Why does the mainstream industry only want a select few to be popular?

~~Soulflower~~ · 09-20-2014, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

What agenda could there possibly be beyond making money? They're a business. They don't care about anything else. Urban made a perfectly good example of a band playing mainstream palatable music and getting famous, then making different music and being ignored even with record company backing.

And Adele is totally pop friendly. "Rolling In the Deep", which let's face it is the only song most mainstream fans care about, is lobotomized soul that's trying to pretend it's not a made-for-radio pop song.

But that was not the case for Adele which is why I said it was not a good example because my question was on Adele being an exception to the traditional pop star.

Adele did not start out making mainstream palatable music. She also did not have a superstar friendly image. She was a overweight woman that was fully clothed so sex was not her market. Her brand was the TOTAL OPPOSITE of what was being marketed by the industry which is why I said she was an exception.

I think it is absurd to argue Rolling in the Deep is a pop friendly song. The song is not something that you would commonly hear playing on the radio. There is nothing trendy or even catchy about the song. It covers a mature subject matter and is a bluesy/folk type of song. So how is it pop friendly?

Is blues/folk a pop genre that is playing on the radio right now? I just asked since you insist Rolling in the Deep is a pop friendly song.

Her first album was folk/blues/soul as well so she did not suddenly drop the "21" album with a different sound.

Is she a rare case?

Is the industry picky with who they choose as super stars?

Obviously yes.

There is an agenda and people need to wake up

**Frownland** · 09-20-2014, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soulflower

Adele did not start out making mainstream palatable music. She also did not have a superstar friendly image. She was a overweight woman that was fully clothed so sex was not her market. Her brand was the TOTAL OPPOSITE of what was being marketed by the industry which is why I said she was an exception.

I think it is absurd to argue Rolling in the Deep is a pop friendly song. The song is not something that you would commonly hear playing on the radio. There is nothing trendy or even catchy about the song. It covers a mature subject matter and is a bluesy/folk type of song. So how is it pop friendly?

Are you serious?

Thelonious Monkey · 09-20-2014, 11:34 PM

I don't get why this is even a conversation. They have there reasons. I won't pretend to know anything about this but at the end of the day why can't we all just go home and listen to whatever we want. Nothing is classified as bad music. If you enjoy it, listen to it.
Just don't go on at me about it.

~~Soulflower~~ · 09-20-2014, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

Oh come on, Adele word of mouth? are you kidding me.
The woman was getting tons of attention ages before she even released an album, maybe not in the States but in the UK she was. She was signed for the exact same reason Duffy got signed, to be the next Amy Winehouse. And her record company threw everything behind her to make her that.
Just like I already said, if there's one breakout talent the rest try to find their own version of that. Adele is a perfect example of that happening.

As for your other point I would say although the White Stripes may have sold more records but Adele is much more marketable towards non music fans and a wider selection of people simply because of the material she sings which is much more accessible & commercial. Like I said, why would you use your advertising revenue on something you know is already going to sell?
The White Stripes had a following which would buy a new White Stripes album regardless and would know about it from having an interest in music.

Adele plays the type of music that you buy your mum for Christmas, you need your advertising budget to let those mums know it's out there for them to want it... that's the difference

Adele's first album is titled 19 and it was released in 2008 during the same time Amy Winehouse was immensely popular. She was no where near as popular as Amy and her debut was not mainstream.

Adele's second album 21 did not initially get industry backing and was promoted through word of mouth early on before it became world wide. Record sales is what get songs played on the radio and her album was coming off the shelves left and right (through word of mouth in the beginning) which is how her song initially got played on the radio. After that the rest is history. Adele did not even start her tour until after it became an international success and that is when the industry started to market her.

I remember when I first heard her song randomly play on the radio and I was questioning why because she was not popular and wasn't being marketed. However, her album was selling (by word of mouth).

**Frownland** · 09-20-2014, 11:50 PM

19 (Adele album) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd say going multi-platinum in several countries qualifies as mainstream.

~~Soulflower~~ · 09-20-2014, 11:51 PM

So I ask again, if Adele can become popular through word of mouth with extra industry marketing how come the industry won't give other artists the same chance?

Why can't the industry also market other non traditional pop stars?

Adele is completely different from Rihanna, Beyonce, Lady Gaga, Kary Perry, etc so the argument that she is pop friendly is rather ridiculous.

She is not.... which is partially why she became so popular because people were tired of the same pop stars the industry was marketing. They wanted some new blood.

I know for a fact if the industry marketed an artist like Janelle Monae she would be just as popular.

There some dices being rolled behind the scenes and I don't like it.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 09-20-2014, 11:53 PM

It was not selling by word of mouth at all, Most artists that record companies think will have mainstream appeal based in the UK they treat the exact same way, establish them in the UK & Europe with the first album and then move on to the US market for the 2nd album.

And that is exactly what they did with Adele and that's exactly what they did with Amy Winehouse too. And of course Amy Winehouse was popular then THAT'S WHY THEY SIGNED ADELE IN THE FIRST PLACE, to try and match her success.

If you really think that Adele's success was an accident and wasn't planned & managed in minute detail you must be incredibly naive. Of course they want you to think it's done by 'word of mouth' nobody is going to buy something they think is being forced onto them.

They did a similar thing with Lily Allen, tell everyone that she became well known because of social media and that it was the fans that got her a record deal but don't mention that she was signed before all this happened and that it was just one big publicity stunt to make her appeal to that audience, young people who use social media, the ones who would buy her records.

Adele was marketed at her target audience in the same way and it looks like you fell for it because you genuinely think it happened by accident.

~~Soulflower~~ · 09-20-2014, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

19 (Adele album) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd say going multi-platinum in several countries qualifies as mainstream.

Well if she was I definitely did not hear her songs on the radio nor did she receive accolades, awards and excessive marketing.

**Frownland** · 09-21-2014, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soulflower

Well if she was I definitely did not hear her songs on the radio nor did she receive accolades, awards and excessive marketing.

19 (Adele album) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many accolades had, nominations for Grammys and such, etc.

You don't have to be identical to what's on the market to be pop friendly. You just have to make extremely accessible music that's not too complicated for the casual listener's musical IQ of 15.

~~Soulflower~~ · 09-21-2014, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

It was not selling by word of mouth at all, Most artists that record companies think will have mainstream appeal based in the UK they treat the exact same way, establish them in the UK & Europe with the first album and then move on to the US market for the 2nd album.

And that is exactly what they did with Adele and that's exactly what they did with Amy Winehouse too. And of course Amy Winehouse was popular then THAT'S WHY THEY SIGNED ADELE IN THE FIRST PLACE, to try and match her success.

If you really think that Adele's success was an accident and wasn't planned & managed in minute detail you must be incredibly naive. Of course they want you to think it's done by 'word of mouth' nobody is going to buy something they think is being forced onto them.

They did a similar thing with Lily Allen, tell everyone that she became well known because of social media and that it was the fans that got her a record deal but don't mention that she was signed before all this happened and that it was just one big publicity stunt to make her appeal to that audience, young people who use social media, the ones who would buy her records.

Adele was marketed at her target audience in the same way and it looks like you fell for it because you genuinely think it happened by accident.

I did not fall for anything because I did not buy her album. I am just simply expressing my opinion from what I have heard for myself. I am not insisting that Adele's success was by accident. I am just arguing that the industry at some point started to market her and she became successful by her music and not any other gimmicks regardless whether she was signed to match Amy's success or not.

My argument is if a singer like Adele can become successful surely other singers who make non traditional pop music and do not have traditional pop appear can become successful as well.

Adele's music is very different from Amy Winehouses by the way.

I wouldn't call her success an "accident" but her album sells exceeded expectations and is rather unheard of in this market. Her album went diamond for crying out loud which is rather unrealistic in today's industry. I would say people actually brought the album because she was different from the other pop stars, could sing and people could relate to her music.

Her album still sells till this day so it was not just another gimmicky marketing ploy, people actually like her music.

09-20-2014, 11:50 PM	#175 (permalink)
Frownland SOPHIE FOREVER Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: East of the Southern North American West Posts: 35,541	19 (Adele album) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I'd say going multi-platinum in several countries qualifies as mainstream. __________________ Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. d e a f b o x

09-20-2014, 11:53 PM	#177 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	It was not selling by word of mouth at all, Most artists that record companies think will have mainstream appeal based in the UK they treat the exact same way, establish them in the UK & Europe with the first album and then move on to the US market for the 2nd album. And that is exactly what they did with Adele and that's exactly what they did with Amy Winehouse too. And of course Amy Winehouse was popular then THAT'S WHY THEY SIGNED ADELE IN THE FIRST PLACE, to try and match her success. If you really think that Adele's success was an accident and wasn't planned & managed in minute detail you must be incredibly naive. Of course they want you to think it's done by 'word of mouth' nobody is going to buy something they think is being forced onto them. They did a similar thing with Lily Allen, tell everyone that she became well known because of social media and that it was the fans that got her a record deal but don't mention that she was signed before all this happened and that it was just one big publicity stunt to make her appeal to that audience, young people who use social media, the ones who would buy her records. Adele was marketed at her target audience in the same way and it looks like you fell for it because you genuinely think it happened by accident. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

09-20-2014, 11:34 PM	#173 (permalink)
Thelonious Monkey Caesar is home. Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 876	I don't get why this is even a conversation. They have there reasons. I won't pretend to know anything about this but at the end of the day why can't we all just go home and listen to whatever we want. Nothing is classified as bad music. If you enjoy it, listen to it. Just don't go on at me about it.

09-20-2014, 11:51 PM	#176 (permalink)
~~Soulflower~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 2,304	So I ask again, if Adele can become popular through word of mouth with extra industry marketing how come the industry won't give other artists the same chance? Why can't the industry also market other non traditional pop stars? Adele is completely different from Rihanna, Beyonce, Lady Gaga, Kary Perry, etc so the argument that she is pop friendly is rather ridiculous. She is not.... which is partially why she became so popular because people were tired of the same pop stars the industry was marketing. They wanted some new blood. I know for a fact if the industry marketed an artist like Janelle Monae she would be just as popular. There some dices being rolled behind the scenes and I don't like it.