Classic hard rock still selling strong

[Simo]

Ok last thread for the day, I promise ;-)

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Classic Hard Rock Still Strong[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica].[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica](PR) It seems that people are opting for classic hard rock and metal CDs over most generic "new" music. This according to a report by the Associated Press. While record companies try to fathom reasons why people aren't buying their "new" product, by ignoring the most logical explanation and looking to court tweens to help pick up their bottom lines, it appears that music from other eras where A&R people took chances on bands that didn't sound like everyone else and bands were allowed to develop a fanbase over several albums is still attracting a lot of buyers. [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Twenty-Seven years after its release, AC/DC's Back in Black is still selling almost enough copies a year to qualify for a gold record. Last year while we were treated to dozens of sound-alike emo bands that didn't sell many CDs, AC/DC's landmark album managed to sell 440,000 copies in the US. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]While [insert silly multi-worded name here] was struggling to attract the attention of TRL girls, other albums from long-ago were also moving pretty heavy numbers. Metallica's jump to the commercial mainstream, aka The Black Album was added to the CD collections of 275,000 US music fans last year and Guns 'N Roses debut which broke records when it was released in 1987 is still a hot seller, welcoming 113,000 more people to the jungle last year. And the album that killed "hair metal" and touched off the grunge trend of the early 90s (Nirvana's Nevermind) is still going strong with 143,000 copies sold last year. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]David Geffen should be proud to have two bands that he took a chance on still selling today and showing us why we need trendsetters and not trendfollowers running labels more than ever. On the other end of the spectrum, when you think of today's blasé music scene, you might think of the "genius" of Clive Davis and while his "genius" isn't selling record breaking amounts of CDs right now, he did manage to give us the best selling CD of 1986 in the form of Whitney Houston's self-titled debut. However, like most things that Clive touches it may sell today but doesn't have much of a shelf life (like real cheese) as Houston's CD only manages to attract about 7,000 new people a year, easily beat by Radiohead's "OK Computer" which turned on 94,000 additional people last year. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]There is definitely a lesson to be learned here. But will the people that need to learn it the most, take heed? Probably not, as they are too busy trying to find clones for the few bands of today that manage to sell a decent amount of CDs. That's when they are not working to shutdown online radio, installing rootkits on customers PCs and suing people.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]http://www.antimusic.com/news/07/july/1710.shtml[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Pretty much sums up the fact that most of todays music lacks originality, flare and any form of intrest.
[/FONT]

 

[Ron Jeremy]

People have spoken, new age music is utter crap.

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

People have spoken, new age music is utter crap.

hahahah

its true. nothing has been original since nirvana. what was that 15 years ago?

 

[flamin]

I agree.

The thing with popular music is that it is constantly changing, evolving, "revolutionising" (is that a word? ) against its former self. Every chapter in popular music has started with a revolution against the old. The problem with todays mainstream is that it is stale, still doing the same things that were popular a decade ago. You have to look outside the mainstream to find good music these days.

 

[Nuke]

I have a theory I came up with years ago regarding today's artists. I call it the 'Two Album Wonders'. It's like a one-hit wonder. An artist/band releases album number 1. Album1 is a hit with, say, 4 hit singles. Some time later, artist/band releases album number 2 with another 3-4 singles. Album2 sells well initially due to Album1's popularity. But the general public are fickle. Either the artist/band keep the same sound as Album1 because it worked the first time (boring the general public), or the artist/band go for a new sound that's so different, people in general don't like it as much. The usual other reason is that the Album2 is written after the success of Album1, and the artist/band write about the highs and lows of popularity and being famous, while Album1 was written in a kind of innocence and excitement that would (I imagine) come with being an unknown about to make it big.

Sure, the artist/band may release Album3, but it barely creates a ripple.
Artist/band rarely gets heard from again. Prime example was Natalie Imbruglia. First album: hit. Singles off first album: hits. A few years later, 2nd album comes out: not so much of a hit. Singles off this 2nd album: Nowhere near as good or popular. Where is she today? Basically, she's only known as Daniel Johns's other half.

Some bands/artists don't keep to my theory, but most do!

 

[Simo]

The usual other reason is that the Album2 is written after the success of Album1, and the artist/band write about the highs and lows of popularity and being famous, while Album1 was written in a kind of innocence and excitement that would (I imagine) come with being an unknown about to make it big.

I have had the exact same theory in regards to this part! They are no longer writing from a regular person perspective but from the riches of a super star. The life experiences are totally different to what they originally had. Dont know how true it is but ive held that same thought myself.