My 15-year-old daughter saw Taylor Swift in the spring and she’s still talking about it. I waited in the parking lot with the other parents for the show to wrap up, listening to the end of it floating through the air from the stadium. I’ve never seen so many happy kids in my life, all emerging with their sequins and glitter and dresses a…
My 15-year-old daughter saw Taylor Swift in the spring and she’s still talking about it. I waited in the parking lot with the other parents for the show to wrap up, listening to the end of it floating through the air from the stadium. I’ve never seen so many happy kids in my life, all emerging with their sequins and glitter and dresses and armfuls of friendship bracelets.
Swift is an amazing song writer and performer. She’s generous to her crew and fans. Her fans span generations, even my 79-year old dad likes some of her songs. It’s nice to see a positive force at work.
Same here. My 12 year old granddaughter has been Swifty since she was old enough to listen to pop music. Tay Tay is pure fun and it’s been a joy singing those simple girl songs with her in the car all these years. And you’re right- she’s a wonderful songwriter, telling her fans about the boyfriends and the girlfriends and the heartache and the good times in her life. Just like my Motown and Doo Wop in the 50’s and 60’s. And I know how old I am and sound, but it’s really nice to see someone who’s not terribly interested in shocking us with her moves or with her body or what she can do with her tongue. Give her her due and rejoice in the mad love.
I tried all the songs Evan suggested and to me they were all cringeworthy. To each their own.
I'm on team Albarn, though. He criticized TS for not writing her own songs but was called out as off base. That is correct, as she participates in writing all her songs and her own songwriting put her on the map.
But when you go from "on the map" to number one songs and pop superstardom by "writing your own songs" with production teams that just happen to have already written number ones for Kesha, Pink, and others, to me that is not "writing your own songs".
Songwriting and production are different. In terms of production, people say AC/DC and Def Leppard were largely driven by Mutt Lange which I would agree with; but it can be either a producer, an artist, or both that contributes heavily to the success. Nobody manufactured the Beatles, and groups like Nirvana worked with several great producers but weren't made great by any of them, they were already great. You can argue though that there are artists who clearly were only great with a great producer.
Soon You’ll Get Better is a softer, acoustic song about her mom’s cancer battle. There’s a breathe at the 2:40 mark that hits home. I know a couple people that don’t like Swift’s music but connect with that song.
def leppard and ac/dc were manufactured by Mutt Lange as was shania twain; the beatles were manufactured by George Martin; Ginger Rogers was a product of the studio system.
All of that is utter nonsense. You don't stay at the top for decades by being a manufactured product. You work with the best so that you can put out your best work. Ginger shouldn't have starred in a Gershwin show on Broadway and shouldn't have worked with Astaire or Pan Berman. It's nonsensical, sorry
Han, you hit on something huge there—Rock n’ roll. Those acts you mentioned were already ascending when Mutt Lange or George Martin came along. The same goes for NWA and Tupac Shakur. The list goes on. Compare those with truly manufactured acts (Backstreet Boys?).
ALL of this is about free speech. Rock n’ roll originated in America under our Constitution. Institutions have battled it at every turn and been rebuffed by the First Amendment.
Swift’s music so far has not ”spoken” to me, personally. Probably because I'm just old enough to be her father. That's the way it works. Musically, I prefer listening to Lady Gaga, as it stands now. However, I feel of all the artists of Swift’s generation, she is the one most likely to drop a Highway 61 Revisited on the world, like Bob Dylan.
So true. The Beatles were stars before George Martin. They were (are) geniuses. We wouldn't know Martin's name if it weren't for the Beatles. But also, "Eleanor Rigby" wouldn't be a masterpiece if it weren't for George Martin. And so on.
If there's a problem with Taylor Swift -- which isn't a hill I need to die on because I'm just a curmudgeonly time traveler -- it has to do with the phenomenon itself, i.e., the cult-like, obsessive ferocity of the fans and the obscene amount of wealth that Swift spends and earns in selling herself as a brand. Maybe somebody will write a sociological thesis on Taylor Swift, or a marketing primer, and this article will be source material. But really, we've been here before. Elvis was a thing. Beatlemania was a thing. Girls were fainting. Back in the 19th century, ladies fainted when they heard Wagner. Music is powerful stuff.
I listened to the recommended song, "Back to December." I felt soothed and sucked in right away. Her voice has a tiny drop of auto-tune in it, which softens the vocal line, like a touch of face powder. The arrangement sounds full (nice strings, either real or synth). The tune is generic, but with some subtle rhythmic shifts and shortened line breaks that make it a bit unpredictable. (Yes I'm a musician.) And of course, it has the requisite romantic lyrics about regret and nostalgia -- excellent emotions to plumb if you want a hit song. It's catchy, with an emotional hook. It's not "Judy Blue Eyes" or "Pet Sounds," it's what we geezers would call bubblegum music, but it's very well-produced. Does it pass my "repeated listenings test"? No. But maybe if I need a hug...
Let them eat cake. Taylor Swift eats cake three times a day. Good for her.
yes. i brought up Ginger Rogers because she was phenomenally popular in the 1930s - 1940s, very similar to how Swift is viewed today but without the modern advantages of marketing and a fully developed industry around her. It was a very primitive situation - the modern celebrity factories didn't really exist yet - but it was Ginger that was receiving standing ovations in stadiums across the country for their films, not Fred Astaire, even though he was allegedly the genius behind the team. But in fact her solo films after she left Astaire were more popular than theirs had been.
The public decides, in the end, who is a star and who isn't. The manufactured stuff flashes and disappears and Swift has been around for a very long time.
I agree that Def Leppard, AC/DC, and Shania were all successful because of Mutt Lange. The effect of producers is too strong to deny and there are too many great producers that, when you look at their career, produced the strongest albums for their top artists and the only thing you've heard from other artists, because the producer was the largest talent behind the success. Lange, Rubin, Neptunes, Blanco, or even O Casek, the story is the same. These days I actually plumb old music by producer discography, not artist by artist.
I was listening to L7 as an antidote to Swift, and, yep, produced by Butch Vig, just as was the breakthrough work for seven other bands.
monetary success is something else. Those producers you mention, in particular, all had the industry behind them with marketing, networking and distribution, advantages which disappeared because the producer took them with him when he moved on. george martin brought the same thing to the Beatles. mick jagger is only one musician that has been quite eloquent on the subject.
artists always want to work with the very best because it brings out their own best.
There's no band that has a successful album with one producer and then goes unsupported by the label with the next; there are plenty of bands that change producers, keep high support and have a big dropoff in both quality and success.
Name a band that lost industry support after a big success. Not even logical.
fleetwood mac def leppard van halen struggled with it for years heart rolling stones jeff beck
all of em had the money jerked out from under, all gigantic names not flash in the pans who are usually flash in the pans because the money got jerked out from under
The challenge was naming the case where a band had a successful album with one producer and then a producer change with no label support. You seem to be naming situations where bands faded out over time and lost label support after unsucceasful albums.
Yeah there’s a certain whiff of bitterness in kg posts ain’t there?
Irving Berlin couldnt read or write music and was an atrocious pianist, so bad that musicians couldn’t recognize his songs when he played them. He had to have loads of industry muscle.
All musicians want to work with the best, it brings out their best. Said it in the first comment, and the whole thread has been a studied ignoring of that simple fact by kellygreen
I love that you spent a few hours of work to convince yourself that TS is likeable because you think I don't like her and am "dogpiling".
I don't like or dislike her particularly. I simply argued she doesn't write her own biggest songs without loads of industry muscle. Neither did Madonna, who I like a lot, or Britney, who I generally like.
My 15-year-old daughter saw Taylor Swift in the spring and she’s still talking about it. I waited in the parking lot with the other parents for the show to wrap up, listening to the end of it floating through the air from the stadium. I’ve never seen so many happy kids in my life, all emerging with their sequins and glitter and dresses and armfuls of friendship bracelets.
Swift is an amazing song writer and performer. She’s generous to her crew and fans. Her fans span generations, even my 79-year old dad likes some of her songs. It’s nice to see a positive force at work.
Same here. My 12 year old granddaughter has been Swifty since she was old enough to listen to pop music. Tay Tay is pure fun and it’s been a joy singing those simple girl songs with her in the car all these years. And you’re right- she’s a wonderful songwriter, telling her fans about the boyfriends and the girlfriends and the heartache and the good times in her life. Just like my Motown and Doo Wop in the 50’s and 60’s. And I know how old I am and sound, but it’s really nice to see someone who’s not terribly interested in shocking us with her moves or with her body or what she can do with her tongue. Give her her due and rejoice in the mad love.
So you’re saying it was worth the $853 bucks you paid for the ticket
We got ours through Ticketrom and paid $175 each. I’d only pay over $800/ticket for Elvis.
I’d only pay that to see Jesus.
No one else would ever be that important.
My first laugh of the day. Thanks!
I tried all the songs Evan suggested and to me they were all cringeworthy. To each their own.
I'm on team Albarn, though. He criticized TS for not writing her own songs but was called out as off base. That is correct, as she participates in writing all her songs and her own songwriting put her on the map.
But when you go from "on the map" to number one songs and pop superstardom by "writing your own songs" with production teams that just happen to have already written number ones for Kesha, Pink, and others, to me that is not "writing your own songs".
Songwriting and production are different. In terms of production, people say AC/DC and Def Leppard were largely driven by Mutt Lange which I would agree with; but it can be either a producer, an artist, or both that contributes heavily to the success. Nobody manufactured the Beatles, and groups like Nirvana worked with several great producers but weren't made great by any of them, they were already great. You can argue though that there are artists who clearly were only great with a great producer.
I’d recommend two different songs. The Great War is an amazing relationship ballad.
And Ronen, about a boy who died from cancer is a real tear jerker.
I tried really hard not to be a swiftie, but without success
Soon You’ll Get Better is a softer, acoustic song about her mom’s cancer battle. There’s a breathe at the 2:40 mark that hits home. I know a couple people that don’t like Swift’s music but connect with that song.
def leppard and ac/dc were manufactured by Mutt Lange as was shania twain; the beatles were manufactured by George Martin; Ginger Rogers was a product of the studio system.
All of that is utter nonsense. You don't stay at the top for decades by being a manufactured product. You work with the best so that you can put out your best work. Ginger shouldn't have starred in a Gershwin show on Broadway and shouldn't have worked with Astaire or Pan Berman. It's nonsensical, sorry
Han, you hit on something huge there—Rock n’ roll. Those acts you mentioned were already ascending when Mutt Lange or George Martin came along. The same goes for NWA and Tupac Shakur. The list goes on. Compare those with truly manufactured acts (Backstreet Boys?).
ALL of this is about free speech. Rock n’ roll originated in America under our Constitution. Institutions have battled it at every turn and been rebuffed by the First Amendment.
Swift’s music so far has not ”spoken” to me, personally. Probably because I'm just old enough to be her father. That's the way it works. Musically, I prefer listening to Lady Gaga, as it stands now. However, I feel of all the artists of Swift’s generation, she is the one most likely to drop a Highway 61 Revisited on the world, like Bob Dylan.
So true. The Beatles were stars before George Martin. They were (are) geniuses. We wouldn't know Martin's name if it weren't for the Beatles. But also, "Eleanor Rigby" wouldn't be a masterpiece if it weren't for George Martin. And so on.
If there's a problem with Taylor Swift -- which isn't a hill I need to die on because I'm just a curmudgeonly time traveler -- it has to do with the phenomenon itself, i.e., the cult-like, obsessive ferocity of the fans and the obscene amount of wealth that Swift spends and earns in selling herself as a brand. Maybe somebody will write a sociological thesis on Taylor Swift, or a marketing primer, and this article will be source material. But really, we've been here before. Elvis was a thing. Beatlemania was a thing. Girls were fainting. Back in the 19th century, ladies fainted when they heard Wagner. Music is powerful stuff.
I listened to the recommended song, "Back to December." I felt soothed and sucked in right away. Her voice has a tiny drop of auto-tune in it, which softens the vocal line, like a touch of face powder. The arrangement sounds full (nice strings, either real or synth). The tune is generic, but with some subtle rhythmic shifts and shortened line breaks that make it a bit unpredictable. (Yes I'm a musician.) And of course, it has the requisite romantic lyrics about regret and nostalgia -- excellent emotions to plumb if you want a hit song. It's catchy, with an emotional hook. It's not "Judy Blue Eyes" or "Pet Sounds," it's what we geezers would call bubblegum music, but it's very well-produced. Does it pass my "repeated listenings test"? No. But maybe if I need a hug...
Let them eat cake. Taylor Swift eats cake three times a day. Good for her.
yes. i brought up Ginger Rogers because she was phenomenally popular in the 1930s - 1940s, very similar to how Swift is viewed today but without the modern advantages of marketing and a fully developed industry around her. It was a very primitive situation - the modern celebrity factories didn't really exist yet - but it was Ginger that was receiving standing ovations in stadiums across the country for their films, not Fred Astaire, even though he was allegedly the genius behind the team. But in fact her solo films after she left Astaire were more popular than theirs had been.
The public decides, in the end, who is a star and who isn't. The manufactured stuff flashes and disappears and Swift has been around for a very long time.
I agree that Def Leppard, AC/DC, and Shania were all successful because of Mutt Lange. The effect of producers is too strong to deny and there are too many great producers that, when you look at their career, produced the strongest albums for their top artists and the only thing you've heard from other artists, because the producer was the largest talent behind the success. Lange, Rubin, Neptunes, Blanco, or even O Casek, the story is the same. These days I actually plumb old music by producer discography, not artist by artist.
I was listening to L7 as an antidote to Swift, and, yep, produced by Butch Vig, just as was the breakthrough work for seven other bands.
monetary success is something else. Those producers you mention, in particular, all had the industry behind them with marketing, networking and distribution, advantages which disappeared because the producer took them with him when he moved on. george martin brought the same thing to the Beatles. mick jagger is only one musician that has been quite eloquent on the subject.
artists always want to work with the very best because it brings out their own best.
There's no band that has a successful album with one producer and then goes unsupported by the label with the next; there are plenty of bands that change producers, keep high support and have a big dropoff in both quality and success.
Name a band that lost industry support after a big success. Not even logical.
oh gosh yes there have been lots of them. the money moves around with the producer it's a common occurrence.
You've convinced me by repeating the claim without meeting the challenge for evidence
fleetwood mac def leppard van halen struggled with it for years heart rolling stones jeff beck
all of em had the money jerked out from under, all gigantic names not flash in the pans who are usually flash in the pans because the money got jerked out from under
The challenge was naming the case where a band had a successful album with one producer and then a producer change with no label support. You seem to be naming situations where bands faded out over time and lost label support after unsucceasful albums.
She would be offended that you said that, honestly. She definitely wants to be considered a singer-songwriter.
Great point maybe you can find a thread for it rather than the one about whether or not she's a songwriter
Yeah there’s a certain whiff of bitterness in kg posts ain’t there?
Irving Berlin couldnt read or write music and was an atrocious pianist, so bad that musicians couldn’t recognize his songs when he played them. He had to have loads of industry muscle.
All musicians want to work with the best, it brings out their best. Said it in the first comment, and the whole thread has been a studied ignoring of that simple fact by kellygreen
I love that you spent a few hours of work to convince yourself that TS is likeable because you think I don't like her and am "dogpiling".
I don't like or dislike her particularly. I simply argued she doesn't write her own biggest songs without loads of industry muscle. Neither did Madonna, who I like a lot, or Britney, who I generally like.