For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
NedKellyBandit
Well, you only need to register as a free User with your E-mail address and you have to pay nothing. You can listen to the music on sporify for free. After 20 or 30 minutes you have to listen to a 30 second advertising clip. That's all.
Dave Clark is an eccentric character, and I believe he has made his wealth in other areas, like stage musicals. Those DC5 albums are out of print, and I can only get them through one CD mail order source that specializes in bootleg and out of print material.Quote
LongBeachArena72
—Bobby Gentry: does not appear on Spotify at all. Apparently t the artist's request. Who does she think she is, Taylor Swift?
—Dave Clark 5: Also do not appear on Spotify, at the artist's request. Who do they think they are, Peter Gabriel?
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
TravelinMan
What's even more interesting is that after Taylor there are only three songs from the majority of their recording career.
Alas, only chronologically speaking. In terms of actual product, the Stones were on the downhill slide toward senescence after 1974: 15 records in the first ten years of their recording career; only 11 records in the 43 years after MT departed. (Not trying to link MT to productivity, mind you.)
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
TravelinMan
What's even more interesting is that after Taylor there are only three songs from the majority of their recording career.
Alas, only chronologically speaking. In terms of actual product, the Stones were on the downhill slide toward senescence after 1974: 15 records in the first ten years of their recording career; only 11 records in the 43 years after MT departed. (Not trying to link MT to productivity, mind you.)
We all know the big hits stopped coming after 1981 (they got middle aged and less relevant). But are you guys telling me that you weren't surprised that so few tracks with Taylor on guitar made it on that streaming list?
The biggest hits came in the 60s.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
TravelinMan
What's even more interesting is that after Taylor there are only three songs from the majority of their recording career.
Alas, only chronologically speaking. In terms of actual product, the Stones were on the downhill slide toward senescence after 1974: 15 records in the first ten years of their recording career; only 11 records in the 43 years after MT departed. (Not trying to link MT to productivity, mind you.)
We all know the big hits stopped coming after 1981 (they got middle aged and less relevant). But are you guys telling me that you weren't surprised that so few tracks with Taylor on guitar made it on that streaming list?
The biggest hits came in the 60s.
Yes, I would certainly agree with the statement that "the biggest hits came in the 60's;" there's really no disputing that. Esp when you consider that Keith essentially "flew solo" on what many people think are the band's best albums (Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed), it's difficult to make the case that MT was an integral part of their late-60's/early 70's studio wizardry.
For me, personally, his addition happened to coincide with a flowering of creativity from The Glimmers. How much he had to do with that is infinitely debatable. Taylor's greatest contributions to the band came on stage; again, to my tastes, his presence made for the most compelling and musically inventive live version of the band, ever.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
TravelinMan
What's even more interesting is that after Taylor there are only three songs from the majority of their recording career.
Alas, only chronologically speaking. In terms of actual product, the Stones were on the downhill slide toward senescence after 1974: 15 records in the first ten years of their recording career; only 11 records in the 43 years after MT departed. (Not trying to link MT to productivity, mind you.)
We all know the big hits stopped coming after 1981 (they got middle aged and less relevant). But are you guys telling me that you weren't surprised that so few tracks with Taylor on guitar made it on that streaming list?
The biggest hits came in the 60s.
Yes, I would certainly agree with the statement that "the biggest hits came in the 60's;" there's really no disputing that. Esp when you consider that Keith essentially "flew solo" on what many people think are the band's best albums (Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed), it's difficult to make the case that MT was an integral part of their late-60's/early 70's studio wizardry.
For me, personally, his addition happened to coincide with a flowering of creativity from The Glimmers. How much he had to do with that is infinitely debatable. Taylor's greatest contributions to the band came on stage; again, to my tastes, his presence made for the most compelling and musically inventive live version of the band, ever.
Don't you think that great studio tracks with more Taylor involvement, like Shine A Light, Moonlight Mile or All Down The Line could have been big hits, had they pushed them back in the day?
Quote
rockdoc8885
Any idea what follows the top 16 songs by the Stones from Spotify? Or where you can find the number of "listens". Curious as to what Spotify users deem as best or most popular Stones songs
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Don't you think that great studio tracks with more Taylor involvement, like Shine A Light, Moonlight Mile or All Down The Line could have been big hits, had they pushed them back in the day?
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I guess what I'm reflecting a bit over is that the more creative they were in the early 70s (defined as breaking news ground and exploring new musical paths here), little of that very music was presented as singles.
We got TD and Happy from Exile. Both are great songs, but still safe choices as singles.
...but it did have a U.S. stadium tour where they were playing many cuts and even the album all the way through at one point, behind a deluxe album reissue.Quote
LongBeachArena72
BEGGARS: 8 songs, avg of 1.5MM streams per song
LET IT BLEED: 7 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
STICKY: 8 songs, avg of 5.3MM streams per song
EXILE: 16 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
GHS & IORR: 8 songs each, avg of .5MM streams per song
From this point of view, the most popular "album" (at least in view of today's fans) the band ever cut was clearly Sticky Fingers. That record did not have a "Sympathy" or a "Gimme Shelter,"
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Don't you think that great studio tracks with more Taylor involvement, like Shine A Light, Moonlight Mile or All Down The Line could have been big hits, had they pushed them back in the day?
I'm not sure there's any way of knowing that with any accuracy. Who knows exactly why they chose the singles they chose? To my ears, "Tumbling Dice" is much more "creative" and possibly riskier as a Stones single than "All Down the Line," but what do I know? My guess is that either "Rocks Off" or "Shine a Light" would have ultimately performed better than "Happy," though. ("Rocks Off" has a million more streams than "Happy" on Spotify, while "Shine a Light" nearly has as many as "Happy," in spite of not being "promoted.")Quote
DandelionPowderman
I guess what I'm reflecting a bit over is that the more creative they were in the early 70s (defined as breaking news ground and exploring new musical paths here), little of that very music was presented as singles.
We got TD and Happy from Exile. Both are great songs, but still safe choices as singles.
It's a conundrum of sorts. Is it a self-fulfilling prophecy to issue only "safe" singles ... or does it show a canny awareness on the part of the band about what the public really wants from them?
I was looking at the 68-74 period the other night, from the perspective of deep album tracks. If you leave off the two biggest streamers from each of those records, here are the numbers:
BEGGARS: 8 songs, avg of 1.5MM streams per song
LET IT BLEED: 7 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
STICKY: 8 songs, avg of 5.3MM streams per song
EXILE: 16 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
GHS & IORR: 8 songs each, avg of .5MM streams per song
From this point of view, the most popular "album" (at least in view of today's fans) the band ever cut was clearly Sticky Fingers. That record did not have a "Sympathy" or a "Gimme Shelter," but it had ten songs that perform on average way stronger than any other Stones record. Exile dropped significantly from the Sticky numbers and then the wheels really came off on both Goats Head Soup and It's Only Rock'n'Roill.
So does this info tell us anything about The Stones' "creativity" or their ability to "break new musical ground"? Maybe it does. It's difficult to talk about 'breaking new ground' with a band that dabbles in many different genres. But if we define this new ground with The Stones as "anything that's not a basic rocker," then maybe there's some clue here in the Spotify data.
Focusing on SF and EOMS, I would say that "Sister Morphine," "Moonlight Mile," "Torn and Frayed," "Sweet Black Angel," "Loving Cup," "Just Wanna See His Face," "Let It Loose," and "Shine a Light" are at least a bit off the beaten track (and therefore more creative?) than the typical Stones track. Those 8 tracks, taken together, average about 3MM streams apiece, which, for their era is very good performance. It doesn't appear, therefore, that the public has any predilection against Stones songs that are a bit outside their usual zone.
I think this argues in favor of your point that, had they just "goosed" some of these other tracks a bit more, they would have been bigger hits. I think the evidence shows that that might very well have happened.
As a practical matter, though, promoting one thing means not promoting something else ... what would they have cut out if they'd released some of these other songs as singles, or even promoted them by playing them live more often?
Quote
LongBeachArena72
("Rocks Off" has a million more streams than "Happy" on Spotify, while "Shine a Light" nearly has as many as "Happy," in spite of not being "promoted.")
Quote
DoxaQuote
LongBeachArena72
("Rocks Off" has a million more streams than "Happy" on Spotify, while "Shine a Light" nearly has as many as "Happy," in spite of not being "promoted.")
It could be that in this streaming era the opening track of an album gains a lot. Even though I personally think "Rocks off" is better song than those two, but I don't think its profile is much bigger - if any - than the other two, but since EXILE ON MAIN STREET is one of those rare Stones albums that has a huge, even magical reputation, and is hailed everywhere if anyone just reads a bit musical press, I can very easily imagine that a casual listener picks up - and probably not knowing any song very well beforehand (except probably "Tumbling Dice") - the first one, listens a bit of that, concludes 'a-ha', and then goes back to Drake...
- Doxa
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Don't you think that great studio tracks with more Taylor involvement, like Shine A Light, Moonlight Mile or All Down The Line could have been big hits, had they pushed them back in the day?
I'm not sure there's any way of knowing that with any accuracy. Who knows exactly why they chose the singles they chose? To my ears, "Tumbling Dice" is much more "creative" and possibly riskier as a Stones single than "All Down the Line," but what do I know? My guess is that either "Rocks Off" or "Shine a Light" would have ultimately performed better than "Happy," though. ("Rocks Off" has a million more streams than "Happy" on Spotify, while "Shine a Light" nearly has as many as "Happy," in spite of not being "promoted.")Quote
DandelionPowderman
I guess what I'm reflecting a bit over is that the more creative they were in the early 70s (defined as breaking news ground and exploring new musical paths here), little of that very music was presented as singles.
We got TD and Happy from Exile. Both are great songs, but still safe choices as singles.
It's a conundrum of sorts. Is it a self-fulfilling prophecy to issue only "safe" singles ... or does it show a canny awareness on the part of the band about what the public really wants from them?
I was looking at the 68-74 period the other night, from the perspective of deep album tracks. If you leave off the two biggest streamers from each of those records, here are the numbers:
BEGGARS: 8 songs, avg of 1.5MM streams per song
LET IT BLEED: 7 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
STICKY: 8 songs, avg of 5.3MM streams per song
EXILE: 16 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
GHS & IORR: 8 songs each, avg of .5MM streams per song
From this point of view, the most popular "album" (at least in view of today's fans) the band ever cut was clearly Sticky Fingers. That record did not have a "Sympathy" or a "Gimme Shelter," but it had ten songs that perform on average way stronger than any other Stones record. Exile dropped significantly from the Sticky numbers and then the wheels really came off on both Goats Head Soup and It's Only Rock'n'Roill.
So does this info tell us anything about The Stones' "creativity" or their ability to "break new musical ground"? Maybe it does. It's difficult to talk about 'breaking new ground' with a band that dabbles in many different genres. But if we define this new ground with The Stones as "anything that's not a basic rocker," then maybe there's some clue here in the Spotify data.
Focusing on SF and EOMS, I would say that "Sister Morphine," "Moonlight Mile," "Torn and Frayed," "Sweet Black Angel," "Loving Cup," "Just Wanna See His Face," "Let It Loose," and "Shine a Light" are at least a bit off the beaten track (and therefore more creative?) than the typical Stones track. Those 8 tracks, taken together, average about 3MM streams apiece, which, for their era is very good performance. It doesn't appear, therefore, that the public has any predilection against Stones songs that are a bit outside their usual zone.
I think this argues in favor of your point that, had they just "goosed" some of these other tracks a bit more, they would have been bigger hits. I think the evidence shows that that might very well have happened.
As a practical matter, though, promoting one thing means not promoting something else ... what would they have cut out if they'd released some of these other songs as singles, or even promoted them by playing them live more often?
I agree about your conclusions, but it would have been interesting to know how the Stones would have been perceived by the (broader?) public had they promoted the more melody and/or genre-crossing tunes in the early 70s. Would their fanbase be different? Would they have remained on a different musical path?
The numbers on Spotify today are a consequence of the choices they made back then, so we will never know..
Quote
stonehearted...but it did have a U.S. stadium tour where they were playing many cuts and even the album all the way through at one point, behind a deluxe album reissue.Quote
LongBeachArena72
BEGGARS: 8 songs, avg of 1.5MM streams per song
LET IT BLEED: 7 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
STICKY: 8 songs, avg of 5.3MM streams per song
EXILE: 16 songs, avg of 3MM streams per song
GHS & IORR: 8 songs each, avg of .5MM streams per song
From this point of view, the most popular "album" (at least in view of today's fans) the band ever cut was clearly Sticky Fingers. That record did not have a "Sympathy" or a "Gimme Shelter,"
My guess is that instead of 2010, had the deluxe reissue of Exile and the companion video Stones in Exile followed in 2016, the number of listens for Exile songs would have been higher.
But, of course, to the average Spotify listener, 2010 is ancient history, because, you know, they have the attention span of a fly and their musical memory for anything past 3 years tends to be... spotty at best.
Quote
buttons67
pardon my ignorance but who the hell is drake.
Quote
Doxa
I can very easily imagine that a casual listener picks up - and probably not knowing any song very well beforehand (except probably "Tumbling Dice") - the first one, listens a bit of that, concludes 'a-ha', and then goes back to Drake...
- Doxa
Quote
buttons67
pardon my ignorance but who the hell is drake.
Quote
treaclefingers
I understand spotify measures the number of times a song is streamed, the more the 'bigger' the song.
what isn't measured by anyone is how many times I've listened to my beatles, stones and led zeppelin albums. In the day, I'm sure they were 'listened to' much more than Elvis, Chuck Berry and Frank Sinatra, certainly outsold them by the time we get to the late 60s.
Just because our favourite bands aren't streamed to the same level as "the drake" is doesn't mean we're facing the decline of western civilization...invariably new releases will always outperform catalogue music in streaming (just like in the old days with sales).
I also think that if there happens to be a skewing right now towards a handful of artists, that will change very quickly when the next big thing comes around. Think about how much the Beatles, one band dominated sales in the 60s...music survived.
The big difference now is you'll be able to see swings in musical taste virtually in 'real time'. It's a brave new world.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's also interesting that tracks like Anybody Seen My Baby are more popular on Spotify than Happy, ER, Shattered, 19th Nervous Breakdown and It's All Over Now.
And Just Your Fool has passed Not Fade Away in streams. Who would have believed that!
Quote
buttons67
pardon my ignorance but who the hell is drake.
It could be that younger people simply know who Mick Jagger is -- showing up to guest at that Taylor Swift show, and other similar things that he's done ever since that 2011 Grammy appearance, has really paid off.Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's also interesting that tracks like Anybody Seen My Baby are more popular on Spotify than Happy, ER, Shattered, 19th Nervous Breakdown and It's All Over Now.
And Just Your Fool has passed Not Fade Away in streams. Who would have believed that!