Quote:
Originally posted by Sazare
I guess I just don't buy that 21 was that strongly affected by the overall market decline. For starters, the main demographic she targets skews at least a bit older than most mainstream-leaning albums, and that demographic is far more likely to purchase an album than, say, the demo for a Katy Perry album, among which streaming and illegal downloading are far more popular. Look at Barbra Streisand, who's well beyond her peak and largely outside of the spotlight, who still managed to outsell most mainstream pop acts' latest albums, presumably because she still caters to an older crowd (whereas contemporaries like Madonna and Cher don't and now don't sell as well)
I've also found (and I realize this is completely anecdotal and doesn't actually mean anything) that for whatever reason even people I know who usually illegally download their music still went ahead and purchased 21, for whatever reason. Adele's sales just seem like a bit of an anomaly to me, like she somehow managed to bypass the overall market trend.
|
I do think there is some truth to this. Many chart analysts over the years have suggested that truly landmark albums transcend sales climates to a large degree. For instance, sales in the 1960s were MUCH worse than they are now. Same with the 1970s, but we saw several albums from those periods move over 30M copies (though a related oft-ignored point is the relative distribution of album sales in different eras).
But I still think it's foolish to disregard the realities of the shifting climate. I feel it's pretty apparent through every relative measure that 21 is far more successful than Come On Over and any other female album ever released. COO obviously benefited from the all-time peak of album sales. Its chart run is impressive, but more in line with a host of other very successful albums, including recent ones like Fearless or 1989.
These albums just don't feel like good points of comparison for 21, though.
absolutely none of her songs had impact. Good riddance.
