Gazza Wrote:
Like Ade, I've never heard of Lil Wayne either. I've heard of Lil Kim, though! So, I seriously doubt he was topping the charts 'all over the place'. Seems to be unknown over here:
_____________________________________________
Well AC/DC and Metallica topped the charts all over. In several countries. As far as Lil Wayne goes Lil Wayne sold over a million copies in the very first week over here! Name another artist that sold that much within the states in the very first week this year. That alone speaks for itself. I know he is not popular all over and I realize this. However his album was much anticipated in the states. Numbers don't lie. AC/DC and Metallica sold like mad globally.
*
Ah-ha, I knew the day would come. Finally, now I get to share some artist info with you Gazza
. Gazza, introducing Lil Wayne. This years biggest rapper.
(I know you could care less... believe me I am not huge rap fan either. Sure I'll listen to almost anything if it is done well, but no I am no big Lil Wayne fan).
Albums entering the charts at #1 isnt exactly unheard of. Over here anyway, it's extremely common.
__________________________________
Yes I know that .. Still ...where did The Rolling Stones album place it's first week? Are they not probably the most successful global touring act on the planet. Ok so they tour and are not big on the charts as they used to be. Still are they not known in more countries than most any other current band? Again numbers don't lie.
You could just as easily say that albums by Hannah Montana and Jay-Z are 'hugely anticipated' - it's just that maybe they don't fit into your own musical horizon.
__________________________________
Right. They are. That is the sad part, and that is my very point Gazza. Numbers don't lie. If it were 94, 84, 74, or even 64 we would have a solid list of artists that sold well in the first week.
Now we have Jay Z, Hanna Montana, and Lil Wayne, or maybe Cold Play. The only folks to come close to any such impact were two old acts: AC/DC and Metallica. There are no newer bands that shape any real impact is what I'm saying. Why? Well I think the market has changed drastically. Secondly, and importantly I think the quality is not there like in 64, 74, and 94. Heck even 84 had Van Halen and a slew of other hair bands (as cheesey as they were) but now we have Jay Z or Cold Play that people are excited about most (again in terms of the masses) ...that isn't saying much now is it. That was my point in the beginning.
And yep, I'm totally serious about Metallica. I have zero interest in that type of music and find it utterly unlistenable, so its extremely easy to avoid.
_______________________________________
I am not a huge fan of that type of music 110% either. I did review the new Metallica because it was news and yes, after St. Anger, I was certainly interested. Some stuff is fairly decent as far as compared to others of that style but only compared to the others of that style. Faster, harder and the louder you scream does not mean better. (and I know, at what point is this music just aimless noise more than music. Basically 95% of the time).
Ian