kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today
I never thought of H&O as old back in the day. I never knew anyone who owned their records. For a time there on the radio it went MJ, H&O commercial, some other hit, MJ commercial, H&O some other hit commercial, MJ...
A few years latter Huey Lewis had every other song on the radio. Go figure.
I watched that keyboard cat video with the hall and oates and I couldn't help but wonder who the target audience of that kind of music was supposed to be.
People buying records, that's who. As radio-friendly as they were, no offense but that's a weird thing to be wondering about.
And then that made me wonder what the "now" equivelent of Hall and Oates is. Is there one? Did the genre of "older guys doing lite pop" sort of die out? or is that just the Black eyed Peas?
H&O were as mainstream as it got during 1976-86. I'm not a Hall & Oates fan by any means, but you act like they were some weird niche duo that slipped on a banana peel and became popular by accident. This wasn't Roger Whittaker, man, my God...
Who were H&O's target audience? That's like asking who was Bryan Adams' target audience, or who was buying the Mamas and the Papas. That was the going sound, so Mainstream America bought their records.
Alright calm down. mamas and papas were "the kids" though when they were popular.
According to AMG, John Phillips (of the Mamas & Papas) was born in 1935.
Which would have made him 31 years old when the M&Ps had their first hit.
I don't know if he lied about his age during his heyday, but...
In 1982 hall and oates were old right?
They were only in their early thirties. So was about half the arena-rock bands and maybe a quarter of the punk/new wave artists.
I don't think that "kids" thing is a fair comparison. The music scene now isn't as ageist as it was in the sixties. When Sheryl Crow turned forty, she announced it to the world. But if this had happened back in the sixties, you know damn well she would have kept it a secret! (Or tried to pass for younger.)
in 1982 kenny rogers had hits, but kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today.
Not quite. He's no longer having hits.
I don't keep up with current country, but even though he's still out there, I don't believe he's as omnipresent as he used to be.
But he's probably rich as all hell. Does he need one?
George Strait is still having hits, 20+ years later, but then again he never crossed over pop like Kenny did.
I know you all like Hall and Oates, but I can assure you at the time they were considered nothing more than a disposable top 40 duo. No one saw them as having an impressive body of work. More like, oh no here comes more pop music claiming to be rocknsoul.
This was a time that Prince, Michael Jackson and Ray Parker were having top 40 hits. Do you really think people were saying to each other, "my favorite rocknsoul group is Hall and Oates?
I think Maroon 5 = in style but it's hard to find a contemporary example to H&O that matches in style AND success. Seriously, between their debut with Atlantic in 1972, through the double platinum "Big Bang Boom" in 1984, they released SIXTEEN albums (including two live albums and two comps), including a string of four platinum or better albums in the early 1980s which feature most of the hits we all know. That's an incredible run.
I know you all like Hall and Oates, but I can assure you at the time they were considered nothing more than a disposable top 40 duo. No one saw them as having an impressive body of work. More like, oh no here comes more pop music claiming to be rocknsoul.
This was a time that Prince, Michael Jackson and Ray Parker were having top 40 hits. Do you really think people were saying to each other, "my favorite rocknsoul group is Hall and Oates?
"Disposable top 40 duo"? Maybe to an elitist like you. Hall & Oates were arguably the most popular band in the early 80's and the most prolific musical duo ever. Their string of No. 1 hits is incredible.
I know you all like Hall and Oates, but I can assure you at the time they were considered nothing more than a disposable top 40 duo. No one saw them as having an impressive body of work. More like, oh no here comes more pop music claiming to be rocknsoul.
This was a time that Prince, Michael Jackson and Ray Parker were having top 40 hits. Do you really think people were saying to each other, "my favorite rocknsoul group is Hall and Oates?
"Disposable top 40 duo"? Maybe to an elitist like you. Hall & Oates were arguably the most popular band in the early 80's and the most prolific musical duo ever. Their string of No. 1 hits is incredible.
BTW - every kid on my block had this.
I had a transistor radio for a year. For that one year I was not an elitist. For every other year of my life before and since I have looked down on top 40.
I understand that you and your friends and millions of others look to top 40 for their musical choices.
So look at the artists who are getting top 40 hits. They are the Hall and Oates of today. If one of them gets 24 hits in ten years they match H&Os record. Madonna has gotten many more hits over a greater number of years so she is much better than Hall & Oates.
BTW, I listened to lots of top 40 in the 80s, it went with my job.
I will say that very few duos have had so many hits. Simon & Garfunkle Louis Prima & Kelley Smith Steve Laurence & Edie Gorme Eurithymics White Stipes
Maybe White Stripes are the Hall&Oates of today. Looks like they will be around for a while. Lots of hits. High quality.
I'm with Laserwolf on this one. As a kid who was first discovering radio in the early 1980s, H&O were monsters on the box but I never had a memory of them being, "OMG, best f*cking band ever." Didn't hate on 'em, didn't think they were uber-cool. They were pop stars, plain and simple.
White Stripes are not the H&O of today. H&O were never that subcultural.
In any case, my guess is that if we really thought of it hard, the closest comparison would inevitably be a rap or R&B artist vs. a White pop or rock artist.
I'm with Laserwolf on this one. As a kid who was first discovering radio in the early 1980s, H&O were monsters on the box but I never had a memory of them being, "OMG, best f*cking band ever." Didn't hate on 'em, didn't think they were uber-cool. They were pop stars, plain and simple.
White Stripes are not the H&O of today. H&O were never that subcultural.
In any case, my guess is that if we really thought of it hard, the closest comparison would inevitably be a rap or R&B artist vs. a White pop or rock artist.
I'm with Laserwolf on this one. As a kid who was first discovering radio in the early 1980s, H&O were monsters on the box but I never had a memory of them being, "OMG, best f*cking band ever." Didn't hate on 'em, didn't think they were uber-cool. They were pop stars, plain and simple.
White Stripes are not the H&O of today. H&O were never that subcultural.
In any case, my guess is that if we really thought of it hard, the closest comparison would inevitably be a rap or R&B artist vs. a White pop or rock artist.
The thing is H&O were making decent/great records in the early-mid 70's. Quite a few years (and records) passed before they were a huge pop band in the 80's.
Isn't that the way it works out alot of times? The "uber-cool" is in the early years and when they become the pop stars not so much? Hence why you might not have cared for them.
Music has changed alot since H&O were large. Maroon 5 is a great example as far as sound and popularity. When I first saw this thread I thought Kid Rock or Nickle Back, more NB than KR.
I don't know how or if it went down in the US, but Tony Bennett was booked for the big UK music festivals we have over our "Summer" and made a big impression on them younguns, because it was such a direct contrast to 4 skinny white kids making angst. Tony comes out in a suit, laid-back and grinning like a muddafuggah, with a seemingly billion-piece orchestra filling out the sound.
I'll wager it's the first time 99% of that crowd heard those kind of tunes, with that kind of instrumentation, live. And for me, any music with horn or string charts hits about 400% harder when it's copped live. This is how that music should be copped.
As far as a new H&O, Maroon 5 may occupy a similar area of the spectrum but they don't have a 2-man... I dunno, chemistry? [no ayo] about them. White Stripes are too far from mainstream to qualify, plus they are dude and dudette.
I think the issue is marketing - back then when H&O were in business, talent was enough and the record companies would market them as best they could. Now, the marketing model comes first. They have machines set up to market the specific niche your product must fit into:
Boy Band, Girl Band, urban etc... It's like those Pen & Pixel cover concepts on a bigger order of magnitude - take the existing marketing, take the same ingredients, change the faces, launch. No marketing mechanism for the 2-man band in the mainstream.
Comments
kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today kenny rogers is still the kenny rogers of today
I never knew anyone who owned their records.
For a time there on the radio it went MJ, H&O commercial, some other hit, MJ commercial, H&O some other hit commercial, MJ...
A few years latter Huey Lewis had every other song on the radio. Go figure.
According to AMG, John Phillips (of the Mamas & Papas) was born in 1935.
Which would have made him 31 years old when the M&Ps had their first hit.
I don't know if he lied about his age during his heyday, but...
They were only in their early thirties. So was about half the arena-rock bands and maybe a quarter of the punk/new wave artists.
I don't think that "kids" thing is a fair comparison. The music scene now isn't as ageist as it was in the sixties. When Sheryl Crow turned forty, she announced it to the world. But if this had happened back in the sixties, you know damn well she would have kept it a secret! (Or tried to pass for younger.)
Not quite. He's no longer having hits.
I don't keep up with current country, but even though he's still out there, I don't believe he's as omnipresent as he used to be.
But he's probably rich as all hell. Does he need one?
George Strait is still having hits, 20+ years later, but then again he never crossed over pop like Kenny did.
definitely chromeo, they even appeared on Hall's live music show. I saw it once, I don't if it airs or it's an on-line but it's there. . .
Maroon 5 was gigantic for a year or so; I was thinking today's equivalent should have to be big...
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1326490
and here is the making of:
I question Maroon 5.
Do they have the quantity/quality of work to be enduring over the years like H&O have or are they a slightly more disposable?
This was a time that Prince, Michael Jackson and Ray Parker were having top 40 hits. Do you really think people were saying to each other, "my favorite rocknsoul group is Hall and Oates?
BTW, never heard this until now:
"Disposable top 40 duo"? Maybe to an elitist like you. Hall & Oates were arguably the most popular band in the early 80's and the most prolific musical duo ever. Their string of No. 1 hits is incredible.
BTW - every kid on my block had this.
I had a transistor radio for a year.
For that one year I was not an elitist.
For every other year of my life before and since I have looked down on top 40.
I understand that you and your friends and millions of others look to top 40 for their musical choices.
So look at the artists who are getting top 40 hits.
They are the Hall and Oates of today.
If one of them gets 24 hits in ten years they match H&Os record.
Madonna has gotten many more hits over a greater number of years so she is much better than Hall & Oates.
BTW, I listened to lots of top 40 in the 80s, it went with my job.
I will say that very few duos have had so many hits.
Simon & Garfunkle
Louis Prima & Kelley Smith
Steve Laurence & Edie Gorme
Eurithymics
White Stipes
Maybe White Stripes are the Hall&Oates of today.
Looks like they will be around for a while.
Lots of hits.
High quality.
White Stripes are not the H&O of today. H&O were never that subcultural.
In any case, my guess is that if we really thought of it hard, the closest comparison would inevitably be a rap or R&B artist vs. a White pop or rock artist.
Black Eye Peas?
I dont see placing them amongst the 2 hit disposable Pop artists during their 80's run.
Justin Timberlake is the closest. He's not the musician they are, but he's liked by many ages and flavors.
Yeah but Justin's only had two hit records unless you want to count his N'Sync years (which would pull him a lot further away from H&O status).
Black Eyed Peas is a really interesting call. H&O's Atlantic years = Atban Klann equivalent?
The thing is H&O were making decent/great records in the early-mid 70's. Quite a few years (and records) passed before they were a huge pop band in the 80's.
Isn't that the way it works out alot of times? The "uber-cool" is in the early years and when they become the pop stars not so much? Hence why you might not have cared for them.
aKa U2, Coldplay, etc etc etc...
I'll wager it's the first time 99% of that crowd heard those kind of tunes, with that kind of instrumentation, live. And for me, any music with horn or string charts hits about 400% harder when it's copped live. This is how that music should be copped.
As far as a new H&O, Maroon 5 may occupy a similar area of the spectrum but they don't have a 2-man... I dunno, chemistry? [no ayo] about them. White Stripes are too far from mainstream to qualify, plus they are dude and dudette.
I think the issue is marketing - back then when H&O were in business, talent was enough and the record companies would market them as best they could. Now, the marketing model comes first. They have machines set up to market the specific niche your product must fit into:
Boy Band, Girl Band, urban etc... It's like those Pen & Pixel cover concepts on a bigger order of magnitude - take the existing marketing, take the same ingredients, change the faces, launch. No marketing mechanism for the 2-man band in the mainstream.
My 0.02.
Its hard to beleive that there was every a time that Oates wasn't creepy.
How did this guy wake up, look in the mirror and think "yeah... this is definitely the look for me...."
Anytime you get nostalgic for the 80s there will be pictures like this to make you go "oh yeah..."
And here is a picture with oates standing next to DB COOPER:
Its hard for me to beleive that these 2 weren't gay...
another hall and oates costume:
anyways, if Kanye West had a partner he would be the new hall and oates.
Hasn't that whole trend passed and gone now?
He bit Ron Mael's style, no?