|
||||||||
The Top 40 -It's A Disgrace!!! |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
The singles chart is all about hype. Real musicians tend not to release singles unless they need to promote their album, the rest of it is all manufactured pap which is only appreciated by the little kids.
But then, you're kidding yourself if you think it hasn't always been that way. The early 90's, are you forgetting Kylie (in her SAW days), or Take That, or Bros, or Rick f*cking Astley, or Sonia? The 70's was no better. Can anyone seriously tell me that the Bay City Rollers was a quality outfit? You're just remembering the good stuff. In 5 years people will look at 2000/2001 in the same way. It's always been the same. Judge how good the music scene is by the quality of the album chart, not the singles. BTW please don't refer to vinyl as having "vastly" inferior sound quality to CD. If you heard a very high quality record deck you'd realise that the format can be every bit as good, if not better than CD. |
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Warrington, Cheshire
Posts: 517
|
In my opinion the Top 40 is no measure for music.
If you like an artist or band just buy their music. |
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,574
|
Unfortunatly these days its increasingly hard to get hooked onto any new bands listening to the Top 40. Its a shame as the charts have some god awful crap at the moment.
To be honest its a blessing in disguise as Ive got to be a big fan of artists such as JJ72, Feeder, Coldplay and others seeing them live as they were support acts to the Stereophonics and U2. The only way we can enjoy music now is through channels such as MTV and also seeing them live. Now I can finally see a reason why the US use their chart system. Unfortunatly I feel the end is nigh for the Single...... Dan |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
I haven't listened to the Top 40 for a few years now, simple reason it's crap. The singles that are released are either cover versions or dance music. Don't get me wrong some dance music I like, but some of it is really crap. So when a band that releases a single that they have wrote that sounds good then doesn't chart I'm wondering what's going on. Or if does chart then it doesn't get any higher than the top 30.
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Devon UK
Posts: 14
|
Radio Blues
There are shed loads of musicians making good music who can't get record deals because they haven't got short skirts, big baps and a smiley smiley.
The music business is sadly being run by accountants who see the biggest returns coming from ripping off teenagers pocket money with processed music, glossy videos and gratuitous publicity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,574
|
here here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,472
|
Re: Radio Blues
Quote:
Originally posted by Max Wolfe I think that is a very accurate summary of the charts, pop music has become so corporate over the last 20 years which is why so many acts appear the same, the money men see a format that works and then mil it, hence the current crop of 'shouting rock' bands that are Limp Bizkit clones, and all the boy and girl bands. It's getting harder and harder to find record company executives who are willing to take risks, which is why the success of people like David Gray is all that more refreshing.
There are shed loads of musicians making good music who can't get record deals because they haven't got short skirts, big baps and a smiley smiley. The music business is sadly being run by accountants who see the biggest returns coming from ripping off teenagers pocket money with processed music, glossy videos and gratuitous publicity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Thanet, Kent
Posts: 4,820
|
I can't see how you can say that the Top 40 is a disgrace. It's like saying the football league tables are a disgrace because your team isn't doing well. The charts are what they are as they have always been. The Top 40 singles chart doesn't reflect any more than which singles are being sold. We all know single sales are much lower than they used to be so the album chart may be a better reflection of what music people like. Just because you don't like certain kinds of music you can't say music today is bad.
I was around in the 60s and saw much of the start of what we would call pop. Call me a sad old ba****d but I think rock is shite and dislike most of the stuff stations like Capital FM / Invicta FM, etc. play. What I like and buy is mainly dance / trance stuff because I like it - that's all. Music is a matter of taste and there's no point ranting on about good and bad. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tony Richards I agree with you on the points you make, and music is certainly purely a matter of taste. I think the point some people are trying to make is the state of the current charts reflects a move in the music industry toward making music by numbers. I totally agree there is loads of great stuff around if you can be bothered to hunt it down, and I also accept there was a great deal of poor music around when I was growing up in the 70's. My real problem now is where do todays youngsters get exposed to new music ? When I was growing up stations like Capital had rock music and album programs, now it is all chart orientated.
I can't see how you can say that the Top 40 is a disgrace. It's like saying the football league tables are a disgrace because your team isn't doing well. The charts are what they are as they have always been. The Top 40 singles chart doesn't reflect any more than which singles are being sold. We all know single sales are much lower than they used to be so the album chart may be a better reflection of what music people like. Just because you don't like certain kinds of music you can't say music today is bad. I was around in the 60s and saw much of the start of what we would call pop. Call me a sad old ba****d but I think rock is shite and dislike most of the stuff stations like Capital FM / Invicta FM, etc. play. What I like and buy is mainly dance / trance stuff because I like it - that's all. Music is a matter of taste and there's no point ranting on about good and bad. |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Devon UK
Posts: 14
|
If BT hadn't set back the Internet ten years with their stupidity we could be listening to high quality web radio.
In the USA they have high quality streaming of audio & video cheap as chips. |
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Barnsley
Posts: 3,302
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Max Wolfe Would thank be chips as in french fries or chips as in crisps? If BT hadn't set back the Internet ten years with their stupidity we could be listening to high quality web radio. In the USA they have high quality streaming of audio & video cheap as chips. care of Classic Cheers episode! |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Norf Lahndahn
Posts: 512
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Ramsden This isn't really any different from what it was 10, 20 or even 30 years ago. I remember different people saying virtually the same thing every year for as long as I can remember. The fact is that everyone gets to a certain age where the top 40 isn't relevant any more.I think the point some people are trying to make is the state of the current charts reflects a move in the music industry toward making music by numbers It usually goes like this: Phase 1: "The top 40 isn't the same any more, I prefer the album charts" Phase 2: "Radio 1 plays too much <insert current fad here> these days, I'm going to listen to <local commercial radio> FM which plays a better music mix" Phase 3: "I can't watch Top of the Pops anymore, everyone on it just looks/sounds/acts so awful." Phase 4: "I never realised before, but I really like U2" Phase 5: "I don't like <local commercial radio> FM anymore, they play too much <recent artist>. I prefer <virgin/gold/magic> because they play "real music". ....etc... eventually you end up listening to Radio 2, you think U2 "used to be alright, buit they've gone all modern now", and you order those albums that get advertised on TV by Time Life. Its called getting old. By the way, I'm only 26, I've just observed this gradual transition in countless relatives, parents, family friends etc. Even people at work. It seems fairly commonplace. |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes This is very true, and I accept I am now at the age where the top 40 really isn't of relevance to me. However I still personally think that pop music is goverened more by the money men now than it has ever been. If you don't become an overnight sensatoin you get dropped pretty quickly from the record label. If that had always been the case acts like the Police and Duran Duran would never have made it. This isn't really any different from what it was 10, 20 or even 30 years ago. I remember different people saying virtually the same thing every year for as long as I can remember. The fact is that everyone gets to a certain age where the top 40 isn't relevant any more. Look at Mariah Carey as an example, she was signed toi massive Virgin deal on the back of selling 35million albums and because her last effort 'only' sold 2 million units in 6 months they looked for a way out. Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes I think for a lot of people that si very true. I think it was Danny Baker that once said "music stops beign good when you stop going in record shops" The point he was making at a certain age most people stop going intoi record shops looking for new music and that is the point that your taste seems to freeze, after that all new music is awful.It usually goes like this: Phase 1: "The top 40 isn't the same any more, I prefer the album charts" Phase 2: "Radio 1 plays too much <insert current fad here> these days, I'm going to listen to <local commercial radio> FM which plays a better music mix" Phase 3: "I can't watch Top of the Pops anymore, everyone on it just looks/sounds/acts so awful." Phase 4: "I never realised before, but I really like U2" Phase 5: "I don't like <local commercial radio> FM anymore, they play too much <recent artist>. I prefer <virgin/gold/magic> because they play "real music". Personally I like a lot of the newer acts around, a lot of dance music is fine, and some of the 'shouty rock' bands do produce some interesting material, although I would recommend to anyone who likes Limp Bizkit et al that they should go and buy the Pixies 'best of' albums. Yes I do have personal favorites from my youth, more because they remind me of certain times than for anyother reason, even if I still believe firmly that the Smiths are probably the best band of the last 20 years Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes Ok I'll admit to getting old, and Radio 2 I listen to. U2 I've always liked although I admit to finding their recent work more patchy, buying Time Life records NEVER !
....etc... eventually you end up listening to Radio 2, you think U2 "used to be alright, buit they've gone all modern now", and you order those albums that get advertised on TV by Time Life. Its called getting old. |
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Norf Lahndahn
Posts: 512
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Ramsden Yeah but her contract was for such a ridiculous amount of money at virgin - i don't remember exactly what it was but she didn't pay for herself selling 2 million albums so they dropped her. Thats basic economics - ok they shouldn't have given her so much in the first place but then they were taking a risk. She'll get picked up by someone else for a lot less.Look at Mariah Carey as an example, she was signed toi massive Virgin deal on the back of selling 35million albums and because her last effort 'only' sold 2 million units in 6 months they looked for a way out. More a case of a money grabbing artist than a money grabbing executive. |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes I seem to remeber it was around 90 million poundsYeah but her contract was for such a ridiculous amount of money at virgin - i don't remember exactly what it was but she Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes This is true, and I guess it can be argued that the economics didn't stack up in the first place, but what's to say her next album wouldn't emulate the success of her previous career, the company looked at her as a cash cow to be milked and wasn't willing to run with that risk when the first attempt failed.didn't pay for herself selling 2 million albums so they dropped her. Thats basic economics - Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes Maybe, it's certainly not a good point in her career especialy with the personal problems she has at the moment.ok they shouldn't have given her so much in the first place but then they were taking a risk. She'll get picked up by someone else for a lot less. Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes IU think the offers were on the table because the record executives saw pound signs where they should have seen a recording artist. You cannot blame her for taking the deal that was offered to her, we would all do the same
More a case of a money grabbing artist than a money grabbing executive. |
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Norf Lahndahn
Posts: 512
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Ramsden Thats fair enough; but if she didn't want to be under pressure to sell another 30 million she shouldn't have taken it - she can hardly be poor - lesser artists have turned down bigger deals for the sake of their integrity and sanity.IU think the offers were on the table because the record executives saw pound signs where they should have seen a recording artist. You cannot blame her for taking the deal that was offered to her, we would all do the same Anyway, are you saying she meekly sat in the A&R man's office to be offered 90 million? Don't you think she negotiated to get as much out of them as possible? The idea that the execs are greedy monsters and Mariah is sweet and innocent is somewhat laughable don't you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes That is very true, and if you look at Whitney Houston who also signed one of these massive deals the pressure to produce material does impact on the quality.Thats fair enough; but if she didn't want to be under pressure to sell another 30 million she shouldn't have taken it - she can hardly be poor - lesser artists have turned down bigger deals for the sake of their integrity and sanity. Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes Indeed, I'm not saying she is innocent in all of this, of course when the interest was shown she no doubt pushed negotiations to the best possible price. But I do think the execs are also to blame, after all they were willing to meet her demands when they should have thought twice.Anyway, are you saying she meekly sat in the A&R man's office to be offered 90 million? Don't you think she negotiated to get as much out of them as possible? The idea that the execs are greedy monsters and Mariah is sweet and innocent is somewhat laughable don't you think? Lets also not forget even though she has been dropped by the label she also walks away with 35 millio for doing nothing, in this instance the execs have got seriously bunt, and sadly that money could have been invested in new talent. |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Barnsley
Posts: 3,302
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes I am 39 and I have always thought the Top 40, Radio (whatever station) and TOTP to be rubbish with the rare exception. In my teenage years and 20's I was completely into heavy metal, mainly new acts and even the Friday rock show at the time was generally too commercial. Now my tastes vary more and maybe Virgin comes closest but still doesn't cover all I like, I prefer listening to tapes and cd's in the car, or talk stations like Radio 5 and Talk Sport. I keep up to date with music by watching MTV2, Q and Kerrang. Some of the CD's I've bought this year include U2 (ok I admit that I only got into them a few years ago!), Megadeth, Dido, Papa Roach, Blink 182, Creed, Garbage, Tool, Lifehouse, Geddy Lee (lead singer of Rush), Stain'd, Moist, David Usher (lead singer of Moist), JJ72, Incubus, Stevie Nicks, Placebo
This isn't really any different from what it was 10, 20 or even 30 years ago. I remember different people saying virtually the same thing every year for as long as I can remember. The fact is that everyone gets to a certain age where the top 40 isn't relevant any more. It usually goes like this: Phase 1: "The top 40 isn't the same any more, I prefer the album charts" Phase 2: "Radio 1 plays too much <insert current fad here> these days, I'm going to listen to <local commercial radio> FM which plays a better music mix" Phase 3: "I can't watch Top of the Pops anymore, everyone on it just looks/sounds/acts so awful." Phase 4: "I never realised before, but I really like U2" Phase 5: "I don't like <local commercial radio> FM anymore, they play too much <recent artist>. I prefer <virgin/gold/magic> because they play "real music". ....etc... eventually you end up listening to Radio 2, you think U2 "used to be alright, buit they've gone all modern now", and you order those albums that get advertised on TV by Time Life. Its called getting old. By the way, I'm only 26, I've just observed this gradual transition in countless relatives, parents, family friends etc. Even people at work. It seems fairly commonplace. |
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Near Birmingham
Posts: 3,470
|
Quote:
Originally posted by pauljaymes I don't think this will ever happen for me. I'm 20 next month and I have always found U2 to be sad, boring and uninspiring.
Phase 4: "I never realised before, but I really like U2" |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,574
|
Well I on the other hand am into my 11th year as a U2 fan (got hooked when Achtung Baby came out.... perhaps the best album of the 90s), and to be honest, I cant at all agree with your view that they are sad, dull (have you seen their past three tours?!), and uninspiring (are you kidding me?).
In the god-awful world of plastic bands, awful cover music and tripe that wouldnt get into the top 75 ten years ago, U2 stand out as one of the biggest and best bands in music history. Oh, Im 25 btw. Dan |
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Devon UK
Posts: 14
|
Quote;
"I think for a lot of people that si very true. I think it was Danny Baker that once said "music stops beign good when you stop going in record shops" The point he was making at a certain age most people stop going intoi record shops looking for new music and that is the point that your taste seems to freeze, after that all new music is awful. " I find that I'm buying loads of cd's now. There's a lot of good stuff around at the moment. Quite often it isn't available in the record stores as they only keep top fifty albums etc. Amazon online store has everything. I used to buy dvd films but realised I only watched them once. Now I buy CD's & DVD music video's which get replayed all the time. |
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Norf Lahndahn
Posts: 512
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Max Wolfe Yeah I agree, Amazon is a little pricey but definitely has the best selection of CDs on the net. I get what I can from CD-Wow to get the best prices and buy the rest from Amazon .
Quite often it isn't available in the record stores as they only keep top fifty albums etc. Amazon online store has everything. |
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Norf Lahndahn
Posts: 512
|
Quote:
Originally posted by DanVitale You'll notice that I suggested phases but didn't mention any ages... that was intentional.Oh, Im 25 btw. Lets also not forget that the whole thing was slightly tongue in cheek anyway... of course everyone's different in the real world - but as a generalisation I don't think its too bad... |
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,472
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Peej Kerton Fair enough if they are not your thing, but I personally think over the last 20 years they have written some of the most inspirational songs of any band, and they have certainly not been afraid to experiment and reinvent themselves musically.I don't think this will ever happen for me. I'm 20 next month and I have always found U2 to be sad, boring and uninspiring. Although I admit to beign a 'sad' U2 fan since I was recomended an import copy of the U2-3 EP in 1978 by a guy in my local record store - in the days when you actually had record shops, staffed by peopel with a genuine interest in music and not places like HMV and Virgin |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,574
|
Ahh... you have U2-3. I bow down to you sir
I dont know about anyone else, but after the events of September 11th you wouldnt believe the number of people who came up to me and said how much more All That You Cant Leave Behind meant to them. Now if thats not inspiring I dont know what is. I went to see them at Slane last year, and along with JJ72, Coldplay and the Red Hot Chilli Peppers. All of those bands had amazing passion for playing live (the Chilli Peppers especially). Its a shame the music industry has got so money hungry that the people who love making and selling music no longer can stand out. *sigh*... Ban compliations and covers and bring back vinyl!!!! Dan ps Mark, be sure to go to Dublin if you havent been.. the record shops over there are unbelieveable.. not forgetting the Guinness! |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 21:14.




