Yesteryear's Artists - BuzzJack Music Forum

BuzzJack - Entertainment Discussion _ Music Charts _ UK Charts

Latest Site News

Hozier gets a second week at number one

Hozier climbs to number one

A chart double for Beyonce

2 Pages

< 1 2

Yesteryear's Artists, Can they make any chart impact?

Display modes

Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum

pippa View member profile	15th June 2017, 04:47 PM Post #21
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 11 June 2011 Posts: 23,993 User: 14,031	The complete lack of radio support is having an effect on artists of a certain age which is totally crazy. I have always felt a good song should stand on the merits of the song and the the age of the person singing it. I do believe for now (trends do change) that artists we associate with yesteryear will struggle very hard to have hit singles, this is also intertwined with the streaming era too. The album chart however, is different and i strongly feel artists who have passed their peak can still achieve good selling albums, Rick Astley showed this very well and the new Steps album for example is doing well so its possible for such acts to do well. I have noticed in myself that over the last few years i am much more excited for the album chart than i am for the singles and it was always the other way around. The album chart of late has thrown some welcomed surprises that i have found enjoyable.


Bjork View member profile	15th June 2017, 04:57 PM Post #22
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 13 November 2015 Posts: 33,265 User: 22,665	agree its all R1's fault and their stupid anti-age policy


Robbie View member profile	15th June 2017, 05:49 PM Post #23
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 4 April 2006 Posts: 3,445 User: 366	QUOTE(Bjork @ Jun 15 2017, 05:57 PM) agree its all R1's fault and their stupid anti-age policy The problem is Radio 1 are under pressure to get the average age of their audience down and have more or less been instructed to appeal mainly to 15 to 24 year olds. That means dropping acts who appeal to older listeners.


Mack. View member profile	15th June 2017, 07:09 PM Post #24
It's still will be the return of the Mack 4eva Joined: 1 February 2011 Posts: 53,781 User: 12,915	Streaming, Not getting on Radio 1 playlist is why some yesteryear's artists won't make an impact on the chart.


danG View member profile	15th June 2017, 07:27 PM Post #25
🔥🚀🔥 Joined: 30 August 2010 Posts: 74,584 User: 11,746	QUOTE(Robbie @ Jun 15 2017, 06:49 PM) The problem is Radio 1 are under pressure to get the average age of their audience down and have more or less been instructed to appeal mainly to 15 to 24 year olds. That means dropping acts who appeal to older listeners. Well they're going to fail on that front because the incoming generation are growing up with streaming and have no use for the radio. Streaming killed the radio star.


awardinary View member profile	15th June 2017, 10:15 PM Post #26
Here to play, here to stay Pronouns: he/him Joined: 8 February 2015 Posts: 20,279 User: 21,587	QUOTE(Regina @ Jun 15 2017, 01:43 PM) Why should they just give up just because younger people don't like it or it doesn't sell Adele levels? :/ A large amount of those acts will have a dedicated fanbase who have followed them for year and will still buy their music. They wont sell the same amount but who really cares? There's more to making music than just getting hits. Steps have proven that even without massive hit singles and hugely selling albums that you can still sell out venues for concerts. And if people ar enjoying the music then that's the important thing. Shania has said in interviews how important her music is and how it helped her get through really dark times in her life. I'm not expecitng her to sell as she did 15-20 years ago by any means but I can't wait for her album. She's worked hard on it and I doubt she'd give a flying f*** if it "flops" if she manages to make music that people connect to and that might help someone go through tough times thanks to a certain song. I do hear what you are saying, and I do agree there is more to making music than just getting hits. Isn't it also important for the record companies who are pushing these artists and giving them another chance at releasing new material to see results and specifically see a return on any investment made. Surely no recording artist is allowed to release singles or albums without a goal or target in mind, whether that is a sales future or whether it is to reach certain audiences. Plus why all that promo if there's no end game? It just seems a little uncoordinated if there's no realistic target, and realistic being the operative word here. QUOTE(360Jupiter @ Jun 15 2017, 01:50 PM) I don't know if they are trying to appeal to a younger generation. 20s-30s-early 40s is now becoming a larger music-buying market than younger people due to higher disposable income and more accustomed habits of buying music instead of streaming it or listening to it on youtube etc. Lots of younger people don't see the point of buying music any more just to own it when you could just listen to it on demand and not have to store it anywhere. Like. They might pick up some new fans, but I don't think that's the main impetus of their resurgence, with the possible exception of Craig David from those listed. If they do, more's the better, of course. Again, you're right, not every artist has to appeal to a younger audience, but the majority of listeners who determine how well a single or album will do in the charts are younger ones, and if platforms like Spotify or Apple Music don't support such artists with their new music, there's no chance of streaming doing well at all. The music industry as a whole is very ageist nowadays. QUOTE(Liаm @ Jun 15 2017, 02:00 PM) Not everyone needs to please new generations or hop on trends for hits. Sure, but then there needs to be new ways of reaching such audiences with the music they might not have automatically flocked to at first. Maybe Apple should bring back the free track of the week and give listeners a free recording of one of those artists' original hit singles so create exposure in advance of a new single release?


Regina View member profile	15th June 2017, 10:17 PM Post #27
Raining Shitter Joined: 9 March 2008 Posts: 63,090 User: 5,572	Touring makes more money for most acts. Having a single or album out will put them out thee and give ne m aterial to promote on tour even if they underperform. It's been proven that a lot of music buyers are actually older and they can make a huge difference though.


ThePensmith View member profile	15th June 2017, 10:47 PM Post #28
They've had the very Tunnocks, Mary Joined: 13 March 2011 Posts: 5,509 User: 13,208	I absolutely think there's room for them. A lot of those artists mentioned above were having their main success when I was just getting into my teens - the same for a lot of other people my age I'd imagine (I'm 28 in August), and now their fans will be around the 30-40 bracket and will be that Radio 2 market. The last year alone has proved that older artists like Rick Astley can still get a big selling number one album. If the music is good and the fans are there then why not?


Mack. View member profile	16th June 2017, 07:49 PM Post #29
It's still will be the return of the Mack 4eva Joined: 1 February 2011 Posts: 53,781 User: 12,915	People will buy albums from yesteryear artists but not singles from speaking to them.


J00prstar View member profile	16th June 2017, 08:00 PM Post #30
there's nothing straight about plump Elvis Pronouns: they/any Joined: 21 January 2016 Posts: 13,144 User: 22,895	Charting singles don't matter as much though to artists' longevity. It's sales that will keep them afloat, plus touring, merch, etc. Steps are a pretty key example. So Scared in the Dark didn't get streamed enough to get very high in the charts. But if streams make the artist very little money, what does that matter? The chart position is just an ad for the fact the song exists, but if their fanbase already know and are actually buying physical or digital copies with real money at 99p+ a pop rather than 0.01p a play, that's a win for the band. So getting younger fans on board just to stream them and get them singles chart positions isn't ultimately that important any more, unless you want chart positions for pride purposes.


awardinary View member profile	16th June 2017, 09:02 PM Post #31
Here to play, here to stay Pronouns: he/him Joined: 8 February 2015 Posts: 20,279 User: 21,587	QUOTE(360Jupiter @ Jun 16 2017, 09:00 PM) Charting singles don't matter as much though to artists' longevity. It's sales that will keep them afloat, plus touring, merch, etc. Steps are a pretty key example. So Scared in the Dark didn't get streamed enough to get very high in the charts. But if streams make the artist very little money, what does that matter? The chart position is just an ad for the fact the song exists, but if their fanbase already know and are actually buying physical or digital copies with real money at 99p+ a pop rather than 0.01p a play, that's a win for the band. So getting younger fans on board just to stream them and get them singles chart positions isn't ultimately that important any more, unless you want chart positions for pride purposes. Well this is the UK Chart forum I posted this thread in, so it's definitely a chart based discussion, otherwise let's just close down the charts forum and accept that the chart positions don't matter any more for artists above a certain age. This post has been edited by awardinary: 16th June 2017, 09:03 PM


shadow2009 View member profile	16th June 2017, 09:51 PM Post #32
BuzzJack Platinum Member Joined: 24 November 2009 Posts: 9,235 User: 10,059	Wasn't Pharrell Williams 40 years old when Happy/Blurred Lines/Get Lucky became three of the most downloaded songs in history?


BillyH View member profile	17th June 2017, 12:59 AM Post #33
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 10 July 2008 Posts: 2,146 User: 6,614	Urban acts seem to get away with it - I keep forgetting how old a lot of the big names are. Jay-Z had a #1 aged 39 and a top ten hit at 42, John Legend's still happily getting hits at 38.


J00prstar View member profile	17th June 2017, 04:44 AM Post #34
there's nothing straight about plump Elvis Pronouns: they/any Joined: 21 January 2016 Posts: 13,144 User: 22,895	QUOTE(awardinary @ Jun 16 2017, 10:02 PM) Well this is the UK Chart forum I posted this thread in, so it's definitely a chart based discussion, otherwise let's just close down the charts forum and accept that the chart positions don't matter any more for artists above a certain age. Well, that's true. I guess there are different charts though. Singles Sales has a lot more of a mix than the current 'Official' chart. I still wonder if at some point they will shift names, instead of trying to have their cake and eat it. The current chart shows what people are listening to, but the top 40 never used to show that - it used to just be a record of what was being bought; in their hopes people were still probably hammering their existing purchases on and on for weeks and months on end. Fact is, at the minute no songs are getting to #1 unless they're either 1) extremely on-trend 2) extremely middle-of-the-road 3) by an established A-list artist 4) By an artist or band with a huge and ardent fanbase that spans groups That's shutting out, among other things, a lot of female artists. No female soloist has had a chart topper in the UK since they introduced streaming since Adele's Hello in Oct. 2015.