There are alot of artists who have regressed. Name one artist you revere that has lost their artistic edge, integrity.
Mine is Aretha, no contest.
This woman was not simply a great singer, but a great musician and songwriter and producer. WHen you listen to her Atlantic material, no one comes close in terms of creating a sound, forging a new genre and forging an identity. From 1967-1972, no one could touch her aristry. Wexler sat in the studio, made some suggestions and helped choose material, but it was Aretha who led the band, who set the feel and knew what she wanted.
But Wexler respected Aretha as an artist and pushed her as an artist.
The move to Arista killed her musically. Clive Davis wanted to make Aretha the ultimate Diva and Aretha compromised her art as a result. To Davis, Aretha was the prototype for the female singer and he indulged Aretha's own indulgences: the show tunes, the sequinned-gown persona, the watered down soul and the real Aretha has been missing in action since.
Its like if Mick had never returned to the Stones. He has the same indulgent commercial aspirations, but had Keith to mock him and Rubin to challenge him.
Aretha had lost most of the power in her voice, but what I would give to sit her in a recording studio with just piano and a great band and just play and sing.....
Rick Rubin-style. This woman had grit, passion and funk in her music and needs a serious career makeover. Its a damn shame.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-17 03:20 by stupidguy2.

A lot of artists struggle as they age.
I'd regard myself as a bit more than casual Aretha fan, I have her 60s material but I have not followed her new stuff. So I'll defer to your judgement on her.

My own personal pick for artist that most needed/needs better direction is George Jones for about 20 odd years he has seriously needed someone to guide him and is LONG overdue for a make-over project that would make him 'cool' they way Cash and Loretta Lynn and Jerry Lee Lewis have had.

It's been a shame to me to hear one of the greatest voices wasted on god-awful hit chasing material.

The Stones.

Quote
Gazza
The Stones.

Being someone that has actually loved a lot of their latter day music all I really wish is that they were more productive.

I suppose you can't make someone have the passion and hunger for it but I do wish someone was around that kept reminding them that it's later than you think...make some damn music!

Very few artists can keep a career together for longer than 6-7 years. A career makeover for a popular music artist after the age of 60 is pretty much unheard of. Many jazz musicians though tend to only get better with age.

Quote
Stoneage
Very few artists can keep a career together for longer than 6-7 years. A career makeover for a popular music artist after the age of 60 is pretty much unheard of. Many jazz musicians though tend to only get better with age.

I don't think it's unheard of.

Older Artists that have had career makeovers/comebacks:
Rod Stewart
Johnny Cash
Elton John (to a certain degree)
Solomon Burke
Blind Boys of Alabama
John Lee Hooker
Bob Dylan
Jerry Lee Lewis (more than once)
Loretta Lynn

AC/DC lead singer Angus Young for a man in his 50's defintely needs some sort of clothes makeover by doing away with that silly looking School boys uniform for a start.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-17 06:25 by colonial.

Depends of what you mean with a career makeover, Keef 82. Many of the ones you listed have just carried on with what they were doing.

Quote
KeefintheNight82

Quote
Gazza
The Stones.

Being someone that has actually loved a lot of their latter day music all I really wish is that they were more productive.

I suppose you can't make someone have the passion and hunger for it but I do wish someone was around that kept reminding them that it's later than you think...make some damn music!

Indeed. I should perhaps quantify my comment by adding that when the Stones DO make new music, I still enjoy it. Its just so few and far between. The entire second half of their career (25 years) has generated FOUR studio albums. Its just a wasted opportunity to see a band regard art and creativity assuch a low priority as they're more content to take the easy and more lucrative route of pandering to the nostalgia and corporate markets and who seem to measure excellence solely by tour grosses.

It's easy to feel a sense of 'what might have been' though when I cast an envious eye towards other major acts of a similar vintage - Dylan, Young, McCartney, Springsteen etc - who whilst theyve made a lot of money in recent years still manage to give some semblance of remaining largely artistically driven, and who when dealing with their own legacy - specifically regarding archive releases - have managed to treat it with the respect it deserves. (In fairness, the Stones have at least started to take tentative steps to correct this)

Short report the other day on theee television showed Aretha lookin'
a lot healthier and if I remember correctly said that she had lost something like 80 pounds .....



ROCKMAN

I think it, probably, was Jagger's solo projects and unwillingness to carry on with the band that killed the band as a working unit. I guess they havent spend many weeks in a recording studio, together, the last 30 years. It's failed solo projects, money and public demand that have kept them together since 82` - otherwise they would have quit.

I just bought Aretha's new album. Self produced and released on her own label. She sounds great! I could even listen to "The Way We Were", a song I hate, with her singing it. "Sweet Sixteen" is an incredible song.

Is it Lady Soul? No, but it's a lot better than her last album was.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
KeefintheNight82

Quote
Gazza
The Stones.

Being someone that has actually loved a lot of their latter day music all I really wish is that they were more productive.

I suppose you can't make someone have the passion and hunger for it but I do wish someone was around that kept reminding them that it's later than you think...make some damn music!

Indeed. I should perhaps quantify my comment by adding that when the Stones DO make new music, I still enjoy it. Its just so few and far between. The entire second half of their career (25 years) has generated FOUR studio albums. Its just a wasted opportunity to see a band regard art and creativity assuch a low priority as they're more content to take the easy and more lucrative route of pandering to the nostalgia and corporate markets and who seem to measure excellence solely by tour grosses.

It's easy to feel a sense of 'what might have been' though when I cast an envious eye towards other major acts of a similar vintage - Dylan, Young, McCartney, Springsteen etc - who whilst theyve made a lot of money in recent years still manage to give some semblance of remaining largely artistically driven, and who when dealing with their own legacy - specifically regarding archive releases - have managed to treat it with the respect it deserves. (In fairness, the Stones have at least started to take tentative steps to correct this)

On the other hand, given the relationship between the principals, as evidenced from KR's perspective from the book, it's truly astonishing there has been ANY output at all, tours included, in the last 25 years.

I agree, too bad and a wasted opportunity...I do believe though, that maybe this was the best outcome we were ever actually going to get, given the high level of acrimony that seemingly bubbles just below the surface.

After "WWIII", we settled into a 'Cold War' period for 25 years. I wonder if with this book, we'll look on the period that we're currently in, as total nuclear annihilation?

This guy is in dire need of a makeover:

in their career the stones makeover $100 million...that's alot....

Quote
Edith Grove
This guy is in dire need of a makeover:

No, the photographer just got him on a bad day, that's all. He normally looks like this:

Quote
colonial
AC/DC lead singer Angus Young

Huh?

Brian Jones

Quote
Edith Grove
This guy is in dire need of a makeover:

Is it Mark E. Smith?

Quote
dcba

Quote
Edith Grove
This guy is in dire need of a makeover:

Is it Mark E. Smith?

That is the one & only, Mark E. Smith !

Mark E. Smith looks like a poor man's substitute for Shane MacGowan.

...I'm just happy if they're around in some way...Look at Dylan..still touring...no need for career makeover there...

2 1 2 0



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-18 08:23 by Come On.

Quote
AngieBlue
I just bought Aretha's new album. Self produced and released on her own label. She sounds great! I could even listen to "The Way We Were", a song I hate, with her singing it. "Sweet Sixteen" is an incredible song.

Is it Lady Soul? No, but it's a lot better than her last album was.

I will take your review at heart and give it a chance......I really want to like it.

Quote
Come On
...I'm just happy if they're around in some way...Look at Dylan..still touring...no need for career makeover there...

Dylan's made more career changes than most artists have played concerts!

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Come On
...I'm just happy if they're around in some way...Look at Dylan..still touring...no need for career makeover there...

Dylan's made more career changes than most artists have played concerts!

by getting older and older or...He's the same song and danceman as 1963 if you ask Dylan himself...

2 1 2 0

Quote
Come On

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Come On
...I'm just happy if they're around in some way...Look at Dylan..still touring...no need for career makeover there...

Dylan's made more career changes than most artists have played concerts!

by getting older and older or...He's the same song and danceman as 1963 if you ask Dylan himself...

For a genius, Bob can really be full of shit at times!