|
Discussion: Pop Artist from the Past and Now?
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Pop Artist from the Past and Now?
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 14,345
|
Q1 - Unfortunately I don't think so.
Q2 - Beyonce.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Wicked
nnn I lowkey made this thread and people were salty as ****.
These new folks just aren't doing it like the older ones because they really don't have to. Expectations changed.
They're doing fine in their own right.
|
Hmm...
that makes sense.
Never thought of it that way.
Kind of unfortunate.
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 9/14/2010
Posts: 78,921
|
I realised this even more so last year when I restricted myself from commercially successful and contemporary music. Just listened to everything from the 20th century, but mainly the 70s and 80s (primarily to educate myself before Gaga's Joanne.)
Amy Winehouse was very well-spoken, highly intelligent and knowledgeable about the history of music*
Can't speak for anyone else, not even Gaga because she's heavily influenced by that era. Who knows if she could have done it without Bowie (the multiple identities, The Fame visuals), Springsteen (..among others, rock, her first genre), Prince (influenced The Fame sound, was the artist Gaga first spoke about while recording it in the studio.)
Edit: *I think she would have coped better in the 80s than 10s. She wasn't prepared for global stardom, the media we have now.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 11,858
|
1. Do you think new-age artist of today would of had the drive to survive in the 80's, and retain relevancy?
I think it depends on who out of this crop are the hard-working ones and willing to hustle and hustle to perfect their craft and brand.
However with the way technology has advanced and how the industry has become, it makes it easier for the newer artists and therefore they wouldn't try to get themselves to the same standard as the older icons.
2. Do you truely believe there will be any artist from this generation that will be seen as iconic/legendary? (Purely Opinion)
Yes. In terms of legends, I only see it for a few like Beyonce (despite her being more from the older generation) because you can see she puts in a lot of work and energy to solidify her brand as an artist and performer.
Then you also have Britney, Madonna who are all from the older generation too (and still relevant in the new generation) etc.
The rest like Rihanna, Katy, Gaga, Taylor are more of icons IMO. Rihanna and Gaga have helped push boundaries in terms of fashion and music trends. The jury is still out for Katy Perry and her next album will determine whether she's managed to grow as an artist or not.
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/16/2012
Posts: 6,442
|
1. Do you think new-age artist of today would of had the drive to survive in the 80's, and retain relevancy?
The Princes and Bowies of today rarely make it to major labels, and when they do they're not a priority due to the decline of the record industry discouraging investment in "risky" acts.
A few pop acts have done well out of it, like Beyoncé recently - but it took her a long time to get to this position. Lady Gaga had a fair amount of confidence from her label too, but only after the success of her first album.
2. Do you truely believe there will be any artist from this generation that will be seen as iconic/legendary?
Though I don't like everything about her, probably Beyoncé. Kanye too.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Quote:
Originally posted by J a y
I realised this even more so last year when I restricted myself from commercially successful and contemporary music. Just listened to everything from the 20th century, but mainly the 70s and 80s (primarily to educate myself before Gaga's Joanne.)
Amy Winehouse was very well-spoken, highly intelligent and knowledgeable about the history of music.
Can't speak for anyone else, not even Gaga because she's heavily influenced by that era. Who knows if she could have done it without Bowie (the multiple identities, The Fame visuals), Springsteen (..among others, rock, her first genre), Prince (influenced The Fame sound, was the artist Gaga first spoke about while recording it in the studio.)
|
Yes to, Amy Winehouse!
And I completely understand what you're saying about Lady Gaga.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark XXX
1. Do you think new-age artist of today would of had the drive to survive in the 80's, and retain relevancy?
I think it depends on who out of this crop are the hard-working ones and willing to hustle and hustle to perfect their craft and brand.
However with the way technology has advanced and how the industry has become, it makes it easier for the newer artists and therefore they wouldn't try to get themselves to the same standard as the older icons.
2. Do you truely believe there will be any artist from this generation that will be seen as iconic/legendary? (Purely Opinion)
Yes. In terms of legends, I only see it for a few like Beyonce (despite her being more from the older generation) because you can see she puts in a lot of work and energy to solidify her brand as an artist and performer.
Then you also have Britney, Madonna who are all from the older generation too (and still relevant in the new generation) etc.
The rest like Rihanna, Katy, Gaga, Taylor are more of icons IMO. Rihanna and Gaga have helped push boundaries in terms of fashion and music trends. The jury is still out for Katy Perry and her next album will determine whether she's managed to grow as an artist or not.
|
I agree with your statement in the first question!
Additionally, even though I would like some of my favorite artist to be legends. I do see where you're coming from in terms of whether they would be iconic or legendary.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Fahrenheit
1. Do you think new-age artist of today would of had the drive to survive in the 80's, and retain relevancy?
The Princes and Bowies of today rarely make it to major labels, and when they do they're not a priority due to the decline of the record industry discouraging investment in "risky" acts.
A few pop acts have done well out of it, like Beyoncé recently - but it took her a long time to get to this position. Lady Gaga had a fair amount of confidence from her label too, but only after the success of her first album.
2. Do you truely believe there will be any artist from this generation that will be seen as iconic/legendary?
Though I don't like everything about her, probably Beyoncé. Kanye too.
|
You're right.
A lot of artist from the past would be considered "risky" now a days.
I feel like that's why a lot of them don't seem as opinionated.
Also, I never thought about Kanye.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Quote:
Originally posted by fireaero
Q1 - Unfortunately I don't think so.
Q2 - Beyonce.
|
Q2. It seems like there's a general consensus on Beyoncé being the one.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 11,858
|
Mr Fahrenheit's point about labels signing risky acts is a very good one because it does show why this new generation of stars are so bland and lack anything new to bring to the table.
However in some cases, I don't think that the artist is bland, it's just that they're being told by label executives how to portray themselves and make safe music. I'll admit there are some new stars with potential (maybe not to reach the heights of Prince, Michael, George etc. but at least get that recognition and establish themselves) but the labels aren't bringing it out.
When they sign a new artist, there is no artist development at all. Just get them into the studio with some big pop producer and record stuff that's already like the rest of the 13576622134 tracks on the radio.
I do think that as time goes, more and more artists will be going down the independent route. Prince already spoke out about the how industry treats artists and the benefits of staying independent.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 1,002
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark XXX
Mr Fahrenheit's point about labels signing risky acts is a very good one because it does show why this new generation of stars are so bland and lack anything new to bring to the table.
However in some cases, I don't think that the artist is bland, it's just that they're being told by label executives how to portray themselves and make safe music. I'll admit there are some new stars with potential (maybe not to reach the heights of Prince, Michael, George etc. but at least get that recognition and establish themselves) but the labels aren't bringing it out.
When they sign a new artist, there is no artist development at all. Just get them into the studio with some big pop producer and record stuff that's already like the rest of the 13576622134 tracks on the radio.
I do think that as time goes, more and more artists will be going down the independent route. Prince already spoke out about the how industry treats artists and the benefits of staying independent.
|
Going independent does seem like the new wave, and having that platform gives artist more artistic freedom.
But, it seems like going independent kind of hinders global stardom, and promotion.
|
|
|
|
|