|
||||||||
Josh Dubovie, Win Eurovision For The UK & For... |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#101 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
you are deluded
. ive told you all along that the vast majority of music lovers HATE their nursery rhyme, mass produced track. (again the use of single tense was deliberate). they appealed to children and a certain section of gay people (mainly young, older gay people i knew at the time prefered more sophisticated acts like erasure and the pet shop boys). outside that demograph they had very very few people who liked even 1 track (from 87 onwards). waterman produced a bog standard s/a/w track for eurovision. europe flatly rejected it. that is evidence for how much he/they are hated . if 'millions' like them like you claim, the result would have been much different. yeah? like what?... have any been nominated for any songwriting awards? recognition for being musically 'good'?, any critical acclaim? breaking and boundaries? (like madonna was at the time), cited by anyone as influencial? hell they didnt even sell much! they were 'kiddy pop', music ten year old girls liked. kylies early material was ok pop at best ... 'amazing'? lol.. not! You cannot deny that for nearly a decade, they were massive. All this rubbish about low sales, it is all relative. Don't be giving all this, "it was easier to get number 1s", because it wasn't. Everything is relative. If it was easy, then it was easy for everyone. The difference is, more people bought and liked SAW music than other artists...fact! |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#102 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,998
|
Quote:
The difference is, more people bought and liked SAW music than other artists...fact!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#103 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
And your evidence for such negativity towards SAW...or is that just your opinion?
You cannot deny that for nearly a decade, they were massive. All this rubbish about low sales, it is all relative. Don't be giving all this, "it was easier to get number 1s", because it wasn't. Everything is relative. If it was easy, then it was easy for everyone. The difference is, more people bought and liked SAW music than other artists...fact! here we go again... 'nearly a decade they were massive'... NO THEY WERE NOT! they had a couple of years when they kept releasing the same backing track with some created 'artiste' 'singing' over it.. the top ten selling records from 88 and 89, (20 in all) saw had 3!!!! dominant is something the beatles did, or t rex, slade, duran duran.. saw got their foot in the door because record sales were slumping due to the punk generation growing up and buying albums. every so often in music theres a generational shift and a generation turn away from the commercial singles chart. the beatles/merseybeat in the 60's 'ousted' the rock n rollers the 60's generation grew up and the glam rock invasion took place as a new, young generation claimed the charts for their music. same happened with punk after the glamrockers 'grew out of chart material'. it was when the punk/new romantic generation of the late 70's / early 80's turned their backs on chart music that a new generation got their chance. the charts in 87-8 were full of indie, rock, house, so when s/a/w gave children an alternative, they took it! people were still buying music, just not singles, getting a 'hit' at a time when you only needed eg 10,000 sales to get a #1 IS a damn site easier then when you needed 50,000 (figures used are for example). your last line is utter nonsense... more people DIDNT buy s/a/w then anyone else, and they only figure with rick astley in the top 100 sellers of all time. hardly 'domineering' lol. but your over inflated, delusional view of s/a/w does you not credit. you were in their target audience, you were in that demograph, but outside that they were nothing... but a horrible little irritation. ooh look, pretty much what people think of waterman now! lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
#104 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
well they obviously don't now
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#105 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
opinion based on everybody elses opinion i speak to and did back then! like i said... girls n certain gay guys like s/a/w, us adults HATED them.
here we go again... 'nearly a decade they were massive'... NO THEY WERE NOT! they had a couple of years when they kept releasing the same backing track with some created 'artiste' 'singing' over it.. the top ten selling records from 88 and 89, (20 in all) saw had 3!!!! dominant is something the beatles did, or t rex, slade, duran duran.. saw got their foot in the door because record sales were slumping due to the punk generation growing up and buying albums. every so often in music theres a generational shift and a generation turn away from the commercial singles chart. the beatles/merseybeat in the 60's 'ousted' the rock n rollers the 60's generation grew up and the glam rock invasion took place as a new, young generation claimed the charts for their music. same happened with punk after the glamrockers 'grew out of chart material'. it was when the punk/new romantic generation of the late 70's / early 80's turned their backs on chart music that a new generation got their chance. the charts in 87-8 were full of indie, rock, house, so when s/a/w gave children an alternative, they took it! people were still buying music, just not singles, getting a 'hit' at a time when you only needed eg 10,000 sales to get a #1 IS a damn site easier then when you needed 50,000 (figures used are for example). your last line is utter nonsense... more people DIDNT buy s/a/w then anyone else, and they only figure with rick astley in the top 100 sellers of all time. hardly 'domineering' lol. but your over inflated, delusional view of s/a/w does you not credit. you were in their target audience, you were in that demograph, but outside that they were nothing... but a horrible little irritation. ooh look, pretty much what people think of waterman now! lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
#106 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
they didnt then either, thats just a 'fact' he created.... like the one where he reckons hot chocolate created disco... or s/a/w were the pioneers of british based hi nrg (totally overlooking the vastly more successful and infinately more respected frankie goes to hollywood), or s/a/w created dance music
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#107 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,015
|
can someone post the Eurovision Thread link as i cant find it
|
|
|
|
|
|
#108 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
In your opinion only...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#109 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,204
|
Quote:
I think we will have to agree to disagree. You don't want to accept that they were successful back in the day, a success which many singers and bands can only dream about...oh and Kylie's first album sold 2.1 million copies...more than Madonna's True and many of Robbie's albums.
Apart from Kylie, what about all the other SAW artists? I doubt they've been around for as long as Madonna or Robbie- Sonia's career was short-lived, as was Big Fun, Pat and Mick, Michaela Strachan, Sinitta, Reynolds Girls, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#110 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,204
|
Quote:
they didnt then either, thats just a 'fact' he created.... like the one where he reckons hot chocolate created disco... or s/a/w were the pioneers of british based hi nrg (totally overlooking the vastly more successful and infinately more respected frankie goes to hollywood), or s/a/w created dance music
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() What about Farley Jackmaster Funk, Frankie Knuckles, David Morales and Steve Hurley? |
|
|
|
|
|
#111 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
I think we will have to agree to disagree. You don't want to accept that they were successful back in the day, a success which many singers and bands can only dream about...oh and Kylie's first album sold 2.1 million copies...more than Madonna's True and many of Robbie's albums.
heres a copy of the list of the best selling singles of the 80's... out of 100 s/a/w got just TWO entries... lol thats hardly 'dominant' http://www.buzzjack.com/forums/index...howtopic=85041 |
|
|
|
|
|
#112 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,204
|
Quote:
i accept they had a degree of success... but they were not dominant as you suggest, their artists bar kylie and astley sold bugger all. peruse old charts from 88 and 89 and youll see more indie in there then s/a/w, more house/dance, more rock...
heres a copy of the list of the best selling singles of the 80's... out of 100 s/a/w got just TWO entries... lol thats hardly 'dominant' http://www.buzzjack.com/forums/index...howtopic=85041 |
|
|
|
|
|
#113 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
I've just written that Madonna and Robbie are still around,unlike the SAW artists (apart from really Kylie)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#114 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
Thing is Madonna and Robbie are still around.
Apart from Kylie, what about all the other SAW artists? I doubt they've been around for as long as Madonna or Robbie- Sonia's career was short-lived, as was Big Fun, Pat and Mick, Michaela Strachan, Sinitta, Reynolds Girls, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#115 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
exactly, they are real artists, not some nonentity moulded for a cheap shot at making money... and lets face it ...thats all waterman is interested in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#116 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bristol
Posts: 341
|
Quote:
can someone post the Eurovision Thread link as i cant find it
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...1268887&page=9 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#117 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,204
|
Quote:
exactly, they are real artists, not some nonentity moulded for a cheap shot at making money... and lets face it ...thats all waterman is interested in.
Needless to say, regardless of her role as Maxine Peacock, the UK record buying public paid no attention to her records nor to Stock or Aitken-despite a performance on This Morning, Happening All Over Again peaked at No.46, dropping out of the Top 75 the next week. Ridin High got no TV or radio airplay (it was naff anyway), so failed to chart. I forgot, where is Tracy now? |
|
|
|
|
|
#118 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,204
|
Quote:
Sonia? Bananarama? Dead Or Alive?
And members of Dead or Alive are writing songs for other artists. As for Sonia, where is she? Probably in Wentworth Detention Centre . |
|
|
|
|
|
#119 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
Stock and Aitken had Tracy Shaw (yes, Maxine off Coronation Street) on their roster back in 1998, and gave her a couple of their songs- Lonnie Gordon's Happening All Over Again and Ridin High, recorded by a singer I've never heard of called Serena- apparently it was No.1 in Brazil (well Corona were popular there, and the main female never sang- the vocals on Rhythm of the Night belong to someone else, as did Baby Baby's).
Needless to say, regardless of her role as Maxine Peacock, the UK record buying public paid no attention to her records nor to Stock or Aitken-despite a performance on This Morning, Happening All Over Again peaked at No.46, dropping out of the Top 75 the next week. Ridin High got no TV or radio airplay (it was naff anyway), so failed to chart. I forgot, where is Tracy now? |
|
|
|
|
|
#120 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
And how successful was Lonnie Gordon with Happenin All Over Again?
dead or alive was pre- the hit factory, but were basically one hit wonders as non of their other hits are remembered...being rubbish you cannot claim bananarama as they were only breifly with saw. they were already an established act. that leaves us wiiiiittthhhh..... oh yeah, NO ONE! |
|
|
|
|
|
#121 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
right.. im bored enough to have done a little research.
ive gone through the top ten charts from 1988 and 1989 and catagorised the styles of hits. ok , its not a defining scientific experiment, but it IS a useful guide as to what was happening at the hight of the supposed s/a/w domination of the charts. of the top ten hits basic pop = 57% soul/black music = 12% dance/house/hip hop = 9% s/a/w hits = 9% 'indie' = 15% rock = 8% so you can see, of the top ten hits over those 2 years. s/a/w were pretty irrelevant, hardly dominating anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
#122 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
I suppose Pete Waterman's success with Steps between '97 and '01 was due to low record sales to!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#123 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kylie Minogue's Bedroom.
Posts: 4,354
|
Quote:
Thank you Red Blooded. They are indeed...as are many of their other hits they wrote for other artists. The joke is, too many people think they are too cool to admit to liking SAW's music. It is my belief that many people love their music, but choose not to admit to it.
All the SAW music lovers should come out! A massive shout out to you. Together, we fight the cause. |
|
|
|
|
|
#124 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 13,768
|
Quote:
right.. im bored enough to have done a little research.
ive gone through the top ten charts from 1988 and 1989 and catagorised the styles of hits. ok , its not a defining scientific experiment, but it IS a useful guide as to what was happening at the hight of the supposed s/a/w domination of the charts. of the top ten hits basic pop = 57% soul/black music = 12% dance/house/hip hop = 9% s/a/w hits = 9% 'indie' = 15% rock = 8% so you can see, of the top ten hits over those 2 years. s/a/w were pretty irrelevant, hardly dominating anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
#125 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 348
|
Lo and behold this thread has turned into another slanging match re SAW between miles and mushymanrob.
Miles I have stood up for you and still do re the fact SAW hits deserve credit, had you been at school during their peak, gay or straight, this is what you were listening to (OK minority was listening to the poodle perm so called heavy rock of the time). Also agree re SAW produced some excellent sales, and no, the downward trend of sales had nothing to do with SAW, sales went even lower a couple of years later in the faceless rave age. However, on this occasion have to agree with Mushymanrob that Joshs song for Eurovision was rubbish Pete should have done much better. Mushymanrob as stated before look at worldwide sales, as an example Dead Or Alives worldwide success continued way beyond their UK heyday. Since then Tim Lever and Mike Percy (left DOA 1990) have found even more success as writers in their own right for other artists. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:56.



. ive told you all along that the vast majority of music lovers HATE their nursery rhyme, mass produced track. (again the use of single tense was deliberate). they appealed to children and a certain section of gay people (mainly young, older gay people i knew at the time prefered more sophisticated acts like erasure and the pet shop boys). outside that demograph they had very very few people who liked even 1 track (from 87 onwards). 
