#1936404 - 05/03/08 09:34 AM
Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 11868
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
Offline
|
|
As I sit here reading my audio/music rags on this rainy Saturday morning…I often see some minor mention of a “big” name artist who has faded into general obscurity over the years…and I have to wonder why some of these great talents can’t seem to get another shot…another big boost to their careers?
Why are there so many excellent musicians/songwriters who had one single big moment (maybe it spanned a year or few) of general public notoriety…and then they just dropped out of favor with the masses?
They sell less records…do smaller and smaller concerts…make fewer music event appearances…and yet, they are every bit as talented (maybe even more) as the time they were on top of their wave…???
Has their music become dated…?
Has their original fan base vanished or changed their tastes…?
Is it the ever/never-ending hunger for “FRESH”…as the public just wants a new face…a new “image” to focus on…?
Will most of them be forever resolved to cheesy “comeback” tours and Greatest Hits albums…or the occasional “remember when” music event, where they are dragged out of their obscurity to be dusted off and dressed up for the new, young consumers to get one last look at the dying dinosaurs…?
It seems to me (and I may be wrong in this observation) that back in the day of the “classical” composers…they all continued to mature and gain ever-increasing respect and following…unlike modern pop/rock music stars who shoot off for a brief period and then fade away…even though they are still alive and well and able to make great music.
Hmmmmmmmm….just some rainy-day thoughts….
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1936411 - 05/03/08 09:53 AM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: miroslav]
|
Greg B.
Platinum Member
Registered: 12/28/04
Posts: 1373
Loc: Tulsa Oklahoma
|
|
Offline
|
|
I personally think that it is due to the "flavor of the day" mentality of the music business. Artist X has a hit with their song. Record company then proceeds to sign as many bands as possible that sound exactly like Artist X (if one is good, then 1,000,000 should be better, and more profitable). Artist X then comes out with their next record, which may not sound exactly like their previous one, but still maintains their "sound". By this time, the companies, and the record buying public, who, for the most part, have no clue how to make their own decisions on what they like and don't like, have moved on to the next "thing". Artist X gets dropped and forgotten about, cause they aren't part of the new "thing".
Just my $.02.
_________________________
Avoid playing the amplifier at a volume setting high enough to produce a distorted sound through the speaker-Fender Guitar Course-1966 http://www.myspace.com/tentcityallstars1
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936417 - 05/03/08 10:10 AM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: miroslav]
|
splitting hare
Gold Member
Registered: 05/29/07
Posts: 780
Loc: The 'Nooga
|
|
Offline
|
|
Some interesting thoughts, Miro.
I am sure there are several reasons and you touched on a few of them - tastes change, the music becomes dated, overplayed, and perhaps the artists themselves loses interest in the music business or no longer want to be a household name. Or the record company feels the artist can no longer sell enough records and drops the artist.
In regards to classical composers - thinking back in the day before any type of recordings were available, the only means of listening to music would be to witness a live performance of that music. Perhaps the fact that folks weren't bombarded with something like Eine Kleine Nachtmusik in hourly rotation, commercials, shopping malls, etc. the music never really got stale. I'm guessing here.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936435 - 05/03/08 11:08 AM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: splitting hare]
|
Caevan O'Shite
10k Club
Registered: 04/05/02
Posts: 13048
Loc: The Great Spirit's Handprint o...
|
|
Offline
|
|
This dovetails with what I was ruminating about this morning- the difference between individuals and groups that wound-up making it big primarily on the basis of their material, with little promotional activity- and those who are interchangeable figures that are trotted out with huge promotional campaigns all mapped-out before they've been much heard of by the public in general, whose 'material' is often pretty unremarkable, made into big success-stories by corporate machinations...
_________________________
~Caevan James-Michael Miller-O'Shite~
_ _ ___ _ _ Leprechaun, Esquire _ ___ _
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936516 - 05/03/08 02:18 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: Caevan O'Shite]
|
fantasticsound
10k Club
Registered: 04/07/01
Posts: 16403
Loc: Madison,TN, UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
I'm with 'Hare on this one. The nature of the business and our culture has changed so much. You didn't get the instant gratification in past centuries we get on an ongoing basis in the area of music. Composers generally wrote a mix of relatively short pieces, almost all of which were longer than any modern song, and long form symphonies that were longer than an album. The audience rarely had the opportunity to hear these compositions and didn't become jaded over hearing them over and over.
Plus, musicians of the classical composition school were supported by patrons. Only the best of the best survived the test of time. We have more new celebrity successes in music each year than I can count classical composers from an era several hundred years long.
There's no comparison in these terms.
Then there's the change in our western culture. Artists who become famous have the opportunity too make enough money in a relatively short time that they need not continue really working at composition. They don't have to keep a patron happy if they don't want to. This leads to long breaks between projects or tours which also often leads to a diminished capacity to pump out music the industry will push hard to consumers. It's the modern version of, "Use it or lose it." Occasionally bands or artists make a decent comeback after such a loss, but not often.
Look at Johnny Cash. Despite being a legend of sorts Johnny was dropped by his record company and pretty much relegated himself to live concerts with The Highwaymen (Kris Kristofferson, Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings) and as Johnny Cash and the Carter Family with wife June and her sisters, as well as John Carter Cash, their son. These were not arena or stadium concerts, either.
Then Rick Rubin takes an interest in Johnny and he begins a new life with the respect he already deserved, but for new recordings of songs outside the industry's comfort zone of who Johnny Cash was.
It's a great story about a true legendary performer, but even for Johnny it was something of a fluke that he and Rick were able to turn an aging star into a viable commercial enterprise again. It wasn't lack of talent, to be sure. But there are lots of people trying to be on top in this game and only a few of those who capture the public once, let alone again and again.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936520 - 05/03/08 02:26 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: fantasticsound]
|
caprae
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 11/28/04
Posts: 3180
Loc: Athens, Georgia, USA
|
Online
|
|
Even many of the classical composers were not always as well respected in their day as they are now.
_________________________
Raise your children and spoil your grandchildren. Spoil your children and raise your grandchildren.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936569 - 05/03/08 06:01 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: miroslav]
|
Kramer Ferrington III.
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 05/12/05
Posts: 9383
Loc: Wellington, NZ
|
|
Offline
|
|
It seems to me (and I may be wrong in this observation) that back in the day of the “classical” composers…they all continued to mature and gain ever-increasing respect and following…
Erm... yes and no. Musical fashions changed even in the classical world, and sometimes people fell out of public favour, just like today.
But bear in mind that even though many classical composers had a lot of respect and public acclaim, this didn't always translate to actual money the way it does today. I suspect that many of the classical composers would have considered themselves satisfied with making a living out of their music without necessarily expecting to be as rich as the nobility. In fact, until comparatively recent times, many classical composers depended on someone's patronage in order to survive. In other words, they got food and board and not a lot more.
Bach, for example was usually employed by various churches as choir master and organist. Vivaldi spent a long time teaching the violin in an orphanage. Chopin supplemented his income by giving piano lessons.
The ones that did best out of the music biz seem to have been the ones that had a flair for business, a lot like today, come to think of it. Nonetheless, it was hardly a life of wild partying and driving Cadillacs into swimming pools.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936593 - 05/03/08 07:35 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: Kramer Ferrington III.]
|
Billster
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 5546
Loc: Wilmington, MA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I often think that "one hit wonders" spent years and years developing what becomes their one hit, and when it comes time for the second hit, they have like three months to try and write it. The ones who sustain a career are rare.
Then you have folks who toil in relative obscurity for a long time and then have a breakthrough in some random way that may or may not be representative of their true artistic nature. Then they slide back to what they really do best.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936625 - 05/03/08 09:32 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: Billster]
|
Picker
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 6914
Loc: A few miles fro the corner of ...
|
|
Offline
|
|
The question gets even more complicated when you factor in folks like Eric Clapton, who has had a career basically made up of "comeback albums". Clapton has become a legend, but there are better players out there, even he knows it. How did he manage to do all that, and even now still be able to draw a crowd when he plays out? And how come some of the other guys from the same time didn't make it happen too?
I suspect it has a lot to do with money...
Edited by Picker (05/03/08 09:33 PM)
_________________________
You're only young once, but you can be immature forever...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936648 - 05/03/08 10:58 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: Picker]
|
revolead
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/11/03
Posts: 4324
Loc: Colorado Springs, CO
|
|
Offline
|
|
One cannot blame the industry or the public as much as a lot of it is historical economics.
The classical world was created in a society of aristocrats and an economy governed by the rulers of a country. Bach, Mozart, Haydn - they were all court composers. They all came from wealthy families who had the luxury to educate their youth in music instead of educate them in working the farm. Also, bear in mind the genre was very limited. There was no punk classical. Either you played Baroque or you watched others play Baroque.
However, after the American and French Revolutions, especially the French, economies and governments began changing, and with them, so did musicians. Capitalism made its advances in European and American society, and suddenly, being a professional musician or writer was not the job of an aristocrat. Remember that great writers like Dickens and Dostoevsky were coming from practically nothing, and for the first time, the Romantic movement allowed music to be about the individual and his existence, not about God or a ruler one may have never met.
There were a lot more one-hit wonders from the Romantic period, and even those that succeeded died in poverty. Edgar Allen Poe died in a sewer, drunk without a penny. Brahms practically gave up composing just before he died. And then there are many Romantic composers none of us would even recognize.
As with all economies though, as production of the commodity, music, rose, the number of producers and the accessibility increased. As did the number of willing listeners. How many more ears are there today than in 1750?
Thus, over time, in a relatively free market, music was able to produce so many musicians and ways of accessing them, that its impossible to hear everyone. It'd be like eating every brand of bread in the nation. Even when you cover the mainstream, there's still a little bakery in a small Wyoming town that you've never tasted.
I don't look at it as a negative, but as a positive. This means that even you and I have a chance to make it, and though it certainly is harder, the alternative would be a non-free economy and society where a monarch or government told us all what is good and what is not. I know it seems like we have producers to do that for us, but certainly, there are far more producers than governments or economic systems, so before anyone decides to go PBS on us, just remember, it could be worse.
Meanwhile, my writing and music has just as much of a shot as the next small guy, and I firmly believe that.
Edited by revolead (05/03/08 11:00 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936676 - 05/04/08 03:50 AM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: revolead]
|
Kramer Ferrington III.
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 05/12/05
Posts: 9383
Loc: Wellington, NZ
|
|
Offline
|
|
Bach, Mozart, Haydn - they were all court composers. They all came from wealthy families who had the luxury to educate their youth in music instead of educate them in working the farm.
Well, I don't know about Haydn, but I do know that Bach and Mozart were born as you say, into families of court composers, so basically, they were taught "the family trade". I don't think I've ever heard of their being wealthy, and they didn't have farms to work. They may well have been financially comfortable, but certainly not wealthy.
Also, bear in mind the genre was very limited. There was no punk classical. Either you played Baroque or you watched others play Baroque.
Up to a point. You could compose church music (instrumental, choral or both), chamber music, dances for big court parties, opera (proper opera and oratorios), military marches, concertos for whatever instruments were available, fanfares, and whatever the heck the local noble who was employing you wanted written... there was a lot of music to be written, in a variety of formats. The music, of course, generally reflected the prevailing style, but there was a lot of different types of music being written.
However, after the American and French Revolutions, especially the French, economies and governments began changing, and with them, so did musicians. Capitalism made its advances in European and American society, and suddenly, being a professional musician or writer was not the job of an aristocrat.
I think the change was set in motion earlier than the late 18th century. The renewal of trade in Europe from say, the 1200s onward meant that all of a sudden, there was a growing bourgeoisie and, having money, they wanted the same things the nobles had... including music in their homes. Enter commercially available sheet music and mass publishing.
Actually, that's an interesting watershed in musical history, because the new demand for music "in the home" meant that music was being taken out of its normal context (the church, the battlefield, the ballroom) and played in a new environment (ie someone's house, for no specific reason beyond the pleasure of hearing it) There was a new need for some way of defining whether the music was any good on its own, abstract terms.  A whole system of formal aesthetics was born where, once, all that mattered was whether the local duke liked it or not.
There were a lot more one-hit wonders from the Romantic period, and even those that succeeded died in poverty. Edgar Allen Poe died in a sewer, drunk without a penny. Brahms practically gave up composing just before he died. And then there are many Romantic composers none of us would even recognize.
Well, yes. And it's easy to think that a previous age was made up of musical giants, simply because for your music to be popular five hundred years after your death, you MUST be a musical giant. All the mediocre guys have disappeared into obscurity over time. And some, like Vivaldi, were rediscovered in relatively recent times. making the whole thing even more of a crap shoot!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936754 - 05/04/08 08:39 AM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: Billster]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 11868
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I often think that "one hit wonders" spent years and years developing what becomes their one hit, and when it comes time for the second hit, they have like three months to try and write it. The ones who sustain a career are rare.
But that's my point...many DO sustain careers...they just end up doing it in obscurity.
I'm sure a lot of their fans are still around...yet that doesn't seem to help when they are releasing their 20th (relatively insignificant) album.
As an example...I loved the Allman Bros....still do...but I just have not been compelled to buy any of their later albums even though they still make that same style of music that I love back in the day.
Then you have the artists that try to reinvent themselves over and over...and they just can't seem to jump on any current music fashion/fad...it's like the new/younger public doesn't acknowledge them even though they may be making the same style of music as some of the newer/younger acts.
Maybe it's a "youth" thing....?
Just find it all so curious how some drift away...and some CAN stay in the public eye even if they are selling the same sound/message of the last 50 years!
Like....the Stones for instance.
I find most of their current stuff rather boring/predictable…yet they will still sell out for some reason…but other older artists who were pretty big at one time…just fade away, like Blondie for instance.
And there are many more…
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1936918 - 05/04/08 04:16 PM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: miroslav]
|
Kramer Ferrington III.
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 05/12/05
Posts: 9383
Loc: Wellington, NZ
|
|
Offline
|
|
but other older artists who were pretty big at one time…just fade away, like Blondie for instance.
And there are many more…
Well, Deborah Harry spent a lot of time away from recording, looking after her guitarist(?) who was diagnosed with AIDS. And she had a couple of hits since, at least in Europe.
There was a GP interview with Chrissie Hynde a few years ago and she complained bitterly about the US radio situation where it's become rather monolithic and if you don't get played, you just don't get played and that's it. It's nothing to do with the public since Pretenders compilations still sell, its just the industry. Or so she said, I wouldn't know myself.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1937109 - 05/05/08 06:10 AM
Re: Why does lightning only strike once for so many…?
[Re: miroslav]
|
Billster
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 5546
Loc: Wilmington, MA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I often think that "one hit wonders" spent years and years developing what becomes their one hit, and when it comes time for the second hit, they have like three months to try and write it. The ones who sustain a career are rare. But that's my point...many DO sustain careers...they just end up doing it in obscurity.
That's the second part of my equation. Some artists achieve broad success with something that isn't necessarily representative of the bulk of their art.
As a for instance, Zappa has various niches in his career like early Mothers of Invention, the Grand Wazoo big band, or the Synclavier stuff, but the average person on the street will say "Valley Girl" or maybe "Don't Eat the Yellow Snow", which are really almost fluff compared to the depth of the Zappa catalog.
As another for instance, Eric Clapton's most successful album is "Unplugged". Does that album really represent what makes EC tick as a legendary musician?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: myles_rose, A String, Bluesape
|
|
|
