|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Sept 22, 2006 14:54:17 GMT -5
I was thinking about it and while the answer is somewhat obvious, it's still somewhat hard to think of a worded explanation for why is it such a bad thing when a song by an artist that is mainly rock, or mainly country, or mainly rap, is promoted to pop radio and succeeds? For instance, if you have a CD that scores big on rock radio from the beginning, having a few Top 10 alternative and rock hits or whatever, and then one of those songs crosses over and becomes a big pop hit, and then songs are sent to pop the same time as (or a few weeks after) being sent to rock/alternative, why is it so bad? I find it really annoying when someone says so-and-so sucks because their music is popular when, a year ago, the exact same CD was loved by the same person. Popularity doesn't magically make a CD suddenly turn bad. I can understand if the band's next album is suited toward pop-radio but otherwise, let's discuss this. LOL! I think it's interesting. I'll add some points later.
|
|
|
Post by A Thug Named Slickback on Sept 22, 2006 21:17:35 GMT -5
I completely agree with this.
The ironic part is that people who reject everything popular are every bit as concerned with the mainstream as the people who actually follow popular music. Great example: People started claiming that Nas had sold out when his sophomore album It Was Written spawned a few pop hits. Truthfully, it was the same sort of formula he used on his debut (even if it wasn't as good).
|
|
|
Post by Love Plastic Love on Sept 24, 2006 1:17:30 GMT -5
I think it depends. I think if any alternative act releases soft poppy song after soft poppy song alternative starts to turn on them. But alternative artists can court both worlds if done correctly.
|
|
|
Post by jaxxalude on Sept 24, 2006 16:14:00 GMT -5
As long as the music's good, who cares?
|
|