No Doubt is an interesting example, because they are a commercial band that has tried some different stuff. I have a theory that the long lag between albums makes most artists more conservative -- when you spend so much time between releases, it actually inhibits artistic growth, due to a fear that if you change too much, you lose your audience. But when you record a lot, the growth is a natural by-product -- if you're recording a new album every 9 months, you'd get bored doing the same thing. This is a generalization, but I think most commercially successful acts who don't release more than an album every two or three years tend to play it safe. Mike Bennett Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com Find out about Chicago shows: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chicagopopshowreport/ >From: DanAbnrml9@aol.com > >I just want to jump into the talk about Rooney, who will wind up having a >very long wait between albums as they're just now going into the studio to >record a follow-up... > >A lot of things have been said already about why this is bad--losing your >fanbase being a main one. But one big problem is that I think you miss out >on >entire "periods" of a band's career. Take this: > >No Doubt's first album came out in 1992. Their (presumably) last album came >out in 2001. That's nine years, and in that time they produced four >full-length albums, plus that "Beacon Street" album, which I guess >technically counts >as a fifth. Okay, 5 albums in about ten years... that's about the industry >average, if not a little faster. > >Compare to the Beatles, who had a recording career that was two years >shorter (correct? I admit I am not an expert) and cranked out 12 proper >albums >(including "Magical Mystery Tour", but not "Yellow Submarine" or any of the >various now-out-of-print releases that didn't quite mirror the "classic" >releases). Now I am not arguing that No Doubt was as genius as the Beatles >or >anything, but consider this: If the Beatles worked on the same schedule >that No Doubt >did, we probably would've missed out on entire chunks of their career, >including some of the great diversions they've become known for. If the >Beatles >knew they could only get an album out every two years, would they have >allowed >the while album to be so sprawling? Probably not--they'd probably want >something tight and commercial to reconnect with fans. Would they have >made the bold >move that was "Sgt Peppers"? Well, maybe, but if they did then we might've >missed out on "Revolver". Their folk period might've been a passing phase >BETWEEN albums, and we wouldn't have gotten "Rubber Soul". The Beatlemania >period >might've only produced one full length, and it's even possible that "Let >It >Be"/"Abbey Road" would've just been new tracks on a career-ending greatest >hits. It's weird to think about, but if a band of that caliber came along >today >we might not even KNOW about it because they might be so restricted by >this >very system that they wouldn't be ALLOWED to be brilliant. > >No Doubt, for comparison, put out two forgotten ska-punk albums, one big >(MASSIVE, really, selling over 15 million copies) new wave/punk/pop hybrid >disc--the one that really preceeded this trend that's along now--a "mature" >version of the same thing as a follow-up FIVE YEARS LATER, then a dancehall >and >funk-inflected party album as their last, 18 months after their fourth >disc. >Again, I don't think there are many No Doubt fans here, but isn't it >interesting >to think about what was missed--about what passing musical fascinations >could've found their way to tape and proven them to a more prolific and >better >band? Instead, I would argue that a big major label band stuck to this "No >Doubt > Schedule" is under more pressure to stick to the script and put out an >album > that their fans would expect, rather than challenging the audience the >way >that many of the Beatles albums did. > >And on this note, I'm upset in part because my two favorite bands are >HORRIBLE about this. After a very prolific period in the mid-90s which >produced >their best 4 albums, Blur started waiting YEARS (4 between "13" and "Think >Tank") between each release. And Fountains of Wayne (who also went 4 years >between >albums) have reportedly not written ANYTHING for a follow-up to "Welcome >Interstate Managers", which is now over a year old. They need badly to >seize on >their momentum, and it looks like they're prepared to blow it. > >--Jason _________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/