in ads. Especially if the product is harmless! I have to admit I was dissapointed when I found out that one of my favourite bands used one their songs for a McDonalds ad but I manged to get over it, and I still have huge respect for them.

Pigman II

garypope wrote:

if you do an ad - you're off the artist role call - FOR LIFE.

What about Willie Nelson?

I used to be dead against bands doing ads but now I've kinda come round to the idea. It's good exposure for a lot of bands as all the 'what's the name of the song in this ad?' threads that are constantly popping up on boards clearly show.

Steven

Pigman II wrote:

What about Willie Nelson?

Ads are OK, but did you see that C&W version of "These Boots are Made for Walking" with Jessica Simpson?

He's off the artists' register for all future possible lives

Pigman II

Steven wrote:

but did you see that C&W version of "These Boots are Made for Walking" with Jessica Simpson?

Haven't seen it. I'm waiting for her remix "This head is made for walking on"

Steven

Why, Willie? WHYYYYY?

StupidLikeAFox

What difference does it make where ya hear a song? Good music is still good music!

John

goo wrote:

Joanna Newsom in that Orange ad.

I just saw that ad and I must say the song fits the scene in the ad perfectly

parasite

goo wrote:

I think it's weird hearing a song I like in an ad. The only recent example I can think of is Devendra Banhart's "At the Hop" in some beer ad

it was for cheese ... "put me on your plate, 'cos you know i taste great", unless he was in an ad for beer aswell :?

it doesn't bother me, might have once

Steven

Steven wrote:

Why, Willie? WHYYYYY?

Cos he owes a fortune to the taxman still ?


But really, I'm in a band and I have to say if someone wanted to use our music in an ad, the band (as a democracy) would let them. It would mean we could get better equipment, time off to write material and give us a broader audience. It's so much more than "those awful ba$tards sold out!" type of stuff you here. There's usually a reason for selling out. It's called the need to play full time and eat and clothe yourself.

Gross Halfwit

I think, well for me anyway, it would have to be based on the product being advertised and the song used. For example - Enter Sandman being used to advertise Nytol would be farcical -but- say Aqualungs - Strange & Beautiful would be perfect for make-up or something.

I wouldnt see an artist as a sell out for allowing their song to be used on an Ad.

Doctor J

Papa Smut wrote:

It's called the need to play full time and eat and clothe yourself.

Getting those ribs removed is costly, eh?

dalk

You could also take a leaf out of Tom Waits book, and make money from ads whilst NOT letting your music be actually used in the ad... make the money without pimping your music as such. Of course this only works if you have a unique voice and a large cult following (and seemingly be beloved of advertising copyrighters with short memories of the musicians previous litigation)...

And heres how he does it: Firstly, you expressly tell your publishers that none of your music is ever to be allowed to be used in an ad, period. No questions asked. Then you sue anybody who tries to side step that.

In 1988 he sued the Frito Lay Company for using a soundalike in a radio ad and won $2.6m. In 1993 he sued Levi's for using Screamin' Jay Hawkins (bit of a soundalike) version of 'Heartattack & Vine' in an ad. They had to print an apology in Billboard and withdraw the ad. In 2000, Audi were sued for a song (and soundalike again) used in an ad in Spain. He won and got more money. And at the moment, he's suing Opel cars for a song (and soundalike) in an ad flogging cars in Scandanavia...

So you can make money from advertising and keep your integrity intact... :rolleyes:

Pitseleh

How Waits felt, if I may quote: "it's like having a cow's udder sewn to the side of my face. Painful and humiliating."

tj-music.com

Most people would sell their granny for a tenner so what's the fuzz about musicians allowing companies using their music. It is exposure a musician wants in the first place.

If my favourite band would sell their song for a McDonald ad or something similar I probably wouldn't be eating more burgers but I would not look at the band as being sell-outs.

Hard enough for most bands to survive on the lognrun why not take all you can get while it lasts ...

Pigman II

dalk wrote:

In 1988 he sued the Frito Lay Company for using a soundalike in a radio ad and won $2.6m. In 1993 he sued Levi's for using Screamin' Jay Hawkins (bit of a soundalike) version of 'Heartattack & Vine' in an ad. They had to print an apology in Billboard and withdraw the ad. In 2000, Audi were sued for a song (and soundalike again) used in an ad in Spain. He won and got more money. And at the moment, he's suing Opel cars for a song (and soundalike) in an ad flogging cars in Scandanavia...

So you can make money from advertising and keep your integrity intact... :rolleyes:

Good ol Tommy the Cat keepin it real!

MrJoeSoap

Nescafe used Muse's cover of Nina Simone's "Feeling Good" in an ad recently enough without any consultation or permission and Muse were understandably p'ed off.

Microcuts.net wrote:

Nestle used your cover of Nina Simone's "Feeling Good" on a coffee advert without your permission. What happened there?

"They asked us to do the advert and we said "no". And it just turned up on TV. We said, "This is ridiculous, can you take it off?" They did and then replaced it with some bloody crappy version of the song which is even more of a wind up! We got some money but we're going to give it to charity. A large percentage of that will go to someone like Oxfam (who run the Make Trade Fair campaign helping independent coffee producers among others), and then the rest to some local charities near where we're from in Devon."

Also:

Drowned in Sound wrote:

Sigur Ros does not want to be on a TV near you

Sigur Ros have already turned down numerous requests for the use of their songs in television programmes/adverts. One2one wanted to use a Sigur Ros clip in their new tv advert but the band turned down their offer. Other companies that have offered undisclosed sums for the use of Sigur Ros songs are Orange, British Telecom, Portugal Telecom, Vodafone Australia and Gap America. The band have turned down all these offers.

It is highy possible that they will in fact donate Svefn-G-Englar for use by Amnesty International in the near future, but they have also already turned down numerous requests for the use of their songs in numerous television programmes.

'Buffy The Vampire Slayer' wanted to use Svefn-G-Englar in one episode and Mtv2 made an offer for the use of Flugufrelsarinn in their '2ge+her' show. again, the band turned down these very lucrative offers. Finally they were asked by the director of 'Kids', Larry Clark, for permission to use Ny Batteri in his new film 'Bully', again this request was refused.

John

But wasn't Svefn-g-englar in Vanilla Sky? What makes that better than Bully or Buffy?

dalk

Some more fuel for the fire, against music in ads, from John Densmore of the Doors...

It all started in 1967, when Buick proffered $75,000 to use "Light My Fire" to hawk its new hot little offering--the Opel. As the story goes--which everyone knows who's read my autobiography or seen Oliver Stone's movie--Ray, Robby and John (that's me) OK'd it, while Jim was out of town. He came back and went nuts. And it wasn't even his song (Robby primarily having penned "LMF")! In retrospect, his calling up Buick and saying that if they aired the ad, he'd smash an Opel on television with a sledgehammer was fantastic!

Rest of the article is here

Pigman II

John2 wrote:

But wasn't Svefn-g-englar in Vanilla Sky? What makes that better than Bully or Buffy?

Maybe that they needed the exposure back then and they don't need it now. I don't know anyone who'd heard of SR prior to that film (myself included).

Either that or perhaps they had no choice in the matter back in '01? Maybe they got outmanouvered thru legal loopholes etc?

dalk

Sigur Rós scored a film called 'Hlemmur'... Have listened to the music, but never seen the film itself. Thinks its a documentary. Was released a couple of years ago.

As to they needed the exposure, i remember "Ágætis Byrjun" getting a pretty big push when it was released, air play, media coverage, a place in most "best of 99" album lists... so they were hardly obscure.

Maybe they just suit themselves...

John

And Sigur Rós were just on an ad on Channel 4 for the 50 Greatest Documentaries of all time.