DS Forums

 
 

Adele – as big if not bigger than Elvis, The Beatles and MJ?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28-11-2015, 17:00
007Fusion
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,151
No, they all have legacies. As for Adele, she may have a great voice but I don't see much celebration of her music (except the sales, of course).
007Fusion is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 28-11-2015, 17:10
007Fusion
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,151
When are people going to realise that you can't make simplistic comparisons between the music industry/sales figures from decades ago and the post-Internet music industry we have today. A proper analysis would have to take into account many different factors. So please stop, it makes you look silly.
I agree with this. But also, today it's easier to access music, which to me means the sales are a little less significant.
007Fusion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 17:42
Smudged
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,282
On the issue of cultural impact, it's a dying concept these days. For one thing pop music has lost it's narrative - there are no movements any more, we no longer have one thing replacing what went before in reaction to it. We have pluralism now, each doing their own thing...there is literally nobody having what could be termed wider cultural impact in the old Beatles/Dylan sense.
Think about punk, it hardly sold anything at all in the scheme of things but it's impact was to sweep away the old and inspire a multitude of bands to start up. That's not going to be possible today.
It's fine and correct to say Adele isn't a culture changer like Elvis & the Beatles, but then again nobody else around today is either, however leftfield they might be. The culture isn't there to allow that to happen now.
I would say it's still possible for an artist to make a cultural impact, just very unlikely with the way the music industry is at the moment. Artists still have the potential to be massive and make a significant impact on young people but they need the talent to back it up and sustain it. I would say Lady Gaga was maybe in that sort of position at one point but couldn't deliver (because she never had the talent in the first place IMO).

I have a theory that at the moment, popular music is suffering from a lack of young males buying music (I reckon they are the demographic that's most likely not to buy music or turn their back on it and find alternative forms of entertainment when it doesn't appeal). I might be wrong (and things change) but when I look at pop music at the moment it certainly wouldn't have appealed to me when I was at college/university. I'm sure they're still listening to something but maybe in terms of cultural impact, a popular artist needs to come along that appeals to that demographic (a band perhaps?).
Smudged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 17:56
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
I would say it's still possible for an artist to make a cultural impact, just very unlikely with the way the music industry is at the moment. Artists still have the potential to be massive and make a significant impact on young people but they need the talent to back it up and sustain it. I would say Lady Gaga was maybe in that sort of position at one point but couldn't deliver (because she never had the talent in the first place IMO).

I have a theory that at the moment, popular music is suffering from a lack of young males buying music (I reckon they are the demographic that's most likely not to buy music or turn their back on it and find alternative forms of entertainment when it doesn't appeal). I might be wrong (and things change) but when I look at pop music at the moment it certainly wouldn't have appealed to me when I was at college/university. I'm sure they're still listening to something but maybe in terms of cultural impact, a popular artist needs to come along that appeals to that demographic (a band perhaps?).
i think i agree with that. It was largely a young males game once and it no longer is.
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 18:41
GeorginaPL
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 172
Is she on course to become the greatest artist ever possibly without question? If she keeps on doing this it will be hard to argue. Her sales are phenomenal and certainly not matched by anyone close in her generation currently, her popularity has to be on par with what Elvis, The Beatles, and MJ were in their peaks. I was speaking to an Adele fan and we were talking its sales suggesting if it really catches fire its possible it will outsell Thriller (somewhere between 50-70 million sales), what a legacy that will be, I cant see it personally as 21 as incredible as it was "only" sold between 25-30 million but who knows?
At the moment the only thing one can say is that it is quite possible. Sales wise and seems that's what you mean. Outselling Thriller seems a bit enthusiastic to me at the moment, but so far 25 has been exceeding all expectations. I would say say unlikely, but I would not dare to say impossible.

As for all the discussions, I agree with koneybevax, as is clear from the above. Cultural influence? Perhaps her cultural influence will be shifting the attention a bit from musical tastes of teens and young males to middle aged and females? From artists breaking barriers by doing what is outrageous to just concentrating on music and living a normal life with a family? Who knows. I guess this discussion will be more in place in some years, right now it's an open question. But the first week sales of 25 are not anymore. She is incredible.
GeorginaPL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 18:58
konebyvax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ignoringtrollsville
Posts: 7,875
I knew you wouldn't like "dude" . Of course we're dealing with opinions and assumptions , that's why I used the word hypothesis. But when it comes to what we're talking about i. e. demographics and it's influence on sales, you haven't got any facts either (shouting ALL AGES doesn't cut it I'm afraid ).

Not sure why you think people are "bitching". All some people are saying is that sales on their own are only a measure of popularity, they don't guarantee quality or the sort of impact and influence that other artists have had. So when you keep trying to win an argument with sales stats, it's not surprising that some people are going to say "yeah, she's popular. And?.....".

Yet another fact free post DUDE Are you going for some sort of record here? I think your problem is you're getting a bit excited actually getting a response to your posts after virtually talking to yourself on the Baronet's daughter's thread Judging by your use of DUDE I'm sure you're familar with this equally pretentious uttering. CHILLAX.
konebyvax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 19:04
konebyvax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ignoringtrollsville
Posts: 7,875
I would say it's still possible for an artist to make a cultural impact, just very unlikely with the way the music industry is at the moment. Artists still have the potential to be massive and make a significant impact on young people but they need the talent to back it up and sustain it. I would say Lady Gaga was maybe in that sort of position at one point but couldn't deliver (because she never had the talent in the first place IMO).

I have a theory that at the moment, popular music is suffering from a lack of young males buying music (I reckon they are the demographic that's most likely not to buy music or turn their back on it and find alternative forms of entertainment when it doesn't appeal). I might be wrong (and things change) but when I look at pop music at the moment it certainly wouldn't have appealed to me when I was at college/university. I'm sure they're still listening to something but maybe in terms of cultural impact, a popular artist needs to come along that appeals to that demographic (a band perhaps?).

Far too simplistic a theory dude . I mean, where's the evidence? Crikey, this is easy. Like being Leader of the Opposition....
konebyvax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 20:53
Smudged
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,282
Yet another fact free post DUDE Are you going for some sort of record here? I think your problem is you're getting a bit excited actually getting a response to your posts after virtually talking to yourself on the Baronet's daughter's thread Judging by your use of DUDE I'm sure you're familar with this equally pretentious uttering. CHILLAX.
Far too simplistic a theory dude . I mean, where's the evidence? Crikey, this is easy. Like being Leader of the Opposition....
Wow, I've never seen someone of your age acting so childishly and showing themselves up so much. Well, I do in my job all the time but there are medical reasons for it. Maybe you can't actually help it and I shouldn't be so harsh on you . You still haven't picked up that "dude" was a joke term either.

I don't know why you're getting so offended by me when other people are pulling you up on exactly the same thing of simply talking numbers rather that trying to put any thought into any discussions about Adele (see mgvsmith's post for example).

And to think I still haven't even mentioned yet how disappointed I am that Adele used eleven different male songwriters on her album when she said she wanted to write it on her own (and I was quite looking forward to hearing her songwriting and artistic vision develop).
Smudged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 21:17
GeorginaPL
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 172
And to think I still haven't even mentioned yet how disappointed I am that Adele used eleven different male songwriters on her album when she said she wanted to write it on her own (and I was quite looking forward to hearing her songwriting and artistic vision develop).
Would female songwriters be better? At least she tried...

And just put the CD on. it's her songwriting, rest assure. That she is working with other songwriters doesn't mean it's not her songs and not her album.
GeorginaPL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 21:31
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
No, they all have legacies. As for Adele, she may have a great voice but I don't see much celebration of her music (except the sales, of course).
well as a legacy is what you leave behind when you've gone that stands to reason


The trouble with all this comparison stuff is people never really appreciate what's happening in their own time, the present is always a battlefield and it's much easier to pull someone out of the past whose reputation is secured. Adele may use songwriters to help her but then Dusty never wrote songs, Elvis never wrote songs, and so on. Singers tended to sing what they were given and that was fine. The Beatles had each other to work off, but let's not pretend McCartney hasn't written some truly abysmal songs solo. He may have hit high highs but he's also plumbed depths that someone like Adele would be slaughtered for if any of her work was half as bad. Arguments can go round and round.
The fact is if you don't like someone's work you can always find reasons to dismiss it, if you do nothing matters but enjoying it.
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 21:32
Smudged
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,282
Would female songwriters be better? At least she tried...

And just put the CD on. it's her songwriting, rest assure. That she is working with other songwriters doesn't mean it's not her songs and not her album.
Why are you responding to something I haven't said? I was just listing a fact to keep a certain other poster happy. Or should that be FACT .
Smudged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 21:34
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,287
...

And to think I still haven't even mentioned yet how disappointed I am that Adele used eleven different male songwriters on her album when she said she wanted to write it on her own (and I was quite looking forward to hearing her songwriting and artistic vision develop).
Would female songwriters be better? At least she tried...

And just put the CD on. it's her songwriting, rest assure. That she is working with other songwriters doesn't mean it's not her songs and not her album.
Well, that is a disappointment I know but I believe Adele has written all of the lyrics. I still see Adele as an authentic artist but if you want originality and a female solo artist who writes and composes all of own stuff, you could do worse than listen to Julia Holter's (possible album of the year) 'Have you in my Wilderness'.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 21:52
GeorginaPL
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 172
Why are you responding to something I haven't said? I was just listing a fact to keep a certain other poster happy. Or should that be FACT .
Ok, let's try to clear it up in case there is a misunderstanding. Stress on your texts mine to show what made me write what I wrote.

YOU wrote:
And to think I still haven't even mentioned yet how disappointed I am that Adele used eleven different male songwriters on her album
Thus my answer:
Would female songwriters be better? At least she tried...
I was simply wondering if you maybe think Adele is shunning female song writers, so I ask if you would feel better about the songs she wrote with female songwriters. To me quite a reasonable question.

YOU wrote:
and I was quite looking forward to hearing her songwriting and artistic vision develop)
To which I answered:
just put the CD on. it's her songwriting, rest assure. That she is working with other songwriters doesn't mean it's not her songs and not her album.
As you were looking forward to hearing her songwriting, I said 'just put 25 on and listen'. It IS her songwriting.
GeorginaPL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 22:00
GeorginaPL
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 172
Well, that is a disappointment I know but I believe Adele has written all of the lyrics. I still see Adele as an authentic artist but if you want originality and a female solo artist who writes and composes all of own stuff, you could do worse than listen to Julia Holter's (possible album of the year) 'Have you in my Wilderness'.
Why this hung up that an artist has to do everything on his/her own??? To me it seems like some kind of strange obsession. Faulty premises, faulty conclusions. 25 has Adele all over it and claiming it's not hers in some ways is to me incomprehensible. What is important is that she puts out GOOD music, not that she locks herself on her own and doesn't work with other musicians.
GeorginaPL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2015, 22:32
Smudged
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,282
I was simply wondering if you maybe think Adele is shunning female song writers, so I ask if you would feel better about the songs she wrote with female songwriters. To me quite a reasonable question.

As you were looking forward to hearing her songwriting, I said 'just put 25 on and listen'. It IS her songwriting.
I think it's quite clear from my post that my disappointment was because I wanted to hear what Adele would come up with on her own. I've no idea why Adele has used 20 odd male songwriters in her career and 0 female songwriters. You would have to ask her that one.
Smudged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 00:19
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,287
Why this hung up that an artist has to do everything on his/her own??? To me it seems like some kind of strange obsession. Faulty premises, faulty conclusions. 25 has Adele all over it and claiming it's not hers in some ways is to me incomprehensible. What is important is that she puts out GOOD music, not that she locks herself on her own and doesn't work with other musicians.
It's not a hang up at all and there's nothing faulty about this thinking. There many artists who do actually write and compose all their own stuff without co-writers. For example, U2, Van Morrison, Floyd, Kate Bush, Dylan, Stevie Wonder, Prince, Springsteen, Oasis etc. It simply lends greater authenticity (and often originality) to their work.

I think Adele does produce good music but so do many other artists. Adele just sells a lot more of her music.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 02:08
Apollo Creed
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 588
I spoke to my mates today who are incredibly cool and we all agreed that Adele is a bag shit so everyone needs to pipe down
Apollo Creed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 02:43
GeorginaPL
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 172
It's not a hang up at all and there's nothing faulty about this thinking. There many artists who do actually write and compose all their own stuff without co-writers. For example, U2, Van Morrison, Floyd, Kate Bush, Dylan, Stevie Wonder, Prince, Springsteen, Oasis etc. It simply lends greater authenticity (and often originality) to their work.

I think Adele does produce good music but so do many other artists. Adele just sells a lot more of her music.
I still don't see why such a huge point is made of writing on ones own. I mean, you said there are artists doing it and you gave a list. Ok, all glory to them, but why is it better than doing it in co-operation with others? What exactly makes do-it-yourself better than working with others?

1. Does it make the end product, meaning music, better?
2. Does it make sales better? Here I can answer, clearly, it does not. I'm pretty sure it's the same answer to #1
3. Or is it a kind of "show off" logic, that I don't need anyone else?
4. Or what else exactly makes non-co-operation better?

Whatever the answer to the above questions, I think putting groups here is not fair. Some of their songs are one person work, some are co-operations, but being a group one kind of feeds of each other, isn't?

I had a quick look at some of the others and seems that even those who mostly write on their own also use a co-operation now and then. Or traditional fold melodies, like Bob Dylan.

In any case, what exactly makes writing songs on ones own better than co-operating with others? What is the virtue? So far I don't understand it and lists of people doing it don't anwer the question.
GeorginaPL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 08:51
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
I spoke to my mates today who are incredibly cool and we all agreed that Adele is a bag shit so everyone needs to pipe down
yeah but they'll grow out of it if you're patient with them
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 08:52
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,287
I still don't see why such a huge point is made of writing on ones own. I mean, you said there are artists doing it and you gave a list. Ok, all glory to them, but why is it better than doing it in co-operation with others? What exactly makes do-it-yourself better than working with others?

1. Does it make the end product, meaning music, better?
2. Does it make sales better? Here I can answer, clearly, it does not. I'm pretty sure it's the same answer to #1
3. Or is it a kind of "show off" logic, that I don't need anyone else?
4. Or what else exactly makes non-co-operation better?

Whatever the answer to the above questions, I think putting groups here is not fair. Some of their songs are one person work, some are co-operations, but being a group one kind of feeds of each other, isn't?

I had a quick look at some of the others and seems that even those who mostly write on their own also use a co-operation now and then. Or traditional fold melodies, like Bob Dylan.

In any case, what exactly makes writing songs on ones own better than co-operating with others? What is the virtue? So far I don't understand it and lists of people doing it don't anwer the question.
When a novel has an author's name on it, you expect it to be their own work. When you see a picture in a gallery you want to know who painted it and how it is their personal vision of the world, be it Lowry or Rothko. In classical music it is a canon of composers from Bach to Philip Glass. The Poet Laureate writes their own poetry.

The simple point is that since the early 60s (Dylan and The Beatles being early examples) artists and writers have introduced the idea that pop and rock music are examples of art.

Pop music can be understood simply as a business but for many it is also an art form. Art is about expressing ideas about the world in different creative ways, I don't need to explain that. Aesthetics is about something other than adding up sales figures.

The art (some might call it craft) is in being able to write and compose songs and music and then record and perform them. There are many artists who do this (Lou Reed, Joni Mitchell, Carly Simon, Neil Young, Leonard Cohen...to name a few more). He whole concept of a 'cover' implies original ownership or authorship in a song or recording, so I don't see the difficulty.

Music production (like film production) is a collaborative process. So, yes many songwriters have to work with others particularly producers through the process. The question being raised by others is who is the authentic author of the work? It matters in other art forms so why not music?
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 09:02
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
When a novel has an author's name on it, you expect it to be their own work. When you see a picture in a gallery you want to know who painted it and how it is their personal vision of the world, be it Lowry or Rothko. In classical music it is a canon of composers from Bach to Philip Glass. The Poet Laureate writes their own poetry.

The simple point is that since the early 60s (Dylan and The Beatles being early examples) artists and writers have introduced the idea that pop and rock music are examples of art.

Pop music can be understood simply as a business but for many it is also an art form. Art is about expressing ideas about the world in different creative ways, I don't need to explain that. Aesthetics is about something other than adding up sales figures.

The art (some might call it craft) is in being able to write and compose songs and music and then record and perform them. There are many artists who do this (Lou Reed, Joni Mitchell, Carly Simon, Neil Young, Leonard Cohen...to name a few more). He whole concept of a 'cover' implies original ownership or authorship in a song or recording, so I don't see the difficulty.

Music production (like film production) is a collaborative process. So, yes many songwriters have to work with others particularly producers through the process. The question being raised by others is who is the authentic author of the work? It matters in other art forms so why not music?
actually there are many artists who didn't always produce their own work, painters i mean. Not just the obvious ones like Warhol but going all the way back to Rembrandt and even Michelangelo. The artists had what was referred to as a 'school' working for them. So nothing is a s simple as you say.
Adele working with different music writers is no different to say Morrissey penning his lyrics and handing them over to Marr to put music to them. In the history of pop music i'd put Morrissey at the top of the list of artists who've put over a personal artistic vision, yet he never wrote a bar of music in his life.
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 09:18
homer2012
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 5,071
Adele is all hype, she cant hold a candle to madonna never mind elvis, the beatles and jacko.

You know what all the above artists have that adele in 3 albums hasnt shown is a change in style of music, various uptempo catchy lyrics, slow catchy lyrics, videos that pushed boundries and not sticking to the same tired old formula of "i cant find love" or "hes leaving me" etc

I will go as far as saying adeles 3 albums have not even come close to the iconic album "jagged little pill".

Adele is hype with very little substance.
homer2012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 09:20
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,287
actually there are many artists who didn't always produce their own work, painters i mean. Not just the obvious ones like Warhol but going all the way back to Rembrandt and even Michelangelo. The artists had what was referred to as a 'school' working for them. So nothing is a s simple as you say.
Adele working with different music writers is no different to say Morrissey penning his lyrics and handing them over to Marr to put music to them. In the history of pop music i'd put Morrissey at the top of the list of artists who've put over a personal artistic vision, yet he never wrote a bar of music in his life.
Yes, Michaelangelo didn't paint the Sistine Chapel on his own. And if you had asked him whether he was making great art, he would probably say he was just doing his job. The idea of the personal vision in art is relatively new. But you are hardly saying that an L.S Lowry painting is not Lowry's vision of the world?

And yes music is collaborative. But I listen to U2 a lot and the duo of Bono and The Edge have written all the songs from the late 70s until today bouncing ideas of Steve Lillywhite, Brian Eno and a few others on the way but you can trace the themes and changes.

To be fair to Morrissey (and Adele) you don't have to write music to be a songwriter.

I just think the implication of working with 11 different songwriters meant Adele was going for the hit maker approach rather than the personal vision thing. In truth pop music has long been about the tension between these two elements of business and art. You could extend that to other art forms as you say, Indeed, I think that's what Warhol was trying to express in his work, about mass production of art.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 09:30
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
Yes, Michaelangelo didn't paint the Sistine Chapel on his own. And if you had asked him whether he was making great art, he would probably say he was just doing his job. The idea of the personal vision in art is relatively new. But you are hardly saying that an L.S Lowry painting is not Lowry's vision of the world?

And yes music is collaborative. But I listen to U2 a lot and the duo of Bono and The Edge have written all the songs from the late 70s until today bouncing ideas of Steve Lillywhite, Brian Eno and a few others on the way but you can trace the themes and changes.

To be fair to Morrissey (and Adele) you don't have to write music to be a songwriter.

I just think the implication of working with 11 different songwriters meant Adele was going for the hit maker approach rather than the personal vision thing. In truth pop music has long been about the tension between these two elements of business and art. You could extend that to other art forms as you say, Indeed, I think that's what Warhol was trying to express in his work, about mass production of art.
I would think if Adele was going to go for the hit maker approach she'd have stuck rigid to the 21 team, not look to work with the likes of Tobias Jesso who she came across on youtube. Also the music that made her name was hardly what was 'current' at the time, you can't really argue they went for the commercial hit approach when RITD started all this off.
And what sort of song is 'Hello' (which i don't much like tbh) it's not a club classic is it. To me there's nothing about that song that says 'hit' in todays chart
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2015, 09:36
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
Adele is all hype, she cant hold a candle to madonna never mind elvis, the beatles and jacko.

You know what all the above artists have that adele in 3 albums hasnt shown is a change in style of music, various uptempo catchy lyrics, slow catchy lyrics, videos that pushed boundries and not sticking to the same tired old formula of "i cant find love" or "hes leaving me" etc

I will go as far as saying adeles 3 albums have not even come close to the iconic album "jagged little pill".

Adele is hype with very little substance.
yeah cos hype was invented 2 months ago specially for 25. There was never any hype with Madonna or Elvis, they just sneaked their music out when they hoped nobody was looking.
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:03.