The Top Selling 200 Albums in the UK in 2005

[Guest]

25 for me. DSOTM still selling more than some new albums in a year :dude:

 

[Biscuit]

but then again, so is Shakin' Stevens

 

[Hawk]

ermm.. 53

 

[Guest]

Hawk i don't know whether to

or

 

[Hawk]

me neither mate

 

[purplepleaser]

Er i have a few

Lee

 

[Brown Bottle]

I have 42 of 'em, one of the reasons I'm always skint.

I'm not really a fan of U2's later stuff but it's a sad state of affairs when utter shite like G4 outsells the latest U2 album.

 

[OldSkoOL]

You know whats good about this list

Origonal Nirvana, Pink Floyd, Johnny Cash albums still having a ranking beating many recent releases from modern day bands. Nirvana especially, albums that were released 15-35 years ago are still getting ranked

 

[earl of sodbury]

OldSkoOL wrote:

You know whats good about this list Origonal Nirvana, Pink Floyd, Johnny Cash albums still having a ranking beating many recent releases from modern day bands. Nirvana especially, albums that were released 15-35 years ago are still getting ranked

True, but don't you find it a bit depressing that mainstream contemporary popular music is so dull or crap that no-one's buying it?

 

[ErikFH]

Brown Bottle wrote:

I have 42 of 'em, one of the reasons I'm always skint. I'm not really a fan of U2's later stuff but it's a sad state of affairs when utter shite like G4 outsells the latest U2 album.

U2 will feauture in two lists as their Bombrecord was released in '04.

First albumand Achtung Baby are their finest IMO.

For the rest a lot of good songs and an equal amount of poses. :dude:

 

[OldSkoOL]

when were talking about this subject the boundaries of influence are blurred by marketing spiel and channels of distribution; then we have the view that new material is nothing new in itself, we've all heard it before.

from our point of view we can embrace pioneering artists like bob dylan, pink floyd, guns n roses, freddie mercury, stone roses, nirvana, radiohead and now for me maybe even the artic monkeys. All these groups give a refreshing sound and create something new.

The majority of mainstream music being manufactured today are cheap spin offs of everything we've heard before. The further down the chain we go we start to see a pattern emerging.

thats just the way it is

i may be giving the impression that i'm critically analysing music; and i'm by no means a musical snob. My oppinion is, that despite terrible marketing influence and manufactured music that cringingley makes its way into the top 10 each week, i keep an open mind. What i wrote above is a realisation of musical evolution. New music may never appear to be origonal but what i can do is respect the talents of any given band / performer and merit on performance. I think i'll be denying myself if i didn't give new music a chance.

 

[ErikFH]

earl of sodbury wrote:

OldSkoOL wrote:

You know whats good about this list Origonal Nirvana, Pink Floyd, Johnny Cash albums still having a ranking beating many recent releases from modern day bands. Nirvana especially, albums that were released 15-35 years ago are still getting ranked

True, but don't you find it a bit depressing that mainstream contemporary popular music is so dull or crap that no-one's buying it?

Afterillegal downloads, it's nowon their I-pods. Probably.:Not Sure:

 

[Hawk]

OldSkoOL wrote:

when were talking about this subject the boundaries of influence are blurred by marketing spiel and channels of distribution; then we have the view that new material is nothing new in itself, we've all heard it before. from our point of view we can embrace pioneering artists like bob dylan, pink floyd, guns n roses, freddie mercury, stone roses, nirvana, radiohead and now for me maybe even the artic monkeys. All these groups give a refreshing sound and create something new.

The majority of mainstream music being manufactured today are cheap spin offs of everything we've heard before. The further down the chain we go we start to see a pattern emerging.

thats just the way it is

i may be giving the impression that i'm critically analysing music; and i'm by no means a musical snob. My oppinion is, that despite terrible marketing influence and manufactured music that cringingley makes its way into the top 10 each week, i keep an open mind. What i wrote above is a realisation of musical evolution. New music may never appear to be origonal but what i can do is respect the talents of any given band / performer and merit on performance. I think i'll be denying myself if i didn't give new music a chance.

Well said.....

and i'd go on to say that within todays mainstream there are a couple of elements, in the gutter we have no talent manufactured James Blunt/pop idols churning out commercial fodder for the 'just seventeen' market... but we also have some energetic, talented passionate bands out there. I accept some of them don't hide their influences, but i maintain that doesnt make them bad and they deservea hearing. If they can cut it live they have a place in my collection..

Hawk

 

[earl of sodbury]

OldSkoOL wrote:

when were talking about this subject the boundaries of influence are blurred by marketing spiel and channels of distribution; then we have the view that new material is nothing new in itself, we've all heard it before. from our point of view we can embrace pioneering artists like bob dylan, pink floyd, guns n roses, freddie mercury, stone roses, nirvana, radiohead and now for me maybe even the artic monkeys. All these groups give a refreshing sound and create something new.

The majority of mainstream music being manufactured today are cheap spin offs of everything we've heard before. The further down the chain we go we start to see a pattern emerging.

thats just the way it is

i may be giving the impression that i'm critically analysing music; and i'm by no means a musical snob. My oppinion is, that despite terrible marketing influence and manufactured music that cringingley makes its way into the top 10 each week, i keep an open mind. What i wrote above is a realisation of musical evolution. New music may never appear to be origonal but what i can do is respect the talents of any given band / performer and merit on performance. I think i'll be denying myself if i didn't give new music a chance.

All good stuff, and if you surveyed the current UK music scene from the POV of mags "Top n-hundred" lists, and what gets played on mainstream radio it would be easy to dismiss contemporary music as highly derivative - every few weeks we get a reinvention of previous genres - ska, post-punk, even Britpop ferchrissakes! Now,that has its place, and as you say, itis justthe latestmanifestation of a long-established trend, it's also pretty misleading, because there are shedloads of new acts innovating as best as the medium will let them and being well-nigh ignored "overground" (and cliche though it is, Peely's untimely death played no small part in that) - every time I listen to the radio or flick through a mag I'm haunted by what I'm missing, far more than I'm distracted by what I'm hearing, and I'd sure love for that to change!

 

[Injector]

I used to make sure (maybe even pride myself on the fact) I knew most of what was happening on the music scene. Steadily, over the years, I disliked more and more chart music until it got to the point where I'd given up. I was always the "music guy" in the pub quiz - "ask Adam, he'll know" -but now my specialist subject it purely rock. Suits me fine. Of course I'll never writenew musicoff -every now and then a Stone Roses orRadioheaddrops out of the chart's anus smelling of roses. Generally, though, I find most new music boring. Oftenjust a group oftalentless wannabees regurgitating stuff I'd heard done sooo muchbetterseveral years before. Maybe it's an age thing but I'm not so sure that's the whole deal- the standard of popular musichas declinedIMO.

PS Don't get me started on the R'n'B chart.

 

[OldSkoOL]

yes R n b is a completely different kettle of fish. thing is its a different scene totally and i cannot see an appreciation in the underlying concept of R n B, disagree with the princples and values of the industry therefore i keep my mouth shut on the subject.

I would say that, when we think about new music as music thats been played a million times before, this maybe apparent for us but for the new generation its the polar opposite. Thats really what worries me. Kids of today grow up listening to the manufatured chart music and buy this music on a bigger scale than ever before. It worries me about the future of music itself. But i try never to forget that this is my personal view and that bands like the kaiser cheifs, bloc party and coldplay may liberate the minds of young ones in the same way, Hendrix, Led Zeplin, the smiths, stones roses and nirvana did for me.

Yes they have the oppotunity to investigate singer songwriters from 30/40 years ago but most dont have such an open mind.

Theres this one line from the band Arctic monkeys which sums up youth culture and the music scene pretty well... "theres only new music so theirs new ringtones".

 

[earl of sodbury]

Normally I'd pull myself up (not like that

) at some point in a debate like this, and remind myself I'm an old fart, and what I think is certain to be predjudiced by my advancing senility. But the lack of freshness and inventiveness - the sheer lack of interest in mainstream music at the moment is also reflected in declining sales. This decline's not just due to increasing file downloading - that hasn't picked up the slack by any means. So it seems that young as well as old are simply buying less music, and I struggle to believe that would be happening if the there was a vibrant and exciting mainstream musical scene, as opposed to the cynical, over-controlled and derivative pabulum that's being regurgitated at present.

Right, off to change me pads: "NURSE!"

churz, eofs