iTunes Chart-Toppers (a/o February 21st):
We've been hearing about this problem for some time, and now it's getting worse. Simply stated, top-heavy superstars are having serious problems filling venues, and sometimes even
Back at Midem, one tour manager relayed some similar issues with major-spun stars like Ke$ha. Apparently, filling clubs with top-heavy stars is becoming difficult, so instead, chart-toppers may elect to cameo at a pre-packed club. "The club owner pays $30,000 or whatever for a few songs, and the artist gets a built-in crowd - because they can't fill a place themselves anymore," the manager told Digital Music News. "People just won't come out."
Sort of sounds like a similar situation for Rihanna, a huge chart-topper and label priority. And, a collaborator with megastars like Jay-Z and David Guetta. In fact, Rihanna has just shifted management to Roc Nation, allegedly over concerns related to her tepid "Last Girl on Earth" tour last year. That appears to have factored heavily into the decision to oust manager Marc Jordan.
But there's a much bigger problem here. Because even though big-budget, mainstream stars are topping the charts, their foundations appear flimsy. There just isn't much there, and a major question is what rankings like BigChampagne's Ultimate Chart or the Billboard 200 will look like after more waves of major label implosion. And, what that means for overstretched, overpriced providers like Live Nation.
Comments Closed
@MikeAHaeg Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Mike Haeg
"Overstretched, overpriced providers like Live Nation."
Nanker Phelge Friday, March 25, 2011
>>>"top-heavy superstars"
Is this a Freudian slip?
neil h Tuesday, March 22, 2011
there's always been a difference between recording artists and live acts. some artists are great at both. some aren't. why is this news?
LA Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Neil- I totally agree. I have been to shows where I am shocked that people would even spend the money to go, and the only reason they bought the album is because of autotuning. But I have been to shows where the artist proved they have incredible natural talent. And a lot of those are still selling tickets.
@MiggleM Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Michael
Pink is the reason.
@SongDuck Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Howard Pavane
Partly due to the monopoly held by Live Nation.
@whitperson Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Marc Whitman
it's simple. these are short-lived "fad artists" with no longetivity.
@WayneStevensSA Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Wayne Stevens
Tickets r too $$$$$
aaccardo Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Paul,
Although Rihanna is a well-known superstar, I have a hard time thinking of a single song that is actually a Rihanna song. She seems more like a chorus plug-in to other superstar music. It makes me wonder if she even deserves to be able to fill a stadium at this point in her career. She's no Mariah Carey or Beyonce when it comes to solo hits.
We've written about record labels needing "blowouts", not spending the time to develop artists and trying to cash in ASAP for the big, big bucks. Maybe this is an analogous example of touring companies and managers trying to blow their loads way too early because of the newly constrained environment. Should Ke$ha fill a stadium after two radio hits? I don't know, I seem to remember analogous breakout artists to Ke$ha ten years ago coming out as opening acts for more established artists who have spent the time developing a base. Put Ke$ha as an opening act for Beyonce, or put Rihanna as an opener for Jay-Z or Lil Wayne, and now you have a show that easily breaks even.
Anthony
Hoodgrown Magazine Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Now THAT was a really good response!
Just because you happen to like a few of an artists songs that you hear on radio doesn't mean that you want to spend an astronomical amount to see them live.
Most kids would be satisfied watching their videos on Youtube.
@musictime94551 Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Music Time Academy
Interesting topic, but they didn't answer the question...
Seth Keller Tuesday, March 22, 2011
It may be lack of development (but Rhianna's had double digit top 20 singles) or high ticket prices--or both. My theory, though, with Rhianna and other dance/hip-hop oriented pop artists is that their fans--the people who buy the music and stream the videos--are not necessarily live music fans. Unlike rock fans or even R&B/soul fans (ie, fans of artists like Jill Scott and Maxwell), dance-pop and hip-hop fans aren't interested in a live show for the most part. They use the music as a soundtrack to their own lives (partying, clubbing, hanging out with friends, posting online). They don't see the manufactured pop artist as someone to be inspired by but rather as someone who lives a life of glamour and partying they aspire to. Couple that with the fact that these acts don't write their own material, play an instrument or in many cases sing well without the aid of studio technology and deft engineering, and it's not surprising that ticket sales are soft for these types of "superstars."
On top of that, the mainstream media that props up "superstars" aren't music fans--they are fans of pop culture which sells advertising (TV, magazine, online) by attracting eyeballs. Thus, the mainstream media continues to help the labels promote "superstars" rather than artists while music fans who are interested in buying tickets ignore "superstars" in favor or their favorite band or solo artist that makes an emotional connection with them.
@mGeeInThePlace Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Michael Gregoire
The sham of current-day mainstream "superstardom" is becoming apparent
lroose Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Others already touched on this, but I wanted to chime in as well. There are numerous reasons why a large chunk of the chart topping pop acts will have a tough time putting butts in the seats.
1. Who wrote this, anyways?
The typical pop track today is written and arranged by a hit maker, not the artist, and results in the performer having almost no connection to the track beyond being lucky enough to be the voice that was plugged into the song with the killer hook and the marketing dollars behind it. Sure, Eminem and Jay-Z are mainstream monsters, but they write their own material about their own experiences and build lasting connection with an empathetic fan base.
2. Feat. Whoever It Takes
The race to the bottom in search of the lowest common denominator has resulted in endless collaborations on today's radio-friendly hits. The thought here is that if artist #1 doesn't appeal to the casual listener, maybe artist #2 or #3 will catch a few more consumers in the net that is pop appeal. That's great when the artists can lay down vocals on opposite sides of the country and have a great producer put the pieces together the album. It's not so hot when another artist owns half the recognition of your biggest hit and they happen to be on their own tour somewhere else.
3. There are no pop superfans.
Pop music by definition is made to appeal to the broadest audience possible, but a large portion of the concert-going public consider themselves music lovers. The conflict is obvious: casual listeners don't go to shows. They're hard pressed to spend $.99 on an iTunes track, much less $50+ to get to a show.
4. We go to shows to witness a performance, not a lifestyle.
Another poster noted that many of today's biggest pop stars' most notable trait is the their lifestyle rather than their music. Sure, this gives the artist recogition in the mainstream and may shift some units, but once the artist is forced to stand on artistic merit through performance, the artist's fan base is on TMZ.com and not at the show. Strip away the marketing machine and the artist is left alone on stage playing to an empty venue.
That's what immediately comes to mind.
I'm honestly surprised that the current music scene has not burned itself out by virtue of its tremendously formulaic nature. My greatest fear is that this is not merely a passing scene, but the future of monetized music as we know it.
@IndieHipHop Tuesday, March 22, 2011
FuNkwoRm
Fans are getting tired of manufactured B.S.
@TinzarT Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Tinzar Than Sherman
Good read
@PunkSoda Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Celebrity music acts are having a hard time filling venues because they are over exposed. They are products that target a very narrow field of music consumers. How many times do people want to spend $50-$100 to see Jon Bon Jovi when they can spend $25 and see Peter Bjorn and John. There was a shelf life for celebrity musicians that spanned the decade in which they were relevant. Now we have recycled content and kids/young adults have to choose from the same pool of super-stars people had 10-15 and in some cases 20 years ago.
brent Tuesday, March 22, 2011
I know this doesn't apply to every major artist out there. Regardless, I have to ask the question. When an artist relies on auto tune to make a "good" record, isn't it entirely possible that their live performance is not capable of matching the manufactured and technologically polished "talent" that the fan fell in love with in the recording?
Live performances are meant to bring an experience and connection that is beyond the recorded material. Raw emotion, energy, sincere, driving, captivating.....
Lighting effects, dancers wrapped in fiber optics and exploding pyrotechnics aren't enough to deliver an emotional connection. True skill and a heart felt performance is the only thing that will cut it. Many top 40 artists are performing at a lower level these days. It's only one example but look at the Black Eyed Peas during the Super Bowl. Was it a life changing performance? Was it that well performed? Open to opinion, I know. In my opinion, it was not.
I want to see our industry succeed but artists that rely on auto tune, and glitz - in trade for substance - are not "entitled" to record breaking ticket sales. Perform like your life depends on it, like your soul will wither if you miss your mark. Then maybe fans will fork out the buckets of money they're charging for admission.
Brent McCrossen
http://audiosocket.com
twitter.com/audiosocket
@ThisIsJared Wednesday, March 23, 2011
well said, Brent. You just gained a new follower
balbers Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Good comments in response to this. I wanted to add this-
Who says Rihanna or Kesha are superstars? Just because an artist has one or two or even a string of songs hovering around the top of the charts doesn't make them a star. Certain artists are more popular than others because their songs are more popular. But superstars are superstars because of touring, not charting hits.
A couple extreme examples- U2. The general consensus is that the bulk of their more recent recorded material is downright embarrassing compared to their earlier works. But yet they can still sell out the 100,000 seats of the Rose Bowl with tickets going for a minumum of a couple hundred dollars each and topping out at a couple thousand. Why? Because of the strength of their earlier tours. Other bands who would be able to fill the larger arenas with or without a new album, with or without new hit songs I would say are Pink Floyd, KISS, Bon Jovi, Madonna, Tool, Metallica and jam bands like Phish or Dave Matthews. Probably some others, but those are just off the top of my head. I suppose I would include Bruce Springsteen and The Rolling Stones, but they rarely tour anymore, and also Nine Inch Nails, which is now of course defunct.
Now, these are all artists who gathered all their steam in the 70s, 80s and 90s. Any newer bands come to mind? Maybe Muse? Daft Punk? I'm hard-pressed to come up with any others. All of the bands that are headlining the big US festivals this year (Kings of Leon, Arcade Fire, Kanye West, The Strokes at Coachella; Eminem and Foo Fighters at Lollapalooza; The Black Keys and Widespread Panic at Bonnaroo along with Arcade Fire and Eminem) if they were to mount a headlining tour individually would be playing theatres, not arenas.
So what's the bottom line? The bottom line is that the era of arena-filling superstar musical artist is just about over. Is it their fault for not staging the big, spectacular concerts that filled the arenas in the 70s, 80s and 90s? Or is it the fan's fault for not going to the shows no matter how spectacular they are? Are big concert productions simply too expensive for artists these days? Are there any artists touring this year who are filling the arenas? Any country hat acts?
Christine Wednesday, March 23, 2011
The economy is in the crapper and people won't shell out the equivalent of a car payment to watch the latest plastic pop act du jour prance around for an hour.
It's not rocket science and it's not some deep dark mystery.
Wonderland Wednesday, March 23, 2011
My veiw is the same as my veiw on why album sales are reportedley so bad, its a combination of oversaturation of mediocre acts and over touring of the real bonafide super stars.
Some examples:
Last years so called biggest grossing tour was Bon Jovi. Now maybe in money takings it was the biggest tour but as a long time fan of Bon Jovi I can tell you the ticket prices were stupidly priced which would send the gross figures up and whether the Bon Jovi camp will admit it or not they struggled like hell to sell the tickets to the point of having to give them away at most places to fill in huge unsold gaps in the arenas. Sold out no longer means sold out!!!! Now if they hadn't toured virtually every year for the last 8 and left 2- 3years inbetween tours they are at legendary enough status to absolutley truthfully sell out every concert hall stadium in the world. Unfortunatley their over saturation combined with prices has probably cut there actual paid attendance figures by half.
Now, like their music or not Take That in the U.K sold a million tickets in one day for their stadium tour this summer and could have sold it twice over if they wanted too. So I'm sure Take That are thinking 'what problem filling venues....'
My point is if people want to see an act they will go. If they dont want to see an act they wont which is why the people and promoters etc saying were not selling tickets because people wont come out should really say to themselves Im not selling tickets because people do not actually want to see the act. therefor are our egos bigger than our fan base!!!
Same for album sales if people want somebodys album they'll get it. I heard Taylor Swift sold a million copies in the first week. Again because she offered something people wanted they went out to get it! Seems simple to me......
tonygottlieb Wednesday, March 23, 2011
When people don't want to come, nothing will stop them.
Whatever!
Jason Miles Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Ok I'm going to date myself. years ago I used to go to shows at the Brooklyn Fox and paramount Theater in NYC.They were promoted by radio stations,WMCA,WINS,Murray the K was the man. One show I saw was The Animals,Chuck Berry, The Four Seasons,Leslie Gore, Del Shannon and special guest James Brown!!!. At the Fox was The Cream,The Who, The Blues Project
Dionne Warwick,Smokey Robinson. The acts these days are weak.They don't belong headlining anything.Ke$ha,Rihanna,etc belong on the same show together at smaller venues because they are not big enough to carry a show themselves for 90 minutes,let alone 60 minutes. They are also not artists they are manufactured. I'll give it up to Pink-she's worked her ass off to get the credibility. Beyonce as well,-These new artists have no history of anything except manufactured music.
Time to bring back the format like the stations do with their christmas shows. A whole bunch of these artists doing a few songs and on to the next. BTW-saw Dave Matthews Band at MSG-2 sold out shows-3 hour set
Peace, jason
sigh Wednesday, March 23, 2011
obviously, the main problem is simply too many entertainment choices for the dollar. video games, apps, cell phone & internet monthly costs, movies, cable tv, and lots and lots of concert options... people have to make choices, and they only have so much money.
the idea that Rihanna etc. aren't succeeding in ticket sales because they are 'manufactured' doesn't make sense. there have always been manufactured acts. Elvis didn't write his own songs. Even Eminenm & Jay Z don't -- they write their own raps, but not the raps of their guests, nor of the lyrics or the music of their samples, and if you look at the song credits, their are often 5 or six or more accredited song writers. (hell, i read an interview with Aerosmith that they didn't even write all their own songs.)
to say that people want to see a performance without all the bells & whistles doesn't make sense either-- tell that to all the bands that have used pyrotechnics or goofy spandex costumes, or styrofoam walls back in the day. or tell that to U2 with their giant video walls, etc...
bands can't make money from record sales due to illegal filesharing, so they have to tour. when everyone tours, seats won't sell, because people only have so much money to spend (on entertainment, let alone food and rent.)
@musicregistry Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Stephen Trumbull
Hmmm...supply and demand? Not to mention ticket prices?!
@UltVarietyRadio Wednesday, March 23, 2011
UV Ultimate Variety
interesting
CrowfeatheR Wednesday, March 23, 2011
~ This is CrowfeatheR.
"there are no pop superfans"; perhaps this statement is wrong, the pop superfan is a 12 year old girl locked in her upstairs bedroom playing facebook farm singing along with the same Ke$ha and Rihanna song they just listened to 10 times in a row. 12 year old girls are not ones to plop down $50 to go to a pot smoke filled areana for a concert. Now on the other hand where as this factory fluff pop music is having a hard time due to thier target demographic, you cannot or are lucky to get tickets for a Disturbed concert.
Back in the 80's fluff pop artists used to perform in the malls while Aerosmith and Motely Crue sold out arenas. 2011 the song remians the same. Know your demographic, thier finacial abilities and social habbits and you will know where and how to book shows.
wrongmethod Wednesday, March 23, 2011
I do believe that Riahana tix sells reflect the drama that her and Chris Brown endure in media!!!
Diamond Wednesday, March 23, 2011
There are plenty of artists who sell out arenas on tour, but the mainstream media dismisses them because they don't meet "Rolling Stone"'s definition of cool. Many country acts tour and fill arenas, or in Kenny Chesney's case, stadiums - artists like Taylor Swift, Tim McGraw, Brad Paisley, Keith Urban, or Rascall Flatts, this is where people fork over the cash. Many comments here have named the classic acts that still fill stadiums, like Bon Jovi, U2, Paul McCartney, or Kiss. There ARE mainstream artists making hit records today who ALSO fill arenas - Nickelback, Pink, Beyonce, Black Eyed Peas, Eminem, Kid Rock, Justin Beiber.
The real question is, whoever expected artists like Rihanna, Ke{dollar-sign}ha or Kings of Leon to fill an arena in the first place? Their inability to do so does not reflect on the business of arena tours in the slightest. It's just the wrong venue.
Chris Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Great rock bands have no problem. Example: Rush is playing 2 shows in 6000 capacity Ampitheater again this year, just like last.
Rock rules, pop sucks-ass. that's why.
Aelfric Wednesday, March 23, 2011
If you didn't have an overpriced star being sold by a money grubbing promotor selling too-expensive seats and outrageous VIP packages at an overpriced venue, it wouldn't be a problem.
Promotors...Get real!
Acts...Remember the music, forget your egos!
Venues...get serious about filling the date, not raping your date!
Britt Wilson Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Lower ticket prices. Think that might work? Duh.
emdub123 Wednesday, March 23, 2011
One point that no one has made yet is the possibility that fewer people are actually interested in the large-venue concert experience. Not necessarily because of the artist or the ridiculous prices, but because sitting half a mile away from the artist, in a cramped plastic chair drinking a warm beer SUCKS.
Why would anyone prefer the stadium experience to the club or theater experience?
Baron Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Hello! Maybe the artists that are touring are not that good! Take away the dancers, the light shows, and glitzy costumes and what do you have? A kareoke singer disguised as a "pop star".
K-Sonix Wednesday, March 23, 2011
If you compare Rihanna and Ke$ha to current pop artists that are selling arenas (Beyonce, Gaga, Beiber), the biggest difference is that Rihanna and Ke$ha don’t dance, thus, they don’t have much of a show. If you look at Rihanna’s videos and appearances on award shows, she is basically modeling. Hair is perfect. Clothes are perfect. Watch the ‘Only Girl in the World’ video. That song is smoking HOT and all she does is walk around like a Sports Illustrated model. Ke$ha was basically skipping in one spot when she sang on Saturday Night Live.
I would suggest that both artists pick a dance song for their next single and come up with really strong dance routines like ‘Single Ladies’. Then the tickets will sell.
@KLoniSky Wednesday, March 23, 2011
K'Loni Sky
Even the STARS are having a problem drawing a crowd
Dax Callner Thursday, March 24, 2011
I think the issue isn't actually with the artists or concert providers as much as it is with how music consumption habits have changed. Essentially - the audience has changed in several key ways:
- Music used to be a shared listening experience: friends gathering around a record player to listen to the latest album. They enjoyed it together and this carried on into their live music habits. Music has become a much more personal experience as people download and listen to songs on their laptops and iPods.
- Been to a show lately? The audience isn't immersed in the experience like they once were...they are present but they aren't THERE. Their attention is on capturing the performance on their mobile device and they aren't really participating the way folks used to. And by the way people know they can find a million clips on YouTube if they miss a show by their favorite artists.
I'm not pining for the "way things were" but you can't ignore changes in audience behaviors as a factor in this...and that the artists who ARE still selling out stadiums (U2, The Rolling Stones, etc.) all have an older fan base with different music consumption habits.
/Dax
facebook.com/PassionProject
@viridian_faza Thursday, March 24, 2011
Krzysztof (Faza)
What was everyone saying about live being the future?
rubber Thursday, March 24, 2011
Why? Less music in the music,genetically modified artists,sup par talent,weak material,and unprofessional and greedy managers.
jc Thursday, March 24, 2011
Everybody moaning about making less money but no-one owning up to the fact that most of the artists are mediocre at best. How about scouring the countryside for true talent - most of it hiding or being hidden in the bushes, basements and attics by a suppressive music business community and the only squeaky wheels getting the grease are the ones who, motivated by greed and star-worship dreams, jump around like organ-grinder monkeys yelling "look at me!" while paying way to little attention on the quality and ingenuity of their product. If you sell celebrity, then celebrity is what you get - Joe the Plumber (who?) a perfect example.
Music Executives want the easy job - sell the white bread.
Artists want the easy job - do what they're told.
Big surprise the market has dried up. The stuff sucks.
Do a good job and get rewarded.
So simple .. a child could do it.
Anonymous Thursday, March 24, 2011
Am I the only one that read the Lefsetz letter that showed this article is a total fake?
MisterSoftee Thursday, March 24, 2011
LOL, yeah right. Lefsetz is Irving Azoff's lap boy, so he will believe and print anything he says. Basically he worships Azoff and Steve Jobs, oh and Lars from Metallica.
@CRASHarts Saturday, March 26, 2011
WorldMusic/CRASHarts
they use BOSTON as an example... but lucky for us we have great fans who pack great theatres!
@TheJeneralTwit Monday, March 28, 2011
JenniferB
So what r artists going to do?
OUR SPONSORS
© 2011 All Rights Reserved
Follow Us