Tweet
You are confusing music and creation with the music business. Jackson was a great music businessman. He assembled the teams needed to fit his business model. It worked and produced an image and music that appealed to hundreds of millions of people. Did he write well? Did he play well or sing well? Objectively, no, not really but he knew how to appeal to millions and for that is rare art in itself. Thriller is a milestone record, but he did not write the songs or arrange them or produce the videos. He did not need to, his vision and intent was done anyway, also rare. He got people to do their best. Q. Jones spent 2.5 years finding the songs for that record. Any songwriter who wants to make it a career would eagerly give up rights to songs that would make their career, so Jackson got writing or co-writing credit for all of them, and publishing. Smart, everyone won. The writers, the small world of producers of significance, became known as legitimate sources of material, the goal of a professional song writer. Placing songs on recordings is just as valuable as writing a hit song, they all earn the same royalties for album sales.
Maybe you have an MTV view of the industry or how it was in its peak in the 80's but art and music accessibility are often polar opposites. The only reason you know any of those names is due to the business side of the music.
The Beatles were not the first group or artist to make teen age girls swoon. Look back to the 20s and 30s, or take the 40s when the 20 year old Frank Sinatra become the heartthrob for millions of girls. There were teen idols as long as there has been mass media to create a common cultural experience. Chopin made a lot of girls faint from being overheated and excited. The Beatles main accomplishment was to make rock and pop international in appeal. They also wrote very well crafted songs later on. The hardest part of a good song is writing it, not playing or singing it. It has always been the hardest part of music. They were primarily a writing and studio recording team, and their best work came from the studio only. They also are remembered as one of the first groups to break their own mold with almost every album. Their audiences gave them that permission, just a couple years into it, they were and sounded, and wrote nothing like what they became famous for. Not many artists are given that much freedom by their fans, to try different directions and genres. Many artists were trapped in a mold. Some broke through despite their fans protesting loudly....remember when Bob Dylan went electric. It was a major scandal, but he won a whole new audience by doing so.
Some of the players you mention are performers and some are stylists, those who create such a unique style that it is easily identified even when changing genres. Santana is a good example, few people, in or out of the business could help but pick out his playing whether in jazz, blues, rock or Latin, the only question is how many notes are needed to spot him, whether 2 or 10. Some, like BB King is it 2-3 notes. I have worked with both and regardless of gear or genre they bring something uniquely identifiable to the project.
For me, rock players, the most intensely inventive and gifted was Hendrix. His recording career was very short, most of his released recordings were pieced together from edit room scraps after he died, even his outtakes would have made a star of a lesser player.
Talent, and having something to say that connects with an audience are two different things but are often assumed to be related.
Speaking of audiences giving permission to experiment, in the pop and dance field, I think Madonna is one which successfully reinvents herself. She has a modest performing talent but a strong writing skills and creative vision that appeals to a lot of people in each of her side tracks. A group that locked in a massive, non-mass media success, based on very strong writing skills, and the best sound of the era, with probably the largest catalog of really well crafted songs was the Grateful Dead. Songs that worked just as well unplugged or with a million watt concert pa system. I never heard of a concert series that was not sold out before they ever went on the road, quite often all to the same people in each city attended the 3 nights of the run. One music critic calculated that they had been seen live by more humans than any other in history. I can believe it, 35 years of 240 nights a year of sold out concerts. Robert Hunter will probably be known as one of the best song writers in the 20th century, with that band alone, having close to 500 songs in their play list, any one of which their fans would be calling out for them to play.
Of current players I like Joe Satriani as both a person and player. I have known Carlos since we met in 1967 and like his work and as a person...but would hate to play in his band, after seeing first hand his demanding and high standards he held players, sort of the Benny Goodman of the Rock era. Outside the band, he was always unfailing nice, soft spoken and deferential, not wanting the impose on anyone. All changed when the band was doing a run through. He knew what he wanted and the musicians were under intense pressure to delver.
Of the sheer joy of listening, the most fun was Bela Feck and the Flecktones with some of the best musicianship from 4 very different musicians(there were 3 but they always had a 4th player as a guest performer from the jazz, bluegrass or country genres). I never like electronic percussion but FutureMan, is on another planet, and his brother, Victor Wooten ain't bad either on bass. In fact, working with Victor, I think his the most complete player to ever play the instrument. Bela is, well, Bela, who else could make an electric banjo a lead instrument with universal appeal. Is there a better delta blues/slide player than Roy Rogers? I have never heard anyone come close.
Lots of great players, some have popular appeal due to their business sense, others not, but still great regardless of how many people know them.
Anyway, a long comment to say; the making of music and the making of a popular career are not based on the same talent. The ability to communicate a vision to a large number of people and have it coupled to a skill in business of music are two elements that transcend talent in music.
Maybe you have an MTV view of the industry or how it was in its peak in the 80's but art and music accessibility are often polar opposites. The only reason you know any of those names is due to the business side of the music.
The Beatles were not the first group or artist to make teen age girls swoon. Look back to the 20s and 30s, or take the 40s when the 20 year old Frank Sinatra become the heartthrob for millions of girls. There were teen idols as long as there has been mass media to create a common cultural experience. Chopin made a lot of girls faint from being overheated and excited. The Beatles main accomplishment was to make rock and pop international in appeal. They also wrote very well crafted songs later on. The hardest part of a good song is writing it, not playing or singing it. It has always been the hardest part of music. They were primarily a writing and studio recording team, and their best work came from the studio only. They also are remembered as one of the first groups to break their own mold with almost every album. Their audiences gave them that permission, just a couple years into it, they were and sounded, and wrote nothing like what they became famous for. Not many artists are given that much freedom by their fans, to try different directions and genres. Many artists were trapped in a mold. Some broke through despite their fans protesting loudly....remember when Bob Dylan went electric. It was a major scandal, but he won a whole new audience by doing so.
Some of the players you mention are performers and some are stylists, those who create such a unique style that it is easily identified even when changing genres. Santana is a good example, few people, in or out of the business could help but pick out his playing whether in jazz, blues, rock or Latin, the only question is how many notes are needed to spot him, whether 2 or 10. Some, like BB King is it 2-3 notes. I have worked with both and regardless of gear or genre they bring something uniquely identifiable to the project.
For me, rock players, the most intensely inventive and gifted was Hendrix. His recording career was very short, most of his released recordings were pieced together from edit room scraps after he died, even his outtakes would have made a star of a lesser player.
Talent, and having something to say that connects with an audience are two different things but are often assumed to be related.
Speaking of audiences giving permission to experiment, in the pop and dance field, I think Madonna is one which successfully reinvents herself. She has a modest performing talent but a strong writing skills and creative vision that appeals to a lot of people in each of her side tracks. A group that locked in a massive, non-mass media success, based on very strong writing skills, and the best sound of the era, with probably the largest catalog of really well crafted songs was the Grateful Dead. Songs that worked just as well unplugged or with a million watt concert pa system. I never heard of a concert series that was not sold out before they ever went on the road, quite often all to the same people in each city attended the 3 nights of the run. One music critic calculated that they had been seen live by more humans than any other in history. I can believe it, 35 years of 240 nights a year of sold out concerts. Robert Hunter will probably be known as one of the best song writers in the 20th century, with that band alone, having close to 500 songs in their play list, any one of which their fans would be calling out for them to play.
Of current players I like Joe Satriani as both a person and player. I have known Carlos since we met in 1967 and like his work and as a person...but would hate to play in his band, after seeing first hand his demanding and high standards he held players, sort of the Benny Goodman of the Rock era. Outside the band, he was always unfailing nice, soft spoken and deferential, not wanting the impose on anyone. All changed when the band was doing a run through. He knew what he wanted and the musicians were under intense pressure to delver.
Of the sheer joy of listening, the most fun was Bela Feck and the Flecktones with some of the best musicianship from 4 very different musicians(there were 3 but they always had a 4th player as a guest performer from the jazz, bluegrass or country genres). I never like electronic percussion but FutureMan, is on another planet, and his brother, Victor Wooten ain't bad either on bass. In fact, working with Victor, I think his the most complete player to ever play the instrument. Bela is, well, Bela, who else could make an electric banjo a lead instrument with universal appeal. Is there a better delta blues/slide player than Roy Rogers? I have never heard anyone come close.
Lots of great players, some have popular appeal due to their business sense, others not, but still great regardless of how many people know them.
Anyway, a long comment to say; the making of music and the making of a popular career are not based on the same talent. The ability to communicate a vision to a large number of people and have it coupled to a skill in business of music are two elements that transcend talent in music.
Comment