Opinions are subjective and people are going to judge the artists/albums for themselves, despite what critics say/think. I think "critical acclaim" would probably persuade some people to get into the artist but not enough for the general public to just cause an uproar to go buy the album.

Obviously, there's a a bunch of other factors to consider. You can't compare 4 to DIL because of general album sales being down.

You can, however, compare '4' to a recent album like 'LOUD' and say it's not as good. I, obviously, disagree but I'm just one person. Just like a critic.

Honey the OP is cheap, what did u expect?

But don't you find it... odd, that a pop album with a "lighter" atmosphere is always, in your opinion, "deservedly trashed?" There always some "underlying criteria" for certain critics. The main point I'm making is that the opinion of a critic holds no more weight than that of yours or mine, because that particular critic has his or her own preference of music.

You wanted to be an absolutist, you don't get to switch gears mid-stream now. Live by the sword of public approval, die by the sword of public approval.



And I see you left my point about Check on It alone.

BTW, I think this generation doesn't get what a critic does; they've been blinded by tons of wholly inarticulate blog posts masquerading as criticism.

What a TRUE CRITIC - someone who has studied their art of choice - does is hope to elicit a conversation, and to incite three-dimensional, living and breathing dialogue with art. When done well, it's something truly masterful to behold.

Cause I haven't endorsed them.

Honestly, if somethings so "good" why isn't it popular? Is it "good" simply because 8 out of 9 critics say it's good? Are yall seriously that sheepish?

I'm not saying albums that are critically acclaimed but don't sell well are 'bad' either, cause again, there are many other factors. Promotion being a major one.

But sales are far more accurate than what critics have to say.

This so much.

What the everloving ****.

See! Maybe I should have been clear.

(Obviously this is my opinion, since I'm posting it.) I'm not talking about an album like Circus or Loud or anything a Disney starlet would release.

I'm talking about albums that aim for profundity and fall ludicrously short of their goals, like a Goodbye Lullaby or a Who We/You Are (can't be bothered to look up its actual title to be honest.)

And I hope you understand my last post about critics; I realize you're more likely to fall on the public's side - but since criticism is something I've studied and take quite seriously as an artist - it's vital for all artforms - naturally, I side with it. WHEN DONE WELL.

I have to praise the one who had the idea of creating this thread.
This is a very delicate and interesting subject. I'm delighted with this discussion.

Taylor Swift

He can't hang.

What you're not seeing is that a lot of these albums are not created to sell well.

POP STARS have to work in very set boundaries, with very set ideas of what melodies and chords work on radio. When something is too outside of the box, it fails. (See, radio never accepting Hold It Against Me, or Aaliyah's last album only finding success after her death).

But 70% of artists who make music have no intention of being pop stars. Not everyone wants to be a Jay or Bey, a Katy or Britney, a Kanye or Kings of Leon. Why force them to play in the same box as pop stars if that's not what they seek to do with their art?

I just think critics want to be "cool" and put down almost every popular artist out there and try to bring unkown artists to the scene just because they're unkown. It doesn't mean that the music is good though.

It is a joke.

I'm just proud that I used absolutist correctly! Once you're out of school, all English skills you've acquired go out of the window without practice.