I dont see why you reckon The Saturdays wouldn't have existed without Girls Aloud? its not like GA were the first girlband ever. They may share the same record label but that means nothing.
Strange analysis
I wouldn't really call it a strange analysis at all Its the same theory thats been mentioned on this exact thread, and by many other sources - that The Saturdays were created by Fascination with the intention of being the successors to Girls Aloud, who, after Tangled Up, seemed to be coming to the end of their natural lifespan. Surely its just good business sense, there's nothing strange about it.
Also if you'd read my comment properly, you'd see I said The Saturdays "probably" wouldn't be here if Girls Aloud hadn't been successful. Therefore its just a theory, not fact, but it seems very likely.
I dont see why you reckon The Saturdays wouldn't have existed without Girls Aloud? its not like GA were the first girlband ever. They may share the same record label but that means nothing.
Strange analysis
They were only formed by the label to replace GA though, if GA didn't exist or didn't succeed, it's unlikely they would try making another group.
Another label could easily have created them though thats the nitty gritty of the matter. They didn't need to create a new girlband solely due to Girls Alouds days being numbered. You make it seem as though Girls Aloud needed to be on their way out for The Saturdays to be created and thats just strange.
Does it matter who came first?. I seriously hope Girls Aloud do return, but if not, they don't have anything to prove anyway. The Saturdays still have a lot to prove
I agree with you too Kutox. It's alright having a few successful songs but The sats are not really competition and or force. They are in their third album now and something needs to change
Sugababes did it by album 2 and continued until album 5. Girls aloud managed it through all 6 albums (if you count the GH which was a huge seller and had new songs)
It doesn't matter how big an advantage Girls Aloud had with Sound Of The Underground (or any other song for that matter), that doesn't take away from how brilliant a song it was. It's a modern pop masterpiece. You can't honestly compare it with other reality show winning songs like The Climb or Hallelujah *puke*.
Well there we go then. You're basically agreeing with me that GA got a great start to their careers with such a brilliant song handed to them. The fact it was at Christmas and was off the back of a huge TV show was always going to make it massive, regardless of the song quality.
And quite honestly I don't care about the fact Girls Aloud were formed by a reality show - they and The Saturdays are both manufactured girl bands.
...who started their careers in completely different ways. GA had auditions shown on TV and got voted into the band. The public could connect with them and know who they were in the space of a few weeks. They had the aforementioned Xmas #1 which got them mass attention. After one single they were pretty much known by everyone. The Sats had to do it the harder way with auditions (not shown to millions of people) and then a debut single simply being sent to radio/TV for airplay. Completely different situations.
The Saturdays have still become just as publicised as any X Factor artist - they're in the papers everyday, their songs are played on radio stations across the land, and they've appeared and performed on most primetime tv shows (similar to Pixie Lott).
They're in the Daily Mail everyday. Hardly The Sun or any other credible newspaper (if you can even call that credible). And them being snapped eating chocolate is hardly going to make people go and buy their albums if that's what you're implying. The DM just have an obsession with them, take pics of the and publish pointless "stories" about them. And as for the radio comment, EVERY artist has their songs sent to radios everywhere. It's a form of promotion. Same with the TV shows, it's promotion. Every artist does it (unless you're a worldwide superstar). Not sure what you're getting at here.
They are yet to come up with a song which blows us all away and becomes a truly massive hit
And what song did GA come up with that blew everyone away and was a massive hit? Don't say SOTU as that was always going to be a smash due to the circumstances. I'll Stand By You? Did it sell 200K? Walk This Way? One of the most widely criticised Comic Relief singles? The Promise? Would it have been as big as it was without Cheryl being the Nations Sweetheart and performing on the X-Factor where Cheryl herself was a judge? The rest of their songs had pretty average chart runs with a debut in the top ten followed by a quick fall out of the top 40. 'Up' had regular promotion and still sold over 300K and is played by radios all the time. 'Ego' sold 300K and even 'Issues' and 'Just Can't Get Enough' are on around 250K. Single sales wise, The Sats are doing much better than GA's singles did.
Even if Missing You hits no.1 - which I've said all along it could easily do, considering how they are marketed and how desperate some of their fans are for them to get a no.1 single - that doesn't make it any more memorable
It doesn't need to be memorable. Hardly any #1's are these days. It's about sales and as long as MY sells well then there's no problem.
Ego was a decent enough song, but imo it's still nowhere near as good or memorable as Sound Of The Underground, Love Machine, Biology, Call The Shots, etc
See I disagree here. I think only Biology and Call The Shots are pretty good. I think most of GA's songs are too samey and "cute pop", whereas The Sats are a bit more versatile with their music.
It sold a lot but they did perform it on Dancing On Ice in front of 10 million viewers, and it was featured in a tv ad for a while
Just like 'The Promise' was performed on X-Factor (a show where a member was a popular judge on) in front of millions of viewers, too.
Well there we go then. You're basically agreeing with me that GA got a great start to their careers with such a brilliant song handed to them. The fact it was at Christmas and was off the back of a huge TV show was always going to make it massive, regardless of the song quality.
Firstly, The Saturdays have all their songs 'handed to them' too. That doesn't automatically mean their songs are going to be worse than Girls Aloud's, does it? I'm not debating that Sound Of The Underground was always going to be huge. But like I said, that doesn't mean it's not a brilliant song. My point is that it didn't have to be brilliant though - they could of gone with a typical dreary ballad which they usually do on those shows, but instead they got an amazing pop song which broke the trend. I don't care how much it sold or any of that crap, and I'm not denying it was given to them. Yes that's just fortune, but the music speaks for itself at the end of the day, wherever it comes from for either group.
...who started their careers in completely different ways. GA had auditions shown on TV and got voted into the band. The public could connect with them and know who they were in the space of a few weeks. They had the aforementioned Xmas #1 which got them mass attention. After one single they were pretty much known by everyone. The Sats had to do it the harder way with auditions (not shown to millions of people) and then a debut single simply being sent to radio/TV for airplay. Completely different situations.
Again, like I said, they are both manufactured so I don't care about who has had the bigger advantage in terms of sales. The Saturdays have connected with the public at this stage just as much as GA. Yes they've had it 'the harder way' at first, but they are now at the stage where they don't have to worry about that because they get so much coverage. That doesn't change what the music has to be like.
I think we are arguing separate things here - I'm talking about the quality of the music, and you seem to be focusing on sales and who has the advantage in that sense. Anyway, on we go...
They're in the Daily Mail everyday. Hardly The Sun or any other credible newspaper (if you can even call that credible). And them being snapped eating chocolate is hardly going to make people go and buy their albums if that's what you're implying. The DM just have an obsession with them, take pics of the and publish pointless "stories" about them. And as for the radio comment, EVERY artist has their songs sent to radios everywhere. It's a form of promotion. Same with the TV shows, it's promotion. Every artist does it (unless you're a worldwide superstar). Not sure what you're getting at here.
They're in most tabloids almost everyday for some reason or another - whether it's about their love life, what they're wearing, when they attend events etc. That's because they are young girls and they are a pop group aimed at the charts. I'm not saying the newspaper stories affect their record sales but it gets them noticed. Like they say - all publicity is good publicity. Yes, GA have had the same too, but my point was that that makes them both even in that sense. I don't know what you think I meant by that but I wasn't suggesting that gives them an advantage.
And what song did GA come up with that blew everyone away and was a massive hit? Don't say SOTU as that was always going to be a smash due to the circumstances. I'll Stand By You? Did it sell 200K? Walk This Way? One of the most widely criticised Comic Relief singles? The Promise? Would it have been as big as it was without Cheryl being the Nations Sweetheart and performing on the X-Factor where Cheryl herself was a judge? The rest of their songs had pretty average chart runs with a debut in the top ten followed by a quick fall out of the top 40. 'Up' had regular promotion and still sold over 300K and is played by radios all the time. 'Ego' sold 300K and even 'Issues' and 'Just Can't Get Enough' are on around 250K. Single sales wise, The Sats are doing much better than GA's singles did.
Yes, SOTU was always going to be a hit, that's undeniable. But again, as I said before - it also happened to be a great pop song which was loved by many pop fans and critics, instead of being the usual soppy ballad about overcoming struggles and all that crap. No Good Advice, Love Machine, Biology, Sexy No No No, Call The Shots, The Promise (to name a few) were all extremely well-received and successful. I don't care if they performed them on tv shows and whatnot - that doesn't take away from how good they are as songs in terms of quality. The reason I mentioned Ego is because you pointed out that it sold 300k, and I said that was partly down to the tv appearances it got. Again - I think I'm arguing about quality and reception, whereas you're talking about sales and chart positions. That's not a criticism but I'm just saying that we aren't entirely debating the same thing.
And as for The Sats singles sales being higher than Girls Aloud's - well this has been mentioned before, but we are in a different time now so that argument is totally invalid. I could mention that GA's album sales are much higher than The Sats, but we both know two things; a) singles sales are MUCH higher now than they were 5 years ago. b) album sales have plummeted over the last few years. That should put that debate to bed.
It doesn't need to be memorable. Hardly any #1's are these days. It's about sales and as long as MY sells well then there's no problem.
Fair enough if that's how you see it, there's no problem with that, but although I follow the charts a lot, quality is what matters more imo. There's been some terrible no.1's this year. I know that's all subjective, but in general, I don't think Missing You has had a great overall reception and even if it gets to no.1 it won't make more people like it. It's frustrating because I truly want The Saturdays to release an amazing 'signature' song, but I'm still waiting.
See I disagree here. I think only Biology and Call The Shots are pretty good. I think most of GA's songs are too samey and "cute pop", whereas The Sats are a bit more versatile with their music.
Now when it comes to music jargon and picking apart songs, I'm not the best. I'm sure many others here could do that. You'd have to ask GA fans who are better with words, or read critic reviews. I know exactly what I think, but getting it into words is something I don't have the natural ability to do. But anyway, what I will say is that Girls Aloud have been widely seen as one of the best pop groups of the last decade, their albums have been well-received and their songs are exciting, have clever lyrics, interesting production, and some of the catchiest melodies I've ever heard. Fair enough they've never pulled off a proper 'ballad' as such, they've had a few that come close, I mean The Loving Kind is stunning in that sense. I like some of The Saturdays' songs, but mostly it feels like fairly typical pop songs I've heard all before. I know that's not their fault - perhaps they need some Xenomania magic themselves?
Just like 'The Promise' was performed on X-Factor (a show where a member was a popular judge on) in front of millions of viewers, too.
Yes, it was - I'm not denying that. Sorry to repeat myself yet again, but I still think it was a great song and got a good reception anyway. The only reason I mentioned Ego before was because you mentioned it sold 300k. I know nearly all of what I'm saying about quality is subjective, but I'm just reflecting the general consensus from fans and critics over Girls Aloud's career.
Sorry this has turned into some big debate, it's not as if I'm some crazed Girls Aloud fan who hates The Saturdays. I'm a huge pop music fan, and I'm just frustrated by The Sats not building on their first album success with any great songs to rival Girls Aloud's. In terms of the girls themselves, it's not down to them what the quality of their songs is, for either group, but the music is what talks in the case of such groups. The talent of the girls is another issue altogether which I won't go into here, and I must stress I'm not generalising any of what I've said here at all. I'm just talking specifically about these 2 girl bands.
But I think the common trend in this little debate is that, as I said a few times, we are debating different things here - I'm talking about the quality of the music, you're talking about sales and who has the advantage, mostly. I'm not criticising but I think that's why we seem to be disagreeing about a lot of things. Anyway, that's my afternoon gone don't make me write as much next time lol
I think only Biology and Call The Shots are pretty good. I think most of GA's songs are too samey and "cute pop", whereas The Sats are a bit more versatile with their music.
Really? I would have said it was the other way around. Have you ever listened to any of Girls Aloud's albums, particularly Tangled Up or Chemistry? Because I suppose their album tracks tend to be more experimental/less commercial e.g. Swinging London Town, It's Magic, Memory Of You, Graffiti My Soul, Close To Love, Watch Me Go, the full-length Untouchable. But even with their singles, I don't think that Sexy! No No No, Something Kinda Ooooh, The Loving Kind or Wake Me Up, to name just a few, could be called "samey" or "cute pop".
And I'm not knocking The Saturdays, because I am actually a fan, but I'd still describe their material as your typical girlband fodder. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But its the kind of thing that Atomic Kitten would be releasing if they were around today. I think there's a reason why Girls Aloud have received so much critical acclaim, the kind that The Saturdays can only dream of.
Also you mention a lot in your posts about sales figures, publicity and how Girls Aloud were formed. Does it even matter? Can't you just judge on the quality of the material? We're living in a world where Flo Rida, Joe McElderry and Scouting For Girls are getting number ones, so surely chart positions and sales are a pretty redundant measure of quality?
Comments
I wouldn't really call it a strange analysis at all Its the same theory thats been mentioned on this exact thread, and by many other sources - that The Saturdays were created by Fascination with the intention of being the successors to Girls Aloud, who, after Tangled Up, seemed to be coming to the end of their natural lifespan. Surely its just good business sense, there's nothing strange about it.
Also if you'd read my comment properly, you'd see I said The Saturdays "probably" wouldn't be here if Girls Aloud hadn't been successful. Therefore its just a theory, not fact, but it seems very likely.
They were only formed by the label to replace GA though, if GA didn't exist or didn't succeed, it's unlikely they would try making another group.
But whatever
I reckon its quite likely
Some Cheryl highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXpJcd7jeps - from 3:17
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkzzZ4To09U&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNbUaN23pDo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78mNjp-DlBs - from 1:53
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l10YMqyWfk8 - from 2:50
Kimberley
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmMSWJaTW-E&feature=related
Thanks
Sugababes did it by album 2 and continued until album 5. Girls aloud managed it through all 6 albums (if you count the GH which was a huge seller and had new songs)
Well there we go then. You're basically agreeing with me that GA got a great start to their careers with such a brilliant song handed to them. The fact it was at Christmas and was off the back of a huge TV show was always going to make it massive, regardless of the song quality.
...who started their careers in completely different ways. GA had auditions shown on TV and got voted into the band. The public could connect with them and know who they were in the space of a few weeks. They had the aforementioned Xmas #1 which got them mass attention. After one single they were pretty much known by everyone. The Sats had to do it the harder way with auditions (not shown to millions of people) and then a debut single simply being sent to radio/TV for airplay. Completely different situations.
They're in the Daily Mail everyday. Hardly The Sun or any other credible newspaper (if you can even call that credible). And them being snapped eating chocolate is hardly going to make people go and buy their albums if that's what you're implying. The DM just have an obsession with them, take pics of the and publish pointless "stories" about them. And as for the radio comment, EVERY artist has their songs sent to radios everywhere. It's a form of promotion. Same with the TV shows, it's promotion. Every artist does it (unless you're a worldwide superstar). Not sure what you're getting at here.
And what song did GA come up with that blew everyone away and was a massive hit? Don't say SOTU as that was always going to be a smash due to the circumstances. I'll Stand By You? Did it sell 200K? Walk This Way? One of the most widely criticised Comic Relief singles? The Promise? Would it have been as big as it was without Cheryl being the Nations Sweetheart and performing on the X-Factor where Cheryl herself was a judge? The rest of their songs had pretty average chart runs with a debut in the top ten followed by a quick fall out of the top 40. 'Up' had regular promotion and still sold over 300K and is played by radios all the time. 'Ego' sold 300K and even 'Issues' and 'Just Can't Get Enough' are on around 250K. Single sales wise, The Sats are doing much better than GA's singles did.
It doesn't need to be memorable. Hardly any #1's are these days. It's about sales and as long as MY sells well then there's no problem.
See I disagree here. I think only Biology and Call The Shots are pretty good. I think most of GA's songs are too samey and "cute pop", whereas The Sats are a bit more versatile with their music.
Just like 'The Promise' was performed on X-Factor (a show where a member was a popular judge on) in front of millions of viewers, too.
Missing You (49p Amazon, 65P Play.com 40p Hmv)
Missing You Cahill Remix 79p Itunes.
Go Team Satssssss
What's the point in that? They will get a number 1 by farce.
Up
Pass - they're practically identical!
Jump
The Show
Forever is Over (not keen on either)
Ego
Wake Me Up
Firstly, The Saturdays have all their songs 'handed to them' too. That doesn't automatically mean their songs are going to be worse than Girls Aloud's, does it? I'm not debating that Sound Of The Underground was always going to be huge. But like I said, that doesn't mean it's not a brilliant song. My point is that it didn't have to be brilliant though - they could of gone with a typical dreary ballad which they usually do on those shows, but instead they got an amazing pop song which broke the trend. I don't care how much it sold or any of that crap, and I'm not denying it was given to them. Yes that's just fortune, but the music speaks for itself at the end of the day, wherever it comes from for either group.
Again, like I said, they are both manufactured so I don't care about who has had the bigger advantage in terms of sales. The Saturdays have connected with the public at this stage just as much as GA. Yes they've had it 'the harder way' at first, but they are now at the stage where they don't have to worry about that because they get so much coverage. That doesn't change what the music has to be like.
I think we are arguing separate things here - I'm talking about the quality of the music, and you seem to be focusing on sales and who has the advantage in that sense. Anyway, on we go...
They're in most tabloids almost everyday for some reason or another - whether it's about their love life, what they're wearing, when they attend events etc. That's because they are young girls and they are a pop group aimed at the charts. I'm not saying the newspaper stories affect their record sales but it gets them noticed. Like they say - all publicity is good publicity. Yes, GA have had the same too, but my point was that that makes them both even in that sense. I don't know what you think I meant by that but I wasn't suggesting that gives them an advantage.
Yes, SOTU was always going to be a hit, that's undeniable. But again, as I said before - it also happened to be a great pop song which was loved by many pop fans and critics, instead of being the usual soppy ballad about overcoming struggles and all that crap. No Good Advice, Love Machine, Biology, Sexy No No No, Call The Shots, The Promise (to name a few) were all extremely well-received and successful. I don't care if they performed them on tv shows and whatnot - that doesn't take away from how good they are as songs in terms of quality. The reason I mentioned Ego is because you pointed out that it sold 300k, and I said that was partly down to the tv appearances it got. Again - I think I'm arguing about quality and reception, whereas you're talking about sales and chart positions. That's not a criticism but I'm just saying that we aren't entirely debating the same thing.
And as for The Sats singles sales being higher than Girls Aloud's - well this has been mentioned before, but we are in a different time now so that argument is totally invalid. I could mention that GA's album sales are much higher than The Sats, but we both know two things; a) singles sales are MUCH higher now than they were 5 years ago. b) album sales have plummeted over the last few years. That should put that debate to bed.
Fair enough if that's how you see it, there's no problem with that, but although I follow the charts a lot, quality is what matters more imo. There's been some terrible no.1's this year. I know that's all subjective, but in general, I don't think Missing You has had a great overall reception and even if it gets to no.1 it won't make more people like it. It's frustrating because I truly want The Saturdays to release an amazing 'signature' song, but I'm still waiting.
Now when it comes to music jargon and picking apart songs, I'm not the best. I'm sure many others here could do that. You'd have to ask GA fans who are better with words, or read critic reviews. I know exactly what I think, but getting it into words is something I don't have the natural ability to do. But anyway, what I will say is that Girls Aloud have been widely seen as one of the best pop groups of the last decade, their albums have been well-received and their songs are exciting, have clever lyrics, interesting production, and some of the catchiest melodies I've ever heard. Fair enough they've never pulled off a proper 'ballad' as such, they've had a few that come close, I mean The Loving Kind is stunning in that sense. I like some of The Saturdays' songs, but mostly it feels like fairly typical pop songs I've heard all before. I know that's not their fault - perhaps they need some Xenomania magic themselves?
Yes, it was - I'm not denying that. Sorry to repeat myself yet again, but I still think it was a great song and got a good reception anyway. The only reason I mentioned Ego before was because you mentioned it sold 300k. I know nearly all of what I'm saying about quality is subjective, but I'm just reflecting the general consensus from fans and critics over Girls Aloud's career.
Sorry this has turned into some big debate, it's not as if I'm some crazed Girls Aloud fan who hates The Saturdays. I'm a huge pop music fan, and I'm just frustrated by The Sats not building on their first album success with any great songs to rival Girls Aloud's. In terms of the girls themselves, it's not down to them what the quality of their songs is, for either group, but the music is what talks in the case of such groups. The talent of the girls is another issue altogether which I won't go into here, and I must stress I'm not generalising any of what I've said here at all. I'm just talking specifically about these 2 girl bands.
But I think the common trend in this little debate is that, as I said a few times, we are debating different things here - I'm talking about the quality of the music, you're talking about sales and who has the advantage, mostly. I'm not criticising but I think that's why we seem to be disagreeing about a lot of things. Anyway, that's my afternoon gone don't make me write as much next time lol
I don't think any other girlband will capture the magic of Sexy! No No No, Call The Shots, The Promise, Biology, Untouchable, Close To Love ect..
Life Got Cold is incredible
Up
Issues
Jump
The Show
Love Machine
Ego
Wake Me Up
Really? I would have said it was the other way around. Have you ever listened to any of Girls Aloud's albums, particularly Tangled Up or Chemistry? Because I suppose their album tracks tend to be more experimental/less commercial e.g. Swinging London Town, It's Magic, Memory Of You, Graffiti My Soul, Close To Love, Watch Me Go, the full-length Untouchable. But even with their singles, I don't think that Sexy! No No No, Something Kinda Ooooh, The Loving Kind or Wake Me Up, to name just a few, could be called "samey" or "cute pop".
And I'm not knocking The Saturdays, because I am actually a fan, but I'd still describe their material as your typical girlband fodder. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But its the kind of thing that Atomic Kitten would be releasing if they were around today. I think there's a reason why Girls Aloud have received so much critical acclaim, the kind that The Saturdays can only dream of.
Also you mention a lot in your posts about sales figures, publicity and how Girls Aloud were formed. Does it even matter? Can't you just judge on the quality of the material? We're living in a world where Flo Rida, Joe McElderry and Scouting For Girls are getting number ones, so surely chart positions and sales are a pretty redundant measure of quality?