celeb news Pollstar: Taylor Swift is biggest dominating artist in culture since prime MJ/Madonna

[Raspberries]

This, MJ during mid 80s and The Beatles' peak

Edited December 6, 2023 by Raspberries

[Badgalbriel]

5 minutes ago, Kristie Kuwa said:

To me its just interesting to observe it. Her success is enormous and is reaching hights literally only a very few select people have reached before.

I feel like her success especially grew expontentially during the pandemic - it correlated with the album she recorded then (Folklore + Evermore) plus her rerecordings. She literally created a universe during a time that most people felt isolated and abandonded. 

Her success has very little to do with her quality as a singer, but imho more so with so society itself

You had a point until your last sentence. Her success has nothing to do with her voice, but with the quality of her discography. Her music is universal and talks about things we all go through. That's why even people that hate her end up liking her music if they pay attention to what it says. 

[Badgalbriel]

23 minutes ago, Kristie Kuwa said:

Yes, she obviously appeals to some people with her writing and music, without a doubt.

Her immense success however poses the question: What exactly makes her so special that she's oblitarating her competition so much?

You literally answered the question with the first line. People don't care about vocals when they listen to a song. They care about what the song is talking about. 

[MatiRod]

In terms of net $$$ it definitely is

[pride4jc1222]

1 hour ago, Raphy23 said:

Which pop girl was dominating at that time. I actually cannot remember. 

Wasn’t Billie Eilish starting to get big in late 2018? I remember Bad Guy going to #1 the next summer.

[GoatGly]

Some of the most acclaimed and respected artists are not incredible singers because music is more than voice.

[Badgalbriel]

4 minutes ago, Richie.Valdez said:

Donald Trump was POTY as well. What's to brag? 

And he really was the person of that year. What about it? So was Obama, so was You, so was the computer you use. 

[Badgalbriel]

omg, they just merged countless threads here lol

[Badgalbriel]

Now even more thread

[Klein]

Just now, Badgalbriel said:

omg, they just merged countless threads here lol

And most threads don't even have anything to do with each other. They could have at least merged the threads related to her POTY interview in the POTY thread.  

[Digitalism]

I love this forum

[cruelhprince]

huh

[Richie.Valdez]

A mega thread, thank you sweet baby jesus.

 

[Rev8]

5 minutes ago, swissman said:

It's possible, and certainly in THIS era it is the biggest peak insofar as numbers go, but I think what stops it from outright being "the biggest peak ever" is that her numbers are impressive due to the time she is at her peak.

 

If this were the 1950s, for example, she'd be nowhere near as numerically big (if comparing her to herself today, not necessarily other artists from the 1950s). The same can basically be said for any time before streaming, where album sales are now inflated by being compromised of both physicals (released in many multiples to get fans buying as many as they can) and daily streams as that is the main way people listen to music nowadays. In her case, being a very commercial, relatable and well managed artist, this has her seeing big success.

 

Of course, fans willing to buy albums in this time is no small feat, but we can't say that Beatles or Michael Jackson fans would not have acted the same way if they had the same avenues of consumption and commodities offered to them, and a key difference in their times is that once you buy an album, your statistical contributions to the artist stops until you buy another. You can go back and listen to their discography a thousand times, and still those individual album sales are all that is counted. Now, Taylor's fans and the GP can go listen to her entire discography at a whim, and any interaction contributes to another fraction of a sale, which in totality, adds up to more millions that someone like The Beatles or Michael Jackson never could achieve without consumption rules as we have today.

 

 

Tea

stans should learn that you can't compare (for ex.) 2 different eras, from widely different times

 

[mercurialworld]

40 minutes ago, C-Amber said:

Everyone saying being a billionaire is bad, but non of you will reject being a billionaire, and if you had that money you'll never let it go.

I think you are projecting your own desires onto others. It is unfair to assume that we would all not reject hoarding excessive wealth if given the opportunity. Let's try popularizing the idea of redistributing wealth and making societal changes instead of assuming everyone is greedy and selfish 

[unclefloprry]

NO. And it's not a bad thing if she doesn't have it.  

[illia]

First a Houdini megathread, now this 

[Cruel Summer]

Not the megathread I’m- 

 

Well, I guess that kind of settles the question in and of itself but let’s see where this all goes!

[PoisonedIvy]

How many threads got merged into this

[Relampago.]

I posted about dragging Kim and it got merged into here??

[Kristie Kuwa]

9 minutes ago, Badgalbriel said:

You literally answered the question with the first line. People don't care about vocals when they listen to a song. They care about what the song is talking about. 

But that hasn't always been the case, especially not in the world of Pop (in rap, it was always important for instance).

[Badgalbriel]

Just now, Kristie Kuwa said:

But that hasn't always been the case, especially not in the world of Pop (in rap, it was always important for instance).

So it just means that she makes the music that represents this generation as opposed to songs that represented previous generations. 

[Lemon]

Just now, Kristie Kuwa said:

But that hasn't always been the case, especially not in the world of Pop (in rap, it was always important for instance).

But why do you paint “what the song is talking about” as something… bad? 
 

I mean, that’s the core answer to your question regarding Taylor. 

[Bubble Tea]

Last year if you'd compared Taylor to Madonna I'd have slapped you, but now there's no denying that, if anyone, Taylor and Taylor only could usurp her - and maybe she already has. I think like a lot of people, for a long time I found Taylor calculating and unlikeable, but that was only because I didn't find her to be "authentic." However, what I realise now is that she has always been authentic - she is authentically, and openly, driven to be the most successful. She's really no different to a school's top student wanting to ace all the of the exams, except with her its charts, awards, tickets sold etc.

 

I re-watched her doco recently and she's quite open and blunt about it, she's not pretending to be anything otherwise. Sure everyone doesn't vibe with that, but there's nothing fake or deceptive about anything she's doing.

 

Plus, at the end of the day she is incredibly talented and hundreds of millions of people connect with her and can relate to her music. If it was so easy to do that, everyone would.

[MidnightsAtPeace]

53 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said:

 

Did you watch the video? I’m sure if he was not a fan you’d be in here calling him an OTH.

I know him and I used to watch his videos so idc