Artists are successful because they are successful. This happens because of randomness and luck.
It could have been Bat for Lashes instead of Florence. Or Noah and the Whale instead of Mumford.
Replace “yet” with “because” and you have your answer
Probably big labels, corporate types and payola still dictate a lot of success as to what gets played on radio which then gets absorbed by the masses.
In theory spotify et al should be broadening peoples tastes but in practice it’s only DiS types already inclined to niche music that benefit whereas the general public are content to hear the new Beyonce/Taylor Swift song 5 times a day on radio and then go home and stream it and then maybe buy that album.
I understand Daft Punk’s commercial success, but have always been baffled by the critical acclaim they get.
I mean, they are sort of ok in an inoffensive Radio 2 type way but I’ve always been completely mystified by how absolutely enormously popular they are. I could name countless fairly similar but much better bands that never managed to sell a record in their whole career (The Go-Betweens, Microdisney, The Triffids, American Music Club, I Am Kloot etc etc etc)
Yeah I think that’s a big thing for this type of act. Countless bands toil and toil away blazing a bit of a trail, then some band comes along doing pretty much the same thing and they just explode!
A good example in recent times for Aussie bands is Rolling Blackouts Coastal Fever. So many bands here have that same sort of jangle (Dick Diver, Twerps, Ocean Party etc), and of course you can go to Go-Betweens and Flying Nun bands for source. BUT anyway RBCF just seem to have really taken off!
George Ezra is fucking horrific
I think Drake is ‘Easy Listening’ for the auto-tune generation. It’s a sort of perfected generic auto-tuney noise that could be coming out of your phone speakers or gym speakers or wherever and just sort of sound familiar and ‘inoffensive’ (if that’s the type of music you’ve grown up with, which is the case for people in their 20s & 30s now). It’s just an updated version of Mantovani, a 2010’s elevator music.
At some point he’s also hit that sort of superstar level of popularity where the whole music and entertainment industry also has a vast stake in his continuing success and he seems to have specifically become the artist on which the streaming model is being modelled.
I like them but there is no way a bunch of indie bed wetters should like anything this heavy.
Nah Bat for Lashes is immense. Florence is cool but she’s way more, I dunno, radio 2
Muse headlined Glastonbury but I’ve never met anyone who likes music who doesn’t think they’re fucking abysmal.
Hi there! They’re one of my favourite bands.
Muse definitely don’t belong in the ‘inexplicably successful artists’ category. No band should write an album like Origin Of Symmetry and not get some kind of acclaim. Muse at their best are genuinely brilliant, but I have to say at their worst they are so cringeworthy it’s like listening to a Muse parody band.
I find it inexplicable that anyone would want to listen to Matt Bellamy’s voice for entertainment.
Well at least you can no longer say that you’ve “never met anyone who likes music who doesn’t think they’re fucking abysmal”.
Let’s be friends!
Important research update. Appears that the band name connection with the Australian marsupial has something to do with it.
Weeeeird reason to invest so much into a band
Those Noisey things where they smirkingly interview people doing something that doesn’t gel with their worldview are just horrible. Just let people enjoy things - it’s not difficult.
I didn’t pick that tone up. They were more asking about the phenomena of their unexpected popularity. The interviewer even says they like them at one point.