Re: Artists with terrible popularity-to-legacy ratios

65
zorg wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 2:50 pm
Krev wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 1:57 pmRam Jam
That's more like a "One Hit Wonder". A Lead Belly cover even. I think you need to have at least a couple of singles to qualify as popular....checked on Wikipedia, but no, nothing else. Though I did learn this great factoid....
The band was originally known as 'Creekside Killshack'.
which is indeed badass.
While I don't disagree on the criteria, Black Betty is played at every sporting event, county fair, and bowling alley nationwide. They've left a legacy far exceeding their Ted-Nugent-esque musical output.

Creekside Killshack is a cool name, though it sounds like a local death metal band.
We're headed for social anarchy when people start pissing on bookstores.

Re: Artists with terrible popularity-to-legacy ratios

67
Wood Goblin wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2024 10:51 am Moby is an extremely good one. Play was inescapable for a year or two; Wikipedia says that it sold 12 million copies.

He has released 17 records since then.
He's a weird one, because the ubiquity that he briefly achieved was kinda ahead of its time, with him/his management focusing on selling his songs to adverts rather than singles. He was maybe one of the forerunners in doing that as a career-launching move, rather than cashing in on sales. His music was inescapable for a year/18 months. He hit (in the UK at least) that "coffee-table dance music" sweetspot. Maybe that was his downfall. He was a longform syndrum, and everyone grew tired of him. Of that distinctive sound, which was initially exciting but quickly just triggered a "Yes, we've got it, thanks" reaction. Plus the creeping on young women probably didn't help.

He'd been around a bit before "Play". When it hit big, I wonder if he thought "Yes, it will always be like this from now on" or "Damn, this could be brief, let's rinse it for all I can."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest