It's interesting that people still write Kylie off as nothing but a puppet, 25 years after they gleefully told her she wouldn't have a career that lasted 5 years, never mind 25.
25 years is a proper achievement. Yeah, some acts have been around for longer, but there is also an infinite list of acts that could only dream of such an achievement.
It's well documented that she wrestled for some control of her creative output long before she left the PWL label. The image was the first thing she could get her hands on, but the input into to her music came shortly afterwards. She was co-writing songs with other producers as far back as 1990 and she wrote about six or seven songs on her 1991 album with Mike Stock.
SAW hit factory changed the musical landscape, and not for the better. most pop music prior to this was created by the youth of the day expressing themselves, and old businessmen facilitating it. SAW took away creativity from the youth, they gave them everything, the artists became puppets. what youve had since is a succession of manufactured acts, all sounding the same, all following the formula. whether you or anyone likes manufactured music is irrelevant. what is relevant though is that old men creating pop products have killed creativity in pop.
as for the op's post.... so what? 25 years is like the other day! worry when its 50 years, like the rolling stones! or beatles.
What complete snobbery. I dont rate the song myself, but PWL produced some fantastic stuff. Indeed kylies 'better the devil you know' is a magnificent pop song.
SAW took away creativity from the youth, they gave them everything, the artists became puppets. what youve had since is a succession of manufactured acts, all sounding the same, all following the formula.
Not wanting to argue with you rob, but I think you’re exaggerating. You imply that SAW somehow robbed creativity from an entire generation, never to be returned, and I don’t believe that is true. The kind of creativity you talk about has always been there, was also present throughout the SAW years, and has remained ever since. It still exists now. Besides, I am not sure if the Hit Factory formula even works any more.
SAW also did not invent manufactured pop, they just so happened to be successful at it for a few years. And besides, at the time they were having hits, SAW were in their 30s – hardly the “old men” you’re talking about. Some might argue that SAW were doing exactly what you claim they weren't. They were young men creating their own distinctive sound - a very individual sound - which was popular enough to make them all millionaires.
Didn't know this, apparantly Kylie Minogue reached the top of the charts 25 years ago on the 14th february 1988 with I should be so lucky, for a whooping 5 weeks!
Before my time and lots of others on here of course, so I don't know much about it, but its interesting that song is now 1/4 of a century old.
It's well documented that she wrestled for some control of her creative output long before she left the PWL label. The image was the first thing she could get her hands on, but the input into to her music came shortly afterwards. She was co-writing songs with other producers as far back as 1990 and she wrote about six or seven songs on her 1991 album with Mike Stock.
which would account for her later material whilst still with pwl , being much better.
What complete snobbery. I dont rate the song myself, but PWL produced some fantastic stuff. Indeed kylies 'better the devil you know' is a magnificent pop song.
its not snobbery! unless you think that a track created as a commercial enterprise by middle aged men has as much respectibility as one created by an artist or artistes by their own talent !
Not wanting to argue with you rob, but I think you’re exaggerating. You imply that SAW somehow robbed creativity from an entire generation, never to be returned, and I don’t believe that is true. The kind of creativity you talk about has always been there, was also present throughout the SAW years, and has remained ever since. It still exists now. Besides, I am not sure if the Hit Factory formula even works any more.
look at the chart facts m8... before SAW there was no big hit factory, there was no big pop production line where there artists were created by the management. everything about SAW s artists were created by SAW.
there were a few exceptions, tight fit for eg, but they didnt last long. the monkees?... initially yes they were put together but even so they transcended that to become a respectably group.
before SAW pop was almost entirely created by the youth of the day coming up with an idea, a sound, a look, and they had input into their material. management facilitated it, by promoting, backing, supporting, the acts. the difference is that the pop group or artist was the artists own creation.
compare the fashions, genres, before SAW and then after...
SAW also did not invent manufactured pop,
no they didnt, they popularised it and sold it to a new young generation as acceptable. its worked!
they just so happened to be successful at it for a few years. And besides, at the time they were having hits, SAW were in their 30s – hardly the “old men” you’re talking about. Some might argue that SAW were doing exactly what you claim they weren't. They were young men creating their own distinctive sound - a very individual sound - which was popular enough to make them all millionaires.
i make it they were in their 40's! sorry but my generation would never let 'oldies' control our musical creativity, they had the power to make it happen, but creativity was ours.
beat, psychedelia, rock, glam, prog, punk, new wave, disco, two tone/ska, rock n roll, rockabilly, indie, new romantic, electro, etc etc etc were all created by the youth of the day. how rich and diverse those times were, when music was made by a generation/s of kids with something to say, to express individuality and cut new ground and have fun!
THIS is why manufactured music should never have been accepted. we moan at the generic, unoriginal, formulaic, corporate pop thats created today.... it started with SAW.
it might be hard to agree with IF you like SAWs material... but thats the bottom line.
But, apart from Simon Cowell, who are the old men you’re talking about?
fuller, walsh, waterman, they have dominated the (pure) pop scene for 25 years.
Anyone remember some award show she was on possibly MTV and she read out the lyrics of that song it was so cringey and pretentious. Gettt offfff the staaaaage.
Anyone remember some award show she was on possibly MTV and she read out the lyrics of that song it was so cringey and pretentious. Gettt offfff the staaaaage.
Funny how different people perceive things differently.
Some award show? Possibly MTV? It was at the 1996 poetry olympics. And it was only cringey and pretentious in your opinion, which means very little considering you don't even know what event it was.
Anyone remember some award show she was on possibly MTV and she read out the lyrics of that song it was so cringey and pretentious. Gettt offfff the staaaaage.
I wouldn't have seen it in 1996 so I must have seen the clip on a programme during the 2000s Kylie revival, still seems obnoxious (in my opinion only of course :P) "irony" or not. It was painful to watch so whatever show I was watching that featured it I turned it off. That's what comes into my head whenever I see this song mentioned.
I get what she was trying to do I just don't think it was delivered well.
which would account for her later material whilst still with pwl, being much better.
I like your notion that Kylie’s involvement only improved SAW’s work! :-) That said, I’d be interested to hear your opinion on a track such as Finer Feelings from Let's Get To It, which is a Stock/Waterman song that Kylie didn’t co-write, is really quite beautiful (in my opinion) and is about as far removed from a typical SAW production as you will get. It’s all subjective at the end of the day. :-)
before SAW there was no big hit factory, there was no big pop production line where there artists were created by the management. everything about SAW s artists were created by SAW.
Not *everything* about the acts was created by SAW. The acts indeed had managers but those managers were not SAW and, ultimately, the acts were still in control of their own careers. SAW only had control over the musical output they produced (although they collaborated more often than people care to remember) and, because of the PWL label, they also had control over how most of the *records* were marketed, promoted and distributed. In many respects, SAW were the “artists”. And just because they needed singers to sell records (like every producer who can’t sing), just because they used synthetic instruments and wrote simple (but catchy) melodies, and just because groups of people didn’t like the end result doesn’t mean there wasn’t any creativity involved.
before SAW pop was almost entirely created by the youth of the day coming up with an idea, a sound, a look, and they had input into their material. management facilitated it, by promoting, backing, supporting, the acts. the difference is that the pop group or artist was the artists own creation.
But this was also the case for some of SAW’s biggest acts. You imply that the acts had no choice whatsoever and relinquished all rights to their own careers, which is untrue. For example, Rick Astley wrote his own material and worked with other producers at the same time he worked with SAW. Bananarama always co-wrote with SAW, while they obviously co-wrote with other producers before and afterwards. Dead Or Alive wrote all their own material and made a very conscious decision to work with SAW in a production capacity only. Kylie took control of her image very early on and was actively collaborating with SAW on her music by the time she left PWL.
In 1984, when they scored their first proper hit with Hazell Dean, Waterman was 37, Stock was 32 and Matt Aitken was 27. (Incidentally, Hazell Dean was also 27.) By the time they produced I Should Be So Lucky, only Waterman was in his 40s and Matt Aitken had just turned 30. They were hardly oldies – but I guess that depends on how each of us defines oldies?
beat, psychedelia, rock, glam, prog, punk, new wave, disco, two tone/ska, rock n roll, rockabilly, indie, new romantic, electro, etc etc etc were all created by the youth of the day. how rich and diverse those times were, when music was made by a generation/s of kids with something to say, to express individuality and cut new ground and have fun!
Of course that is all true, but you say that as if there wasn’t a diverse music scene at the time that SAW were having hits. You say that as if there hasn’t been a diverse music scene since. You say that as if SAW single-handedly zapped all creativity out of music completely – and I *know* you don’t really believe that! Musical diversity was always there and still exists today. (Granted, you may have to look a little harder to find it nowadays!)
THIS is why manufactured music should never have been accepted. we moan at the generic, unoriginal, formulaic, corporate pop thats created today.... it started with SAW. it might be hard to agree with IF you like SAWs material... but thats the bottom line.
It’s only hard to agree with because it’s not exactly the complete picture. Rather than it being the bottom line, I tend to think it’s based on opinion and individual interpretation. Someone else might see that there has always been plenty of original, unformulaic, unmanufactured pop in the world, hence they might not immediately agree that a single production team which hasn’t had a proper hit for 20 years has had such a negative influence on today’s music scene.
fuller, walsh, waterman, they have dominated the (pure) pop scene for 25 years.
Well, Waterman has not dominated the pop scene for 25 years. He has had varying levels of success throughout that time and he has not dominated anything for at least a decade. But it’s interesting that suddenly you called it the “pure” pop scene, since it is a moniker which is synonymous with manufactured pop. These names aren’t the only ones responsible for pop music, “pure” or otherwise, in the past 25 years, though, are they?
One last thing... I know you and I will never agree on the subject of SAW, rob, so I am just throwing my opinion in there for purposes of adding some balance. Please do take it in the light hearted spirit in which it is intended! :-)
I like your notion that Kylie’s involvement only improved SAW’s work! :-) That said, I’d be interested to hear your opinion on a track such as Finer Feelings from Let's Get To It, which is a Stock/Waterman song that Kylie didn’t co-write, is really quite beautiful (in my opinion) and is about as far removed from a typical SAW production as you will get. It’s all subjective at the end of the day. :-)
ha ha! maybe her involvement did improve saws work, if so fair play! certainly her early 90's material was superior to her earlier teenybop style.
Not *everything* about the acts was created by SAW. The acts indeed had managers but those managers were not SAW and, ultimately, the acts were still in control of their own careers. SAW only had control over the musical output they produced (although they collaborated more often than people care to remember) and, because of the PWL label, they also had control over how most of the *records* were marketed, promoted and distributed. In many respects, SAW were the “artists”. And just because they needed singers to sell records (like every producer who can’t sing), just because they used synthetic instruments and wrote simple (but catchy) melodies, and just because groups of people didn’t like the end result doesn’t mean there wasn’t any creativity involved.
ok not 'everything' was given to 'every' artiste who worked with saw, but they did produce a fair ammount. and watermans declaration "i can make a pop star out of anybody" didnt help dispell this notion. the bottom line is that they hit on a sound, and milked it for every pound they could squeeze out of their fans.
yep, simple melodies, so you agree that its simplistic music then ! :D
But this was also the case for some of SAW’s biggest acts. You imply that the acts had no choice whatsoever and relinquished all rights to their own careers, which is untrue. For example, Rick Astley wrote his own material and worked with other producers at the same time he worked with SAW. Bananarama always co-wrote with SAW, while they obviously co-wrote with other producers before and afterwards. Dead Or Alive wrote all their own material and made a very conscious decision to work with SAW in a production capacity only. Kylie took control of her image very early on and was actively collaborating with SAW on her music by the time she left PWL.
yep, i accept that some saw acts had some input, but id suggest the majority didnt. kylie didnt at first, sonia? reynolds girls? lonnie gordon? etc.
To be honest, I haven’t got a clue about how SAW altered fashions so I will have to take your word on any point you wish to make.
i highlighted the range of fashions and styles pre saw, and after there was much less . the slide started then.
In 1984, when they scored their first proper hit with Hazell Dean, Waterman was 37, Stock was 32 and Matt Aitken was 27. (Incidentally, Hazell Dean was also 27.) By the time they produced I Should Be So Lucky, only Waterman was in his 40s and Matt Aitken had just turned 30. They were hardly oldies – but I guess that depends on how each of us defines oldies?
making then 30-40 by the time the hit factory got going proper 4 years later.
yes musically that was old! the people who created music, the artists who created the great genres from rock n roll onwards were the youth of the day. mainly 18-25 year olds. the managers were oldies, they had the money, bussinuess acument, contacts, experience to facilitate record deals , arrange tours etc, but they backed new young pop acts of the day.
Not in every case, rob. I think you are generalising.
no not in every case, but certainly in the vast majority.
Of course that is all true, but you say that as if there wasn’t a diverse music scene at the time that SAW were having hits. You say that as if there hasn’t been a diverse music scene since. You say that as if SAW single-handedly zapped all creativity out of music completely – and I *know* you don’t really believe that! Musical diversity was always there and still exists today. (Granted, you may have to look a little harder to find it nowadays!)
not quite... before saw there was a diverse, youth lead, music scene. it didnt stop dead with saw's era, but they popularised manufactured music, and as times gone on it proved to be commercially successful to create pop acts to appeal to the young, girls, and frustrated middle aged women! lol. the generic, uber commercial scene we have today started with saw, and was perpetuated by waterman. if it wasnt for saw, steps ten years later would never have been so big. for 25 years now manufactured music has been seen as acceptable... but i remember 25 years before that when pop was much richer, original, diverse, and was created by the youth of the day.
It’s only hard to agree with because it’s not exactly the complete picture. Rather than it being the bottom line, I tend to think it’s based on opinion and individual interpretation. Someone else might see that there has always been plenty of original, unformulaic, unmanufactured pop in the world, hence they might not immediately agree that a single production team which hasn’t had a proper hit for 20 years has had such a negative influence on today’s music scene.
... but they started it, they popularised and made acceptable manufactured music. the boom in boybands/girlbands came right on the heels of saw. thats no coincidence. they showed to record production companies that you could package the whole product, and exploit it for the best commercial gain.
boybands/manufactured acts have been proven commercially popular. now if you like that and dont care how a track is created....fair play. other though would suggest that its negetive, because its not letting the youth of the day express themselves by creating their own music.
thats one reason i can respect busted! busted popularised guitar pop again, busted did what had been done for years before... young people creating their own music. musically busted are light years ahead saws created acts (as opposed to establish acts who have worked with saw).
Well, Waterman has not dominated the pop scene for 25 years. He has had varying levels of success throughout that time and he has not dominated anything for at least a decade. But it’s interesting that suddenly you called it the “pure” pop scene, since it is a moniker which is synonymous with manufactured pop. These names aren’t the only ones responsible for pop music, “pure” or otherwise, in the past 25 years, though, are they?
and a few others... yes...largely.
One last thing... I know you and I will never agree on the subject of SAW, rob, so I am just throwing my opinion in there for purposes of adding some balance. Please do take it in the light hearted spirit in which it is intended! :-)
Comments
25 years is a proper achievement. Yeah, some acts have been around for longer, but there is also an infinite list of acts that could only dream of such an achievement.
It's well documented that she wrestled for some control of her creative output long before she left the PWL label. The image was the first thing she could get her hands on, but the input into to her music came shortly afterwards. She was co-writing songs with other producers as far back as 1990 and she wrote about six or seven songs on her 1991 album with Mike Stock.
What complete snobbery. I dont rate the song myself, but PWL produced some fantastic stuff. Indeed kylies 'better the devil you know' is a magnificent pop song.
Not wanting to argue with you rob, but I think you’re exaggerating. You imply that SAW somehow robbed creativity from an entire generation, never to be returned, and I don’t believe that is true. The kind of creativity you talk about has always been there, was also present throughout the SAW years, and has remained ever since. It still exists now. Besides, I am not sure if the Hit Factory formula even works any more.
SAW also did not invent manufactured pop, they just so happened to be successful at it for a few years. And besides, at the time they were having hits, SAW were in their 30s – hardly the “old men” you’re talking about. Some might argue that SAW were doing exactly what you claim they weren't. They were young men creating their own distinctive sound - a very individual sound - which was popular enough to make them all millionaires.
But, apart from Simon Cowell, who are the old men you’re talking about?
which would account for her later material whilst still with pwl , being much better.
its not snobbery! unless you think that a track created as a commercial enterprise by middle aged men has as much respectibility as one created by an artist or artistes by their own talent !
look at the chart facts m8... before SAW there was no big hit factory, there was no big pop production line where there artists were created by the management. everything about SAW s artists were created by SAW.
there were a few exceptions, tight fit for eg, but they didnt last long. the monkees?... initially yes they were put together but even so they transcended that to become a respectably group.
before SAW pop was almost entirely created by the youth of the day coming up with an idea, a sound, a look, and they had input into their material. management facilitated it, by promoting, backing, supporting, the acts. the difference is that the pop group or artist was the artists own creation.
compare the fashions, genres, before SAW and then after...
no they didnt, they popularised it and sold it to a new young generation as acceptable. its worked!
i make it they were in their 40's! sorry but my generation would never let 'oldies' control our musical creativity, they had the power to make it happen, but creativity was ours.
beat, psychedelia, rock, glam, prog, punk, new wave, disco, two tone/ska, rock n roll, rockabilly, indie, new romantic, electro, etc etc etc were all created by the youth of the day. how rich and diverse those times were, when music was made by a generation/s of kids with something to say, to express individuality and cut new ground and have fun!
THIS is why manufactured music should never have been accepted. we moan at the generic, unoriginal, formulaic, corporate pop thats created today.... it started with SAW.
it might be hard to agree with IF you like SAWs material... but thats the bottom line.
fuller, walsh, waterman, they have dominated the (pure) pop scene for 25 years.
Funny how different people perceive things differently.
Some award show? Possibly MTV? It was at the 1996 poetry olympics. And it was only cringey and pretentious in your opinion, which means very little considering you don't even know what event it was.
It was at the Poetry Olympics in 1996:
http://www.myspace.com/video/deconstructing-kylie/kylie-minogue-at-the-poetry-olympics-1996-mpeg/647213
I get what she was trying to do I just don't think it was delivered well.
I like your notion that Kylie’s involvement only improved SAW’s work! :-) That said, I’d be interested to hear your opinion on a track such as Finer Feelings from Let's Get To It, which is a Stock/Waterman song that Kylie didn’t co-write, is really quite beautiful (in my opinion) and is about as far removed from a typical SAW production as you will get. It’s all subjective at the end of the day. :-)
Not *everything* about the acts was created by SAW. The acts indeed had managers but those managers were not SAW and, ultimately, the acts were still in control of their own careers. SAW only had control over the musical output they produced (although they collaborated more often than people care to remember) and, because of the PWL label, they also had control over how most of the *records* were marketed, promoted and distributed. In many respects, SAW were the “artists”. And just because they needed singers to sell records (like every producer who can’t sing), just because they used synthetic instruments and wrote simple (but catchy) melodies, and just because groups of people didn’t like the end result doesn’t mean there wasn’t any creativity involved.
But this was also the case for some of SAW’s biggest acts. You imply that the acts had no choice whatsoever and relinquished all rights to their own careers, which is untrue. For example, Rick Astley wrote his own material and worked with other producers at the same time he worked with SAW. Bananarama always co-wrote with SAW, while they obviously co-wrote with other producers before and afterwards. Dead Or Alive wrote all their own material and made a very conscious decision to work with SAW in a production capacity only. Kylie took control of her image very early on and was actively collaborating with SAW on her music by the time she left PWL.
To be honest, I haven’t got a clue about how SAW altered fashions so I will have to take your word on any point you wish to make.
In 1984, when they scored their first proper hit with Hazell Dean, Waterman was 37, Stock was 32 and Matt Aitken was 27. (Incidentally, Hazell Dean was also 27.) By the time they produced I Should Be So Lucky, only Waterman was in his 40s and Matt Aitken had just turned 30. They were hardly oldies – but I guess that depends on how each of us defines oldies?
Not in every case, rob. I think you are generalising.
Of course that is all true, but you say that as if there wasn’t a diverse music scene at the time that SAW were having hits. You say that as if there hasn’t been a diverse music scene since. You say that as if SAW single-handedly zapped all creativity out of music completely – and I *know* you don’t really believe that! Musical diversity was always there and still exists today. (Granted, you may have to look a little harder to find it nowadays!)
It’s only hard to agree with because it’s not exactly the complete picture. Rather than it being the bottom line, I tend to think it’s based on opinion and individual interpretation. Someone else might see that there has always been plenty of original, unformulaic, unmanufactured pop in the world, hence they might not immediately agree that a single production team which hasn’t had a proper hit for 20 years has had such a negative influence on today’s music scene.
Well, Waterman has not dominated the pop scene for 25 years. He has had varying levels of success throughout that time and he has not dominated anything for at least a decade. But it’s interesting that suddenly you called it the “pure” pop scene, since it is a moniker which is synonymous with manufactured pop. These names aren’t the only ones responsible for pop music, “pure” or otherwise, in the past 25 years, though, are they?
One last thing... I know you and I will never agree on the subject of SAW, rob, so I am just throwing my opinion in there for purposes of adding some balance. Please do take it in the light hearted spirit in which it is intended! :-)
ha ha! maybe her involvement did improve saws work, if so fair play! certainly her early 90's material was superior to her earlier teenybop style.
ok not 'everything' was given to 'every' artiste who worked with saw, but they did produce a fair ammount. and watermans declaration "i can make a pop star out of anybody" didnt help dispell this notion. the bottom line is that they hit on a sound, and milked it for every pound they could squeeze out of their fans.
yep, simple melodies, so you agree that its simplistic music then !
yep, i accept that some saw acts had some input, but id suggest the majority didnt. kylie didnt at first, sonia? reynolds girls? lonnie gordon? etc.
i highlighted the range of fashions and styles pre saw, and after there was much less . the slide started then.
making then 30-40 by the time the hit factory got going proper 4 years later.
yes musically that was old! the people who created music, the artists who created the great genres from rock n roll onwards were the youth of the day. mainly 18-25 year olds. the managers were oldies, they had the money, bussinuess acument, contacts, experience to facilitate record deals , arrange tours etc, but they backed new young pop acts of the day.
no not in every case, but certainly in the vast majority.
not quite... before saw there was a diverse, youth lead, music scene. it didnt stop dead with saw's era, but they popularised manufactured music, and as times gone on it proved to be commercially successful to create pop acts to appeal to the young, girls, and frustrated middle aged women! lol. the generic, uber commercial scene we have today started with saw, and was perpetuated by waterman. if it wasnt for saw, steps ten years later would never have been so big. for 25 years now manufactured music has been seen as acceptable... but i remember 25 years before that when pop was much richer, original, diverse, and was created by the youth of the day.
... but they started it, they popularised and made acceptable manufactured music. the boom in boybands/girlbands came right on the heels of saw. thats no coincidence. they showed to record production companies that you could package the whole product, and exploit it for the best commercial gain.
boybands/manufactured acts have been proven commercially popular. now if you like that and dont care how a track is created....fair play. other though would suggest that its negetive, because its not letting the youth of the day express themselves by creating their own music.
thats one reason i can respect busted! busted popularised guitar pop again, busted did what had been done for years before... young people creating their own music. musically busted are light years ahead saws created acts (as opposed to establish acts who have worked with saw).
and a few others... yes...largely.
no probs m8