MR

....does record sales equate to popularity in a way that also equals talent? Or is it an independent factor?

Personally, I don't think number of albums sold is indicative of talent at all....I think music fans, in general, have been Kool-aid drinking sheep for decades.

Radio, cable, Rolling Stone, Spin, Blender, and numerous other entities, including American Idol, have basically brainwashed the youth into liking whatever is supposedly "in" at any given time....

S2M wrote:....does record sales equate to popularity in a way that also equals talent? Or is it an independent factor?

Personally, I don't think number of albums sold is indicative of talent at all....I think music fans, in general, have been Kool-aid drinking sheep for decades.

Radio, cable, Rolling Stone, Spin, Blender, and numerous other entities, including American Idol, have basically brainwashed the youth into liking whatever is supposedly "in" at any given time....

No!!
But sometimes very talented people become very popular and sell A LOT of records!!

Being popular actually does take some special kind of talent or everyone that is musically talented would already be popular.

Don wrote:Being popular actually does take some special kind of talent or everyone that is musically talented would already be popular.

Not true...let's take RUSH for example. Music mags hate them. Weren't on MTV much. Radio hardly plays their music, yet they rank 3rd in Gold records by a band behind only the Beatles, and The Stones...all this disposable music is so much 'in your face', that talent doesn't matter. Kids want to be accepted, and if the radio plays Lady Gag 6X an hour, play her vids nonstop on whichever channel actually plays videos now, and that's all the kid's peers are talking about - that kid is going to conform and become a sales statistic of that artist....

S2M wrote:

Don wrote:Being popular actually does take some special kind of talent or everyone that is musically talented would already be popular.

Not true...let's take RUSH for example. Music mags hate them. Weren't on MTV much. Radio hardly plays their music, yet they rank 3rd in Gold records by a band behind only the Beatles, and The Stones...all this disposable music is so much 'in your face', that talent doesn't matter. Kids want to be accepted, and if the radio plays Lady Gag 6X an hour, play her vids nonstop on whichever channel actually plays videos now, and that's all the kid's peers are talking about - that kid is going to conform and become a sales statistic of that artist....

Why even have a poll if it's not true then? I think everyone that has made it has to have some kind of talent even if it's only the ability to dance.
Maybe it's just that the bands you like don't have any talent and that's why no one knows who they are.

Don wrote:

S2M wrote:

Don wrote:Being popular actually does take some special kind of talent or everyone that is musically talented would already be popular.

Not true...let's take RUSH for example. Music mags hate them. Weren't on MTV much. Radio hardly plays their music, yet they rank 3rd in Gold records by a band behind only the Beatles, and The Stones...all this disposable music is so much 'in your face', that talent doesn't matter. Kids want to be accepted, and if the radio plays Lady Gag 6X an hour, play her vids nonstop on whichever channel actually plays videos now, and that's all the kid's peers are talking about - that kid is going to conform and become a sales statistic of that artist....

Why even have a poll if it's not true then? I think everyone that has made it has to have some kind of talent even if it's only the ability to dance.
Maybe it's just that the bands you like don't have any talent and that's why no one knows who they are.

LOL. Touche.

Don wrote:

S2M wrote:

Don wrote:Being popular actually does take some special kind of talent or everyone that is musically talented would already be popular.

Not true...let's take RUSH for example. Music mags hate them. Weren't on MTV much. Radio hardly plays their music, yet they rank 3rd in Gold records by a band behind only the Beatles, and The Stones...all this disposable music is so much 'in your face', that talent doesn't matter. Kids want to be accepted, and if the radio plays Lady Gag 6X an hour, play her vids nonstop on whichever channel actually plays videos now, and that's all the kid's peers are talking about - that kid is going to conform and become a sales statistic of that artist....

Why even have a poll if it's not true then? I think everyone that has made it has to have some kind of talent even if it's only the ability to dance.
Maybe it's just that the bands you like don't have any talent and that's why no one knows who they are.

Funniest thing ever said on this site...hands down.

My likes are eclectic....and SOME talent, yes....but a lot of these artists today are a psychology experiment. Record companies and agents have evolved. You can't possibly tell me any of the boy bands had more than a thimble's worth of talent between them. Eye candy for young girls and gays were their Target audience...each member had a 'personna'...bad boy, pretty boy, metrosexual(is he gay, or not)...etc. bands put together for the main purpose of giving girls their first orgasm. Maurice Starr, and Lou Perlman - top psychologists in their field...

Journey is so popular that most people won't even admit they like them.

Jana wrote:

Don wrote:

S2M wrote:

Don wrote:Being popular actually does take some special kind of talent or everyone that is musically talented would already be popular.

Not true...let's take RUSH for example. Music mags hate them. Weren't on MTV much. Radio hardly plays their music, yet they rank 3rd in Gold records by a band behind only the Beatles, and The Stones...all this disposable music is so much 'in your face', that talent doesn't matter. Kids want to be accepted, and if the radio plays Lady Gag 6X an hour, play her vids nonstop on whichever channel actually plays videos now, and that's all the kid's peers are talking about - that kid is going to conform and become a sales statistic of that artist....

Why even have a poll if it's not true then? I think everyone that has made it has to have some kind of talent even if it's only the ability to dance.
Maybe it's just that the bands you like don't have any talent and that's why no one knows who they are.

LOL. Touche.

Douche'

steveo777 wrote:Classic Journey is so popular that most people won't even admit they like them.

Fixed it for ya steveo

Maybe average talent and the right team surrounding you will get you a great first album if you have catchy hits, but longevity in the business takes talent and drive, perserverence, and creativity. There's always the exception, but I guess the exception would still have the "it" factor.

I can't answer your poll. B/c record sales are different genres, different age groups I can't relate to, like kids and their huge record sales, which their albums are manufactured by labels, writers brought in, etc. Image is everything at that age, so how am I to judge?

How do you judge elctropop record sales? Many are true originators and visionaries in that genre or expanding on it. Some have their vocals all computerized and have people write catchy electropop songs that are great for clubs. Does it mean they have talent? I don't know. You question has given me a headache b/c there's too many variables. You have to have some talent, but great talent, no, but maybe you finger on the pulse of the music scene at the moment.

Jana wrote:Maybe average talent and the right team surrounding you will get you a great first album if you have catchy hits, but longevity in the business takes talent and drive, perserverence, and creativity. There's always the exception, but I guess the exception would still have the "it" factor.

Some bands get so many fans from one or two good albums, fans that'll buy anything the band puts out - good or not, and ride that popularity for 20-30 years....

S2M wrote:

Jana wrote:Maybe average talent and the right team surrounding you will get you a great first album if you have catchy hits, but longevity in the business takes talent and drive, perserverence, and creativity. There's always the exception, but I guess the exception would still have the "it" factor.

Some bands get so many fans from one or two good albums, fans that'll buy anything the band puts out - good or not, and ride that popularity for 20-30 years....

Well, then, they have "something" that gives a lot of people joy live, so the fans support them.

I don't know where Deb's post went, but she mentioned Paris Hilton' album. We had been making fun of Paris putting out an album back when she did. Can't sing. So we sat, myself and my niece and her friend, to watch it. And we were staring at each other during it. It wasn't bad. A really fun summer pop song. And the video was a great beachy video in black and white. Paris looked stunning frolicking on the beach. What can I say. It was a cute song. No, I didn't buy it. I doubt she ever performed it live since it was studio magic. I doubt the rest of the album was any good.

Paris' song and official video: Stars are Blind, starts at the 30-second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYLon-rki10

Today you can make $$$ from downloads (worldwide), concerts, cd's, merchandice, dvd's. maybe sheet music is still around. The computer has changed everything forever.Today, Vh-1 & MTV are worldwide promoters of videos. I remember the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show to promote themselves. They were soooo different than what we had they hit bigtime. They really had no competition. Music was so poor .Can you imagine with todays technology.......

squirt1 wrote:Today you can make $$$ from downloads (worldwide), concerts, cd's, merchandice, dvd's. maybe sheet music is still around. The computer has changed everything forever.Today, Vh-1 & MTV are worldwide promoters of videos. I remember the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show to promote themselves. They were soooo different than what we had they hit bigtime. They really had no competition. Music was so poor .Can you imagine with todays technology.......

Funny you should bring up the Beatles and technology. One of the reasons they quit touring was that the fans were so loud, they drowned out the band. If the Beatles had proper technology(amps, etc), oh man, what could have been?

Rockindeano wrote:

squirt1 wrote:Today you can make $$$ from downloads (worldwide), concerts, cd's, merchandice, dvd's. maybe sheet music is still around. The computer has changed everything forever.Today, Vh-1 & MTV are worldwide promoters of videos. I remember the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show to promote themselves. They were soooo different than what we had they hit bigtime. They really had no competition. Music was so poor .Can you imagine with todays technology.......

Funny you should bring up the Beatles and technology. One of the reasons they quit touring was that the fans were so loud, they drowned out the band. If the Beatles had proper technology(amps, etc), oh man, what could have been?

They would have realized they sucked after hearing themselves, and we'd pretty much have the same outcome.

it helps to be both though... at one time back during escape and Frontier records... journey was both talented and popular...
before escpape they were just talented...

S2M wrote:

Jana wrote:Maybe average talent and the right team surrounding you will get you a great first album if you have catchy hits, but longevity in the business takes talent and drive, perserverence, and creativity. There's always the exception, but I guess the exception would still have the "it" factor.

Some bands get so many fans from one or two good albums, fans that'll buy anything the band puts out - good or not, and ride that popularity for 20-30 years....

U2 & Bon Jovi are 2 examples of that !

Behshad wrote:

S2M wrote:

Jana wrote:Maybe average talent and the right team surrounding you will get you a great first album if you have catchy hits, but longevity in the business takes talent and drive, perserverence, and creativity. There's always the exception, but I guess the exception would still have the "it" factor.

Some bands get so many fans from one or two good albums, fans that'll buy anything the band puts out - good or not, and ride that popularity for 20-30 years....

U2 & Bon Jovi are 2 examples of that !

SPRINGSTEEN IS REALLY GOOD AT THAT!! ooops...

lights1961 wrote:

Behshad wrote:

S2M wrote:

Jana wrote:Maybe average talent and the right team surrounding you will get you a great first album if you have catchy hits, but longevity in the business takes talent and drive, perserverence, and creativity. There's always the exception, but I guess the exception would still have the "it" factor.

Some bands get so many fans from one or two good albums, fans that'll buy anything the band puts out - good or not, and ride that popularity for 20-30 years....

U2 & Bon Jovi are 2 examples of that !

SPRINGSTEEN IS REALLY GOOD AT THAT!! ooops...

oh yeah , him too !

A musicians sales have been important ever since Johann S Bach was number 1 for 28 weeks straight on the Harpsichord Hot 100 with Harpsichord Concherto No Five in D Major . Apparently there was fighting in the melodicharpsichord discussion forums in Leipzig when Johan Pacabel knocked him off number one with the Canon.

Just cos they hit the charts though didnt mean they were any good though!

"B" ...You are absolutely correct, can't remember when I've agreed w/you more!!