McSeven Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 If there history was the same, except that they came out in 2008. Do you think they would recive the same fanfare among fans and music critics. I know that Rstone Mag, did not think much of them. Would we look at them in the same light like the White Stripes/Beck. Quirky indie music entity. Mc7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 If there history was the same, except that they came out in 2008. Do you think they would recive the same fanfare among fans and music critics. I know that Rstone Mag, did not think much of them. Would we look at them in the same light like the White Stripes/Beck. Quirky indie music entity. Mc7 I don't remember any music mags or critics liking the band when they first came out. It really wasn't untill during the 73 NA tour that mags paid much attention to them. Most music critics were only heard to slag off the bands first three albums. To answer your question, yeah I think they would be as big, maybe bigger as there really is no one close out there now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
widget Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 The reviews for the band were "mixed" to begin with. Some music newspapers gave positive reviews and a small number of reviewers like Mendelsohn in the Rolling Stone did not. Get a hold of Robert Godwin's Led Zeppelin: The Press Reports (ISBN 1894959175), if you don't have access to the media of the period. The were definitely a number of glowing reviews for the debut album and tours. Meg I don't remember any music mags or critics liking the band when they first came out. It really wasn't untill during the 73 NA tour that mags paid much attention to them. Most music critics were only heard to slag off the bands first three albums. To answer your question, yeah I think they would be as big, maybe bigger as there really is no one close out there now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 The reviews for the band were "mixed" to begin with. Some music newspapers gave positive reviews and a small number of reviewers like Mendelsohn in the Rolling Stone did not. Get a hold of Robert Godwin's Led Zeppelin: The Press Reports (ISBN 1894959175), if you don't have access to the media of the period. The were definitely a number of glowing reviews for the debut album and tours. Meg From the start local press was generally positive. At least here it was. I suppose in larger areas that was as good as national attention but there was not anywhere near the volume of information that came with the 73 and later tours. The band was promoted by the fans and some local DJ's for at least the first 3-4 yrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 If their history was the same, except that they came out in 2008, do you think they would receive the same fanfare among fans and music critics. No. I think a large part of their appeal for women is they were all straight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquamarine Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 Yes, that was definitely part of their appeal for me. But I was in the UK when they began and I remember good press (not that "underground bands" got much anyway, that being the category they were in in 1968) at first--it was only when they really took off and developed this adoring fan base so fast that a backlash began almost equally fast. This happened around about the time of the second album. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 This happened around about the time of the second album. Certainly the third album caught critics and fans alike by surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 Certainly the third album caught critics and fans alike by surprise. I think that album just caught everyone off guard. The same press that was hammering them after II just continued to do so. The band had become whipping boy's for the critics but the network that was the fans just kept going to the shows anyway's. Would that happen today ? I think it would because the music was so good. Would today's record executives be as patient...hard to say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 Would that happen today ? I think it would because the music was so good. Would today's record executives be as patient...hard to say No, the business has changed. Labels used to allow artists time to develop their craft and the better labels took great care to cultivate the relationship. Generally speaking, nowadays if your a new act and your debut album bombs you'll probably be dropped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 No, the business has changed. Labels used to allow artists time to develop their craft and the better labels took great care to cultivate the relationship. Generally speaking, nowadays if your a new act and your debut album bombs you'll probably be dropped. I was thinking more of the initial sales of III. They had established themselves as money makers with I and II. Would they have been allowed the same long rope after III in today's scene ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 I was thinking more of the initial sales of III. They had established themselves as money makers with I and II. Would they have been allowed the same long rope after III in today's scene ? Well, just ask Hootie and the Blowfish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ally Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 Well, just ask Hootie and the Blowfish... Can't find them OK, I'll crawl back to my hole now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reids Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 They're (Hootie) just a state fair and political afterparty band now (but still big in only a few places in the US: the SE, the NE and out in California, mostly). I went to school with them (and worked at a record store while in college with the singer, (Darius), who is now doing country... i'll leave it at that. R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Harris Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 If there history was the same, except that they came out in 2008. Do you think they would recive the same fanfare among fans and music critics. I know that Rstone Mag, did not think much of them. Would we look at them in the same light like the White Stripes/Beck. Quirky indie music entity. Mc7 I'm pretty sure I'd think they're as good as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.