[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: After an album, what?
>Pete has said recently that he accepts the fact that his solo releases will
>sell a few thousand. The risk is a new WHO album that sells as poorly as
>PSYCHODERELICT. Rock, like other aspects of the entertainment industry, is
>a popularity contest, too (I just wanna be popular.....).
It depends. If Pete does idiosyncratic, off-the-wall stuff, then he can
expect that there's a small market for it. The more mainstream the work,
the more likely there'll be big sales. Whichever, if word that it's
available doesn't reach the intended public, then it won't sell.
In a way, art is the easy part. Marketing is harder for the artist than
producing the product--especially considering that artists aren't always
equipped with the accountant type brains that keep track of costs and
strategies. Pete does tend to off-the-wall stuff (and John's even worse),
so the amazing thing is that The Who material has sold so well. It has to
do with the philosophy, I think--the undercurrents that run through Who
music that TED's solo projects don't contain. That's what sells.
I think PSYCHODERELICT should have sold. It's true that it's something of a
personal type project, and oddball, as usual, but it contains all the
elements that should make it sell--it has a great edge to it, and it's got
sex and intrigue, and a big sell out at the end. Great stuff, but I totally
missed the fact that it was released, myself. What kind of promotion did it
get? Just Pete's tour?
>When it comes to a new WHO album, Pete has the weight of THE WHO &
>it's entire history on his shoulders. It's pretty much *his* band & he
>knows it. But it also involves many other people as well.
>
>That's a lot a pressure for Pete. Pete pressure.
Why should he let all that scare him into silence? Nobody can accomplish
anything if they let all the baggage of the past tie them down. It's NOT
just Pete's band and Pete's responsibility, and trying to make it that robs
the other members of creative opportunity. They had gotten into this corner
back in 1982, when Pete was trying to do everything himself, and likely
Roger was right that they should have just backed off and taken another look
at the process. If they all share the work, then they share the load for
criticism as well. It's not like Pete is going to lose any credit for
sharing, either. If it's good work, then it reflects the same way on
everyone concerned.
keets
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com