SAW were never the alternative to anything. They were the replacement for the "mid 80s $h!t that filled the charts". If SAW hadn't existed then something else would have filled the void.

 

And I'd agree that 14 year old girls would be most likely to buy Kylie. 14 year old boys were probably a different matter. And anyway lots of adults would have bought Kylie because it was the most popular music around at the time. But then I'm probably doing a complete disservice to 14 year old girls here. But then I can understand why they bought Take That/Duran Duran/etc in their droves but I can't understand why the same song sung by different pop muppets was bought over and over again.

 

TBH I am absolutely fed up with your anti-indie/anti-"cool" (whatever cool is) stance. I have proved time and again that I have not espoused views like that yet you trot out the same old tired argument. Seems like I'm not the one with a chip on their shoulder. People have the right to like whatever the hell they like but I also have the right to say if I think something is downright crap.

 

So by refuting your opinion that a kid can't circumvent the current chart fodder and like something else, I am saying that how could anyone like that music, am I?

What utter bollocks!

SAW were never the alternative to anything. They were the replacement for the "mid 80s $h!t that filled the charts". If SAW hadn't existed then something else would have filled the void.

 

And I'd agree that 14 year old girls would be most likely to buy Kylie. 14 year old boys were probably a different matter. And anyway lots of adults would have bought Kylie because it was the most popular music around at the time.

 

im confused.... again you are saying that SAW wasnt an alternative to chart music in the mid-late 80's then accept that a certain section in society, girls (and young gay guys, SAW openly admitted they courted the pink pound and SAW are still popular amongst a fair proportion of gay men) DID buy their music!!! ... the point is that if people (esp the young) like 'simple pop' then theyll like simple pop, yes if SAW didnt exist something equally as bland would fill the void, so surely by default that music IS the alternative, or AN alternative to the 'better' music. im NOT saying they are 'alternative' as a genere thing, obviously they aint..

 

But then I'm probably doing a complete disservice to 14 year old girls here. But then I can understand why they bought Take That/Duran Duran/etc in their droves but I can't understand why the same song sung by different pop muppets was bought over and over again.

yet ...me too.... but they did.

 

TBH I am absolutely fed up with your anti-indie/anti-"cool" (whatever cool is) stance. I have proved time and again that I have not espoused views like that yet you trot out the same old tired argument. Seems like I'm not the one with a chip on their shoulder. People have the right to like whatever the hell they like but I also have the right to say if I think something is downright crap.

 

im NOT anti indie, or anti 'cool', i am anti 'if its not indie/cool its crap' argument that both you and scott appears to hold. you both appear to have a very low tollerance to music outside your personal tastes. IMHO whether I like it or not, whether its good imho or not is irrelevant, it it gives certain people pleasure then it fullfills its purpose and unfortunately SAW still is popular amongst their fans.

 

So by refuting your opinion that a kid can't circumvent the current chart fodder and like something else, I am saying that how could anyone like that music, am I?

What utter bollocks!

 

of course kids can circumvent chart music they dont like and find something else... I DID!!!!! but i strongly suspect that the vast majority of the public (all ages) really dont give a flying fcuk about music that much and lazily accept what the singles chart has on offer, this would explain why there is so much crap there throughout the ages.

 

there always has been, and always will be, people who take music far more seriously then others... thank goodness for that! wouldnt it be boring if we were all the same!

im confused.... again you are saying that SAW wasnt an alternative to chart music in the mid-late 80's then accept that a certain section in society, girls (and young gay guys, SAW openly admitted they courted the pink pound and SAW are still popular amongst a fair proportion of gay men) DID buy their music!!! ... the point is that if people (esp the young) like 'simple pop' then theyll like simple pop, yes if SAW didnt exist something equally as bland would fill the void, so surely by default that music IS the alternative, or AN alternative to the 'better' music. im NOT saying they are 'alternative' as a genere thing, obviously they aint..

I think we are confusing the term 'alternative' here. SAW was not an alternative to mainstream music of 83-86, it was THE mainstream music of 87-90ish.

 

im NOT anti indie, or anti 'cool', i am anti 'if its not indie/cool its crap' argument that both you and scott appears to hold. you both appear to have a very low tollerance to music outside your personal tastes. IMHO whether I like it or not, whether its good imho or not is irrelevant, it it gives certain people pleasure then it fullfills its purpose and unfortunately SAW still is popular amongst their fans.

 

Where is your evidence that I hold this opinion. I have and do like some chart music (admittedly less and less as I move further away from that demographic. The last time I truly liked chart music was when I was 11 or 12 and still listened to Radio 1 regularly.) But I can see how Madonna/Some Britney/Sugababes/Christina is good pop music. There is a difference here.

 

Have to agree with you wholeheartedly that most people do not give a flying one about music though.

Have to agree with you wholeheartedly that most people do not give a flying one about music though.

 

yeah i think we are confusing the issue and that we broadly agree...

 

i find you often dismiss a chart from say 1999 because its full of crap ... and indeed it probably is, but to others they like it.. anyway, its cool, if you think ive mis-reprisented you then i apologise.

 

lets face it, the commercial singles chart has always been spoilt by the masses who dont know nor care much about music and what it can give us.

yet ...me too.... but they did.

i am anti 'if its not indie/cool its crap' argument that both you and scott appears to hold. you both appear to have a very low tollerance to music outside your personal tastes.

 

Sorry to add salt to the wound, but I agree with Rob's point here. Surely us all having different opnions is something to be celebrated, yet some are too quick to gun for those that prefer music that is perhaps less aesthetically pleasing, less challenging. I'm the first to admit I like some of the utter rubbish SAW offered in the 80s, yet I also like Grace Jones, Blondie, De La Soul, Chaka Khan, New Order, Prince etc who are amongst some of the innovators and iconic artists from this decade. I'm also the first to say The Smiths don't do an awful lot for me.

Sorry to add salt to the wound, but I agree with Rob's point here. Surely us all having different opnions is something to be celebrated, yet some are too quick to gun for those that prefer music that is perhaps less aesthetically pleasing, less challenging. I'm the first to admit I like some of the utter rubbish SAW offered in the 80s, yet I also like Grace Jones, Blondie, De La Soul, Chaka Khan, New Order, Prince etc who are amongst some of the innovators and iconic artists from this decade. I'm also the first to say The Smiths don't do an awful lot for me.

 

im not 'big' into the smiths either, but i wouldnt 'diss' them as i recognise their worth.

 

heres an uncomfortable fact.... i like more watermans stuff then led zep or bowie! ...lol... however i have very very little respect for watertwat, but loads for zep n bowie.

If that makes me a music snob today for agreeing with the likes of Paul McCartney (if he is doing the X-Factor Final (which I can't believe the reports) I am going to be one very angry fan) that Simon Cowell is "musical cancer" then I'm bloody proud that I hold my opinion, because Simon Cowell is destroying music IMHO .... you only have to look at the array of posts on this site worshipping the likes of talent free zones Cheryl Cole and mime artists Britney Spears for proof.

 

 

oh dear.....

 

"Paul McCartney has confirmed reports that he is in talks to appear on this year's X Factor.

 

The ex-Beatle is rumoured to be performing in this year's final, with the show's remaining contestants also being given songs by his former group.

 

McCartney told The Sun: "It's something we are talking about. Dermot [O'Leary] is a lovely man who I know very well. He's full of energy and keen for me to do it.

 

"We're seeing if we can make it work. I've been watching on and off with my family. Sometimes it throws up someone brilliant like Leona Lewis. Other years have not been so good."

 

Regarding the recently-eliminated John & Edward, he added: "It's impossible not to like them.

 

"They're a great couple of lads. But let's be honest, they were never going to last much longer in the show. They had to go."

 

digital spy....

im NOT anti indie, or anti 'cool', i am anti 'if its not indie/cool its crap' argument that both you and scott appears to hold. you both appear to have a very low tollerance to music outside your personal tastes.

 

 

Any reason why I should have any tolerance for lazy, unimaginitive sh!te......? IMO life's too short to allow your life and your "soul" to become polluted by garbage, which is what SAW was.... If you consume junk, you will become junk, if you ask me stuff like SAW and X-Factor has totally dumbed down our Popular Culture to an unimaginable degree, I grew up as a kid with GOOD pop like Duran, Human League, Culture Club, Spandau Ballet, Madness, Frankie, Madonna, Cyndi Lauper, etc, scoring massive hits in the charts, none of that lot was exactly cerebral, it was just DAMN FINE POP MUSIC, as opposed to MUZAK.... As far as I'm concerned SAW and Cowell are to music what McDonalds and KFC are to the restaurant business, or what the likes of Starfukks is doing to our Cafe Culture, ie, turning it to sh!t with blatantly inferior product.....

 

Tell me why I should consume a bollock and brain burger, when I can have a fine, juicy steak dude...... :P

 

Yeah, SAW was an "alternative" alright, and "alternative" to good Pop.....

 

As for "Sir Paul"..... Christ, is he just going fukkin' SENILE in his old age....... <_<

Any reason why I should have any tolerance for lazy, unimaginitive sh!te......? IMO life's too short to allow your life and your "soul" to become polluted by garbage, which is what SAW was.... If you consume junk, you will become junk, if you ask me stuff like SAW and X-Factor has totally dumbed down our Popular Culture to an unimaginable degree, I grew up as a kid with GOOD pop like Duran, Human League, Culture Club, Spandau Ballet, Madness, Frankie, Madonna, Cyndi Lauper, etc, scoring massive hits in the charts, none of that lot was exactly cerebral, it was just DAMN FINE POP MUSIC, as opposed to MUZAK.... As far as I'm concerned SAW and Cowell are to music what McDonalds and KFC are to the restaurant business, or what the likes of Starfukks is doing to our Cafe Culture, ie, turning it to sh!t with blatantly inferior product.....

 

Tell me why I should consume a bollock and brain burger, when I can have a fine, juicy steak dude...... :P

 

Yeah, SAW was an "alternative" alright, and "alternative" to good Pop.....

 

As for "Sir Paul"..... Christ, is he just going fukkin' SENILE in his old age....... <_<

 

i fully concur except for the notion that everyone should have the right to like what they want too. if SAW were not popular to a certain degree (ok amongst little girls) then no one would have bought their product. much as i dont like SAW i do support the right of the fans to buy that garbage if they think its good. we aint all the same.

Atleast lot of SAW material was orginal songs, not like the sort of stuff Donny Osmond was churning out in the 70s, cover version after cover version. If you look at the charts in the early 90's when SAW dominance had subsided, it left huge a gap in the music market, which was only filled by monotonous dance tracks and terrible cover versions. I'm not a huge fan of SAW but I can see the positives they brought.

 

Alot of people criticized SAW because they were seen as a hit factory churning out hits at a tremendous rate, however this was nothing new, look at Holland Dozier Holland in the 60's, they churned out masses of hits for the likes of Supremes, Four Tops etc.

Edited November 30, 200915 yr by fiesta

i fully concur except for the notion that everyone should have the right to like what they want too. if SAW were not popular to a certain degree (ok amongst little girls) then no one would have bought their product. much as i dont like SAW i do support the right of the fans to buy that garbage if they think its good. we aint all the same.

 

Silly 11 or 12 year old girls, or teenage lasses dont really know any better mate, I can forgive them.....

 

The ones supposedly grown up and who try to claim some sort of "kitsch" or "post-modern" or "ironic" status for this rubbish and who should know better, are really gonna feel my wrath mate, I make no apologies for that.... :P

 

Atleast lot of SAW material was orginal songs, not like the sort of stuff Donny Osmond was churning out in the 70s, cover version after cover version.

 

Well, I wouldn't exactly pish on Donnie and Marie if they were on fire either mate.... Unless of course I was pishing out Jet Fuel..... :rolleyes:

 

Atleast lot of SAW material was orginal songs, not like the sort of stuff Donny Osmond was churning out in the 70s, cover version after cover version. If you look at the charts in the early 90's when SAW dominance had subsided, it left huge a gap in the music market, which was only filled by monotonous dance tracks and terrible cover versions. I'm not a huge fan of SAW but I can see the positives they brought.

 

Alot of people criticized SAW because they were seen as a hit factory churning out hits at a tremendous rate, however this was nothing new, look at Holland Dozier Holland in the 60's, they churned out masses of hits for the likes of Supremes, Four Tops etc.

 

SAW used covers too... loco - motion, sealed with a kiss... , donny and marie were ignored by us, they had 1 hit at a time, there was plenty of alternatives.

 

i absolutely refute they left a 'huge gap' in the music market, in fact id suggest the only reason they had some popularity in the late 80's is because they filled the gap left by 'proper' pop groups who for some reason stopped releasing tracks. earlier that decade there was duran duran, adam, culture club, wham! they all catered for the same market but are well respected as pop atrists. SAWs material was never anywhere near as good.

 

waterman was involved with several of the successful dance outfits in the early 90's, 2 unlimited, capella... etc.

 

the difference between motown and SAW is that motown artists were real artists whho could sing and perform live. true motown was a hit factory, but somehow it had style and respect. something SAW never had.

 

..... and dont forget, SAWs loss of popularity was down to their target audience getting really fed up with the sameish music they produced, they soon went out of fashion... something motown didnt do for decades.

filled by monotonous dance tracks

 

Ooooh don't go there!

 

The late 80s/early 1990s were the zenith of dance music. Said that, if you didn't like dance music in the early 90s, there wasn't an awful lot else. Pop music sucked, made up of one-off hits by flimsy singers with no iconic or memorable status. Perhaps American grunge was at a peak at this time, but I can't think if owt else.

 

Back on SAW, I think they had an iconic sound that, granted, hasn't aged particularly well but as TIP has stated, they began to blatantly take the p*** in 88 onwards.

 

 

Edited November 30, 200915 yr by ScottyEm

i fully concur except for the notion that everyone should have the right to like what they want too. if SAW were not popular to a certain degree (ok amongst little girls) then no one would have bought their product. much as i dont like SAW i do support the right of the fans to buy that garbage if they think its good. we aint all the same.

I completely agree that people can buy and listen to what they like but that doesn't mean I'm not gonna give my opinion on all kinds of pop and rock. If I think something is crap then I'm gonna say it just like I am going to say if I like something. And if you're so weak minded that someone slagging off a song that you like upsets you then that's tough.

I really like SAW music.

It's so much fun to listen too.

Mel & Kim: now that's what I call happy music!

 

And... who would have heard of Kylie without het SAW years? Well.......

Ooooh don't go there!

 

The late 80s/early 1990s were the zenith of dance music. Said that, if you didn't like dance music in the early 90s, there wasn't an awful lot else. Pop music sucked, made up of one-off hits by flimsy singers with no iconic or memorable status. Perhaps American grunge was at a peak at this time, but I can't think if owt else.

 

Back on SAW, I think they had an iconic sound that, granted, hasn't aged particularly well but as TIP has stated, they began to blatantly take the p*** in 88 onwards.

 

id suggest the zenith of dance was later in the 90's ... early 90's it was still developing.

 

I really like SAW music.

It's so much fun to listen too.

Mel & Kim: now that's what I call happy music!

 

And... who would have heard of Kylie without het SAW years? Well.......

 

i liked mel n kim, flm was played at last nights pop quiz and it sounded quite good.

 

kylie?... tbh i could easily live in a world without there ever having been a kylie.

SAW used covers too... loco - motion, sealed with a kiss... , donny and marie were ignored by us, they had 1 hit at a time, there was plenty of alternatives.

 

i absolutely refute they left a 'huge gap' in the music market, in fact id suggest the only reason they had some popularity in the late 80's is because they filled the gap left by 'proper' pop groups who for some reason stopped releasing tracks. earlier that decade there was duran duran, adam, culture club, wham! they all catered for the same market but are well respected as pop atrists. SAWs material was never anywhere near as good.

 

waterman was involved with several of the successful dance outfits in the early 90's, 2 unlimited, capella... etc.

 

the difference between motown and SAW is that motown artists were real artists whho could sing and perform live. true motown was a hit factory, but somehow it had style and respect. something SAW never had.

 

..... and dont forget, SAWs loss of popularity was down to their target audience getting really fed up with the sameish music they produced, they soon went out of fashion... something motown didnt do for decades.

 

I remember in the early 90's alot of critcism being leveled at the music scene because there were no original songs, it was filled with rave tunes that hardly had any words or cover versions, this didnt chanGe untill the mid 90s when britpop came along. No SAW werent brilliant, and they did do some covers but alot of there stuff were original pop songs. No one was doing this in the early 90s until britpop filled the gap.

 

 

Well, as it's getting to that time of year, anyone remember SAW's take on Band Aid? Yes, it wasn't great, but at least they were a little respectful to the original (which can't be topped). Something that certainly can't be said about the 04 version, a load of utter toilet.

 

 

 

id suggest the zenith of dance was later in the 90's ... early 90's it was still developing.

 

definitely miles wide of the mark there, Rob.... :mellow: by the late 90s, dance music began to morph into cheese....the classic era for dance was 93-96....