So, did anybody here really get into the halftime show? Outside of Madonna, anybody here know who these people are? I was reading a review of the show in the LA Times this morning and these acts were mentioned in that casuai "everybody knows who they are" way that writers use when they know their readers.
This really makes me feel out of touch. Why? Because I am. The article even mentioned that starting last year with the Black Eyed Peas, the halftime producers are deliberately getting away from that southern rock/country/blues style that a fairly large group of football fans are into because it's no longer mainstream. What we saw yesterday is now mainstream. Outside of being visually spectacular, the music itself had no relevance to me whatsoever. Seems like just a few years ago that Big Bad Voodoo Daddy did the show and it was great.
Makes me wonder about the long term future of PG Music because as it is now Biab has no relevance to this new mainstream stuff either.
Bob
Didn't get into it. Haven't gotten into it for awhile. I think the Who did the show a few years ago but they medley-ized the thing so much that it wasn't even worth watching. I was actually doing some recording last night during the first half and saw the opening to the show and when the huge drumline was in there, but that's about it.
Don't worry about the relevance of PG products. BIAB hasn't really ever been 'relevant' as it pertains to truly mainstream pop music.
PG has clearly aligned themselves with a certain type of user base that is unique and supposedly sustaining; a user base that hasn't posted a truly mainstream pop tune here in forever.
Here were the hot 100 charts from 2002, 10 years ago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Year-End_Hot_100_singles_of_2002Never heard a single cover from any of those songs posted here, or even anything in the style of any of those artists.
Now, 1992
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Year-End_Hot_100_singles_of_1992Have to get down to "Tears in Heaven" by Clapton before you see anything that could have been produced by BIAB auto-arrangement. Have to go down to #13 to see Billy Ray Cyrus' Achy...
And to cap it off, 1982:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1982_%28U.S.%29Again - relevance to PG products, at least the autoarrangement aspect of things was minimal even then.
Just my take YMMV . . . Over produced, poorly performed with too many extras. Plus if there was an orchestra they must have been hiding under the stage. Makes a solo act like me feel much better about using BIAB, at least you can see one old cat banging a guitar . . . Just saying.
Later,
PS: Madonna looked like she was moving in slow motion . . . but I resemble that remark myself.
Not my crowd, not my music. Hyped up football and soft laid back jazz don't mix too well. Except it is what they play in the glassed in private boxes before and after.
For me she was never moe than a footnote to begin with, riding a wave of "females can RAWK just like males!" hype.
I liked Black Eyed Peas last year but I would like them even with the sound down. As long as I get a good look at Fergie.....
The Who was a travesty as well.
I was very surprised Kanye West didn't pull the mic from Madonna's hand, though I would have welcomed it.
Quote:
For me she was never moe than a footnote to begin with, riding a wave of "females can RAWK just like males!" hype.
A footnote Eddie? Hype? According to Forbes richest celebrities as of 2010, she's worth over 500 mil, her concerts have grossed over 1 billion, her albums have sold over 200 million copies. Compare that to anybody. Don't like her, don't listen to her fine, I don't either but calling her a footnote is more than a stretch. It's most of the other pop tart girl singers from the last 20 years who are the footnotes. I just read she got a big bounce from the halftime show for her new album debuting in a week, it's already going to be #1 on Billboard. Not too shabby.
Bob
Bob,
Quote:
Redfoo, LMFAO, M.I.A., Nicki Maraj
Who??? LOL.
I didn't watch it, but I suspect it wouldn't have been my cup of tea. I actually like one or two of Madonna's early songs, but the later stuff was crap. Even if she did sell a lot of records. 
My 15-year old daughter thought it was totally awesome!
Y'all are a bunch of old fogeys.
If Madonna was still in her 20s that show might have been ok but she looked ridiculous doing it at age 53!
The last few halftime shows like the Black Eyed Peas, The Who, The Rolling Stones, etc all sucked IMO. The halftime show is not about music but about hyped up glamour.
My name is MarioD and I approve this message!
Quote:
If Madonna was still in her 20s that show might have been ok but she looked ridiculous doing it at age 53!
The last few halftime shows like the Black Eyed Peas, The Who, The Rolling Stones, etc all sucked IMO. The halftime show is not about music but about hyped up glamour.
My name is MarioD and I approve this message!
I think I am going to vote for Mario!
Same age as my wife. I'm not wanting to trade, but one would be way more fun at a party.
I didn't listen to be honest. I was at a party of 100 people, and I had more fun telling jokes and pointing at folks with the cane.
At the end of the day people have opinions. Some of those are when the wallet opens and the cash hits the counter. She's done well on that score. On the other hand, I have made 10k or so over the last 10 years, and donated it all. Well I did once buy a pair of music stands.
My current thing is to scour around for 'old' stuff and donate it to the U. I get a tax receipt. And in perpetuity it says inside the score or book, Donated by...
That way my kids can think I was worth something at the end of the week. They better not expect much, it was mine, I earned it, and I might, or might not share. Pfft.
John you had me laughing on this line
Quote:
I had more fun telling jokes and pointing at folks with the cane.
good one!
I kind of had a different thought. Madonna was a gamble for the TV folks, in that she is past her prime, and they did not know if it would translate well or not to a younger crowd. I think the gamble paid off for all involved. For the network they got a big name performer that wanted to be there, and considered it a challenge. She actually looks great for 53, and showed she still has the chops to perform live. The who came out and actually sounded rather badly, The stones were okay, but obviously aging badly, Black eyed peas were great, even though i actually hate them as an act they did "git 'er done" The last show I thought really rocked was McCartney a few years back for an old dude he really brought the energy.
Madonna doesn't dance like she used to, but who would 25 years past their prime, but she sang well (that is what ever parts were not lip sync) But some of it seemed live to me. The other thing is that she seemed to mature in her show. It was glittery, and over the top but other than a bad taste moment from the MIA dude, her show was cleaned up from what she used to do. I heard a lot of people toss around that Lady Gaga should have been chosen, but do we really need a show like she did last year on TV, at the American Idol finals. That was not for prime time and children to well idolize.
So I think Madonna was fun, she sang a new song or two, and an old hit or so, and in the end the crowd was entertained. I just wish the concert would be at the end of the game, and allow the game to progress with less interruption, and loss of momentum.
I missed the souper bowel , shouldn't this Post read > Redfoo, M.I.A., Nicki Maraj, Madonna at the Super Bowl (LMFAO)?
It looked to be like they were lip synching the whole thing.
I'm not sure why that still qualifies as a musical performance, just seems like a live "video" performance to pre-recorded tracks. Yawn...
It's good to see that Elton John spoke up about that:
http://www.tntmagazine.com/news/world/elton-john-tells-madonna-lip-synch-good-at-the-super-bowl
Not only was Madonna lipsynching, but LMFAO's DJ equipment wasn't plugged in.
Madonna was boring. The music sounds like Muzac.
Quote:
It looked to be like they were lip synching the whole thing.
Yep, that was the first thing I said to my friends. They didn't see it right away but I certainly did.
The musical world is a big place and thankfully there's still a pretty large market for different styles of music but for the biggest stage in the world, the producers wanted the biggest bang for their Superbuck and felt this is now the mainstream.
The point of this thread wasn't so much to critisize the show as to point out that very few of us (if any) have even heard of these performers outside of Madonna herself. Yet, to perform with her at the Superbowl they have to be monster big names in their own right but I have no clue who they are. You know that the young people are pointing to the screen and saying wow, look who that is standing off to the right! Oh yeah, doesn't he look cool in that outfit and talking about his latest hits while I'm sitting there with my thumb up my nose going who the are you talking about? On a certain level I find that disturbing. Musicians are nothing if not plugged into what's happening NOW, baby!
It's now our turn to join our parents and be left in the "what is hip" musical dust. Sigh... All we can do is the same thing our parents did and say, just wait, you're turn's coming.
Where's my Brubeck book?
Bob
One of the things that frustrates me about lip syncing is that "Stars" of days gone by can come out and fake a performance long after they've lost the ability to pull it off. Even the band is "faking" it.
I can see it now! A 90 year old Madonna comes out on stage with her walker, a gold cone shaped bra, fishnet stockings, blond wig and false teeth and "performs" Like A Virgin !!!!!!!!!!!!
One of the things I love about bluegrass is that "Stars" of yesteryear are honored and they still come out and play and sing to the best of their ability and fans love it!
They may let someone else take the solos, but they are still performing the songs. No lip syncing here.
When they're unable to pull it off anymore, they bow out gracefully.
Quote:
Quote:
It looked to be like they were lip synching the whole thing.
Yep, that was the first thing I said to my friends. They didn't see it right away but I certainly did.
The musical world is a big place and thankfully there's still a pretty large market for different styles of music but for the biggest stage in the world, the producers wanted the biggest bang for their Superbuck and felt this is now the mainstream.
The point of this thread wasn't so much to critisize the show as to point out that very few of us (if any) have even heard of these performers outside of Madonna herself. Yet, to perform with her at the Superbowl they have to be monster big names in their own right but I have no clue who they are. You know that the young people are pointing to the screen and saying wow, look who that is standing off to the right! Oh yeah, doesn't he look cool in that outfit and talking about his latest hits while I'm sitting there with my thumb up my nose going who the are you talking about? On a certain level I find that disturbing. Musicians are nothing if not plugged into what's happening NOW, baby!
It's now our turn to join our parents and be left in the "what is hip" musical dust. Sigh... All we can do is the same thing our parents did and say, just wait, you're turn's coming.
Where's my Brubeck book?
Bob
Bob, you despair over nothing. Brubeck hasn't been 'hip' to popular culture since what, the 60's? So in effect, you've been in the musical dust for decades.
Pop music has very few examples of musical virtuosity in it, no matter what era you look at. You could take the groups that were popular in your high school days and the people that were 20 years your senior at the time looked down their nose in despair at how poorly they sing, how it's all a bunch of repetition and gyrations, etc. etc. etc. Frankie Valli - is that really singing? Hurts my ears at my 45 years of age.
What is beautiful about today's age, is that you CAN still be popular in your own circle. What does it really matter anyways if you are enjoying making music? If you touch one person's heart with a turn or riff, that's what counts, does it not?
Who cares if the young people can tell who is who on stage? It really doesn't matter. 20 years ago the superbowl halftime show wasn't the blockbuster production that it is now. Had it been, who knows what offal would have been on the show 20 years ago, or 30 years ago?
A great deal of those popular acts will be in the dust as well; one or two hit wonders in a world where YouTube videos of unknown bands can hit millions of views and garner a pretty decent monthly income based on Google Ad revenue. No record company involved.
We can't say that it's all spectacle now, where in the past it wasn't. Simply isn't true. Spectacle has ALWAYS been part of entertainment; that we may not understand or appreciate it now, doesn't mean it hasn't been there in the past. Think of all the doowop-ish bands with all the cool moves. So much of that music sounds like it's the same record on repeat, but man the dance moves were cool. That's musical talent? No, that's spectacle.
Forward to the late 60's with Hendrix lighting his guitar on fire. Really? And Pete Townsend smashing up guitars into amps and what not. That's musical talent? No, that's spectacle.
Forward to the 70's with KISS and Gene Simmons having his tongue surgically extended; fake blood and sparks and platform boots. Spectacle.
80's. Flock of Seagulls - haircuts were spectacle
90's. Paula Abdul - squeaky voice, but she could do the dance moves - spectacle
2000's. I'm drawing a blank here - This is when I quit listening to the radio for the most part, except for podcasts in the mid 2000's where I mostly listened to unknowns.
2010's. Lady Gaga - spectacle
Now, with each of these eras, yes, there was some musical talent that shone through, but the spectacle always accompanied the music. Scale has changed, growing larger, but so have television sets done the same. Pretty common to have at least a 40" diagonal wide screen with 1080p video quality.
What's popular has rarely been associated with what is truly musically interesting or challenging.
Despair ye not and go kick out some cool B3 licks.
I just noticed this thread, and I also am pretty negative about all that newfangled stuff.
Here's a tune and video that I cobbled together last year the week before the Packers went to Dallas and clobbered Pittsburgh. It is hopelessly corney and dated... just like me, like all my relatives in Wisconsin, and (sigh) like you-all and PG Music. But it has Fergie in it!
But for what it's worth:
Cheesehead Polka
Springsteen was the best in my recent memory. I've become immune to wild outfits and outrageous dancing. It's not even sexy any more. The music was boring.
The commercial with Elton John was pretty good - no coke for you!
I liked the Chevy truck ad. The rain of frogs was a great finishing touch!
I loved the line regarding the missing people, "they were driving a Ford".
I like the "this is the best day of my life" car ad and the Elton John one.
Josie
Quote:
I loved the line regarding the missing people, "they were driving a Ford".
Yeah, but they were towing Chevy's! Here we go.
Later,
I though the Audi commercial with the vampire party was pretty good. Enjoyed that one the most, I think.
Mike
Speaking of stars of yesteryear Bob, check this out:
http://www.wcr.com/page.cfmWorld Classic Rockers. I would call them the ultimate cover band. All these slightly second tier former members of some of the biggest rock bands ever are now doing corporate gigs. I heard about them because a friend has a Journey tribute band and is a killer singer. He somehow got hooked up with WCR to do two Journey songs. They pay him $300 per song but he has to get himself to the gig. The last one was in the Bay area and he lives here. They have specific people who come on to do just 2 or 3 tunes in the exact style of the original star. Similar to the Vegas show groups I used to work with back in the 70's. He's not a regular yet but he has done 3 gigs I think and they're thinking about using him on a regular basis. Not too many vocalists can really do Steve Perry well. The problem is even they don't work all the time and he doesn't have their money. He would have to give up all his other gigs in order to be available for them and he's not sure if it's worth it yet.
To get back to my original point, regular gigs for regular experienced players like me are definitely drying up. Groups like WCR are sucking the air out of the market. And that's for rock stuff, jazz stuff is turning into a complete blackout on the local level.
Scott, I totally agree with you, of course there's still other things going on in musical styles we can relate to it's just the "new" mainstream as reflected by that show is getting bigger while our stuff is getting gradually but inexorably smaller. I haven't had a chance to perform any B3 licks since before Xmas. Our audience is not going out like they used to.
This of course was totally predictable and inevitable, I've seen it coming for years but it still sucks to now be living it.
Bob
Quote:
PG has clearly aligned themselves with a certain type of user base that is unique and supposedly sustaining; a user base that hasn't posted a truly mainstream pop tune here in forever.
I have been playing piano for over 50 years but am new to performing and have just realized that the majority of listeners, at least at small gigs, are only interested in music from the 50's to the 70's. It's not just my crowd in my campground but whenever I go to a bar with live entertainment the only thing that gets the clientel going is the same kind of music. Could this be because there has been very little music with good melodies/lyrics combinations after 1980? Perhaps there is nothing new under the sun? Take a look at Bob Norton's playlist to see what I mean.
Tony
Just look at their ages, Tony. People are only interested in what they grew up with from around age 15-25. That means the big demographic that advertisers want to reach now are people aged 30-45. Do the math, what years were they 15-25?
Btw, I just read the ratings for the Superbowl show and they estimate 210 million people watched it and the consensus is it was one of the best shows ever if not the best.
It just shows the younger generation simply sees things differently than we do. Nothing new there.
Bob
Quote:
People are only interested in what they grew up with from around age 15-25.
using the Billboard "Hot 100" archives (use the arrow buttons under the banner)
http://www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200#/charts/hot-100?chartDate=1958-08-10
you can view the top 10 songs by week back to August 1958. It is quite obvious that I have never been a "top 40" listener. But I do stop recognizing names at about age 25. Funny.