Pretty much everyone agrees that the Beach Boys, Young, McCartney, Dylan, etc made shitty 80s albums. Was it the actual songs or the production that wrecked them though? Would the pictured album have sounded good in 1972, or were the songs themselves just duds?
>>130393855fake Paul
>>130393855>or were the songs themselves just duds?Usually this. Artists run out of steam by the time they reach that point. Most if not all great 60s/70s artists had at least ONE dud during that decade. >David Bowie - Never Let Me Down>Billy Joel - The Bridge >Miles Davis - Tutu>Frank Zappa - Thing Fish >Nina Simone - Nina's Back>Elton John - Leather Jacket >Joni Mitchell - Dog Eat Dog >Santana - Beyond Appearances >Literally every single Jazz artist that didn't die before the 80s happened And it goes on. If they lived to see the 80s and/or didn't break up by then, they had a dud. Guaranteed.
>>130393855Dylan was probably just tired and out of ideas, plus his style of music wasn't really adaptable to 80s trends. Empire Burlesque was ok but the next two albums were crud. I believe though that CBS expected a yearly album out of him while Warner were more benevolent towards Paul Simon and let him release albums on his own timetable. Joni Mitchell and Neil Diamond made some bad stuff too.
>>130394042Springsteen?
>>130394065Oh shit a rare exception. Most of his duds weren't til the 90s. Huh.
>>130394065that is true, obviously Springsteen was a huge exception and so was Tom Waits, but most of them shit the bed hard.
Dirty Work would be a main offender in this sense. The Stones are falling apart, even Charlie Watts developed a drug problem. There are guests up your ass. And Jagger, what's with all the screaming?The recent Dylan archives box suggests that Empire Burlesque could have been better with less of its time production, but the next two just stunk. And Neil Young's Life would have been a pretty good album without all those synths. As for Bowie, there's no saving Never Let Me Down.
>>130394120Dylan had good songs, just not enough of them and the good ones he did have were ruined by the production. Bowie though was just lost and running on fumes.
>>13039385580s production values certainly didn't favor most old artists. hell, it didn't favor a lot of 80s artists either if we're being honest...
>>130393855The 80s were a very label controlled era that followed up on disco where the industry forced everything to be a uniform plastic dancepop sound.
>>130393855>the Beach Boys, Young, McCartney, Dylan, etc made shitty 80s albums.but they all made shitty albums in the 60s & 70s. nobody was listening to their music by 1979. they were washed up relics>>130394053>Dylan was probably just tired and out of ideas, plus his style of music wasn't really adaptable to 80s trendshuh... tell that to tracy chapman or melissa etheridge or the indigo girls etc. he just outright sucked
>>130393855Bowie fell off a cliff after Let's Dance. Neil Young was lost between Hawks & Doves and Freedom, and he also feuded with Dave Geffen. Joni Mitchell and the Stones lost it. Tom Waits, Lou Reed, and Ry Cooder just kept doing their thing and ignored pop altogether. Pink Floyd were pretty successful. What's also interesting is that Springsteen and Genesis mastered 80s pop sounds but most of their peers couldn't.
>>130394053That also applies to Don Henley. Geffen let him release albums on his own terms so he wasn't forced to crank out an annual release.
>>130394283>Tom Waits, Lou Reed, and Ry Cooder just kept doing their thing and ignored pop altogether.Not on Mistrial Lou didn't.
>>130393855Neil Diamond put out an album in the mid-80s called Headed for the Future and the title track is a contender for the most dated 1980s song everhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr4IH7BF5EU
>>130394376yeah yeah drum machine i get it. the album is still classic Lou though--great lyrics, jokes, guitars, sense of zeitgeist, etc.
>>130394283Let's Dance was a massive hit and Bowie's biggest selling album ever and EMI were pushing him for a follow-up but he really didn't have any idea where to go from there. As others said, Tom Waits and Ry Cooder just ignored pop altogether.
>>130393855at what point do things go south? it seems most of these guys were doing ok in the early part of the decade and only lose it starting in '83.
>>130394120Bowie by his own admission had good songs but the production ruined them.
i agree that with the possible exception of Mistrial, Lou Reed wasn't really hurt by the 80s at all
For Bob Dylan, Jackson Browne and Neil Young it was a combination of both. Their questionable production didn't do their music any good, but their songwriting wasn't up to their standards either. I think better songwriting would have helped their music better than more suitable production.
Yes and Jefferson Airplane/Starship were some late 60s/early 70s bands that had some big success in the 80s. I think Heart did alright in the 80s too
>>130393855as others said, the industry ever since disco had become totally smitten with dance pop and tried to force everything into that straitjacket. most 80s music was meant for chicks in leotards and a headband to do aerobics to. what was a guy like Dylan or James Taylor supposed to do with that?
Joni's Dog Eat Dog actually needed the production to work because it was a topical album and really had to sound like 1985 to get its point across.
>>130393855my dad turned 15 in 1980 and man, he fucking hated 80s music. it was as far away from his tastes and sensibilities as it could get.
>>130394789Well mine was 17 back then and he thought '80 was a great year for music and generally loved the first half of the decade. It's always nice when you connect with the zeitgeist during your teen years and aren't a holier-than-thou born in the rong generation kid who wore AC/DC T-shirts in the 2000s and ranted about Nickelback ruining everything.
there is no way any 80s Neil Young album is close to as bad as his 21st century output
>>130394283Tom Waits was allowed by Geffen to do whatever he wanted, however unlike most of the people mentioned ITT he was a super-niche artist who had never made any pretense of being commercial and he was not expected to sell more than a few thousand albums per release. Geffen kept him as a "prestige" artist.
Dylan had good songs but he didn't put them on his albums which mostly got his scraps. CBS were also pressuring him to have hits.
>>130394863Waits did a dog food commercial in the early 80s because he badly needed money. Still, he never sold out to pop music even when he was starving.
>>130393855The old rock-and-roll rooted in the counterculture era had died off by the 80s and so did folk/singer-songwriter music. Many of the longtime veterans couldn't adapt. For some like Elton John they'd started losing it before the 70s were out.
>>130393855When we mean '70s guys, of course referring to artists who were around from prior to '75, not people who started during the New Wave era like Van Halen or Talking Heads.
Eric Clapton had a weak start to the 80s but was very strong in 85 onward.
>>130394283The members of Genesis may have been pop superstars in the 80s but you're out of your mind if you think their music was better than the 70s. Mike & The Mechanics in particular are one of the cringiest things I've ever heard.
>>130395063He didn't say the 80s stuff was BETTER than their 70s albums, he just said they made great 80s music.
>>130394283>Tom Waits, Lou Reed, and Ry Cooder just kept doing their thing and ignored pop altogetherUh...the Grateful Dead? It's not like they also didn't just keep doing the same old thing they'd always done.
The Bee Gees, after their disco backlash, reinvented themselves as songwriters for other people and then mid 80s had some decent new Bee Gees albums (in Europe, anyway)
I'd say the Kinks reinvented themselves for the 80s pretty well.
>>130395193The Kinks to be fair began their rebirth in the late 70s when they abandoned prog bullshit and rediscovered hard rock.
>>130394053Heart were like Genesis. Came back commercially, the music was far inferior to their old stuff.
>>130395223they had some good songs, too bad about the 80s outfits though
>>130394685I almost misread this as 'tropical' and was gonna call out how the album was so sterile and cold that it was completely inaccurate. Good thing I caught myself. It WAS topical but she did that kinda stuff without ugly dated DEVO production on other, mch better albuum. It might've been decent if she went acoustic but EVERY 70s musician just latched onto those tacky synths for some reason.
Neil Young's 80s output wasn't actually bad, it was just much more eclectic in comparison. The only reason, say, an album like Everybody's Rockin' was so regressive is because he wanted it to be as an artistic statement.
>>130394659U2 never did any dance music, at least not until Pop long afterward.
>>130394232>nobody was listening to their music by 1979. they were washed up relicsNeil Young made one of his greatest albums in '79. The rest, yeah they were washed.
>>130393855landing on water is good; you got filtered, tastelet.
Aruba Jamaica
>>130394065his only good album is nebraska because it has atlantic city>>130394283the drop off was lets dance, what an awful direction he went in >>130394789based dad, he knew the 80s sucked
>implying Paul didn't write one of the best songs of the 80s
>>130394283>Lou ReedHis whole solo career was incredibly uneven>>130393855I actually really like Landing On Water and Trans, the really artificial sound is bizarre when applied to Neil Young's music
>>130399199i think its pretty even since he only released three good albums in his entire career
>>130394816how about not? i was a teenager in the 00s and mostly loathed everything about that decade.
Landing on Water [Geffen, 1986]Hidden away on this rock bellyflop (which must be scandalizing 'em in Nashville) are hints that he may still be a crazed genius--the hook on the otherwise more-than-predictable "Drifter," the urban neurosis of "Pressure," and especially the broken yet still encouraging "Hippie Dream." But from straightforward confessional to brand-new drummer, it's the dullest record he's ever made. C+
>>130394826"Re·ac·tor ", "Everybody's Rockin'", "Trans", "Landing on Water"....would all like a word with you
>>130395449There was no artistic statement, it was a shot at Geffen.
>>130399039The 80's production was utter shit. "Hippie Dream" is a great song though, and really damn good live.
>>130399270Geffen expected him to deliver the hits, much like CBS expected Dylan to do same and it didn't work out for either.
>>130394546>had good songs but the production ruined them.The production can't ruin good songs, only mediocre.
All of CSNY had a pretty bad 80s and American Dream really should have never happened.
>>130393855it must have been hard to eg. see a band like the Scorpions go from their bluesy prog 70s sound to ultra hair metal cheese
>>130398854The Beach Boys arguably were done before the 60s even ended.
>>130401027You're done
>>130401027their post-PS albums really only had an audience in Europe, nobody in the US was listening to them by 68-69.
Just listened to Knocked Out Loaded for the first time today. It’s not that bad…
>>130394789https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F3V7Dx4Kewthis was on the radio all the time in 1983, i hated it
>>130394232All those chicks were 90s you dumb fuck zoomer
>>130401230MY GOD THEY KILLED HIM
>>130401272Tracy Chapman broke in '88 when she had her biggest and most famous hit.
>>130401321granted, but 88-89 was when you could see previews of the 90s coming. alternative music was starting to creep onto the charts by then and hair metal shit had become lame and only still running on inertia.
>>130395063Silent Running excellent song
>>130394381I kinda like it but shit sounds like an educational movie
>>130394816>It's always nice Idk, I think it's neutral. I'm not disappointed for being a wrong generation kid for the 80s instead of being into Drake and SoundCloud rap nor do I blame the TikTok teens of today for being 90sphiles instead of into Morgan Wallen or hype edit music
Landing On Water is not that bad at all, you need to re-check that one out.
>>130401864It's certainly better than anything NY has produced this century. It has melodies. Interesting lyrics. Songs with more than three chords.
Y'know? This is a fun chart idea. Shitty 80s albums from 60s and 70s artists. Keep em coming. (I may count early 90s albums too, not sure though).
>>130399296it's good BECAUSE of the 80s production
>>130402080Beach Boys S/T
I wouldn't say Sammy Hagar did too badly in the 80s.
Cher had a successful late 80s, she kind of struggled during the early 80s.
>>130402080For Bob you need Saved, Shot of Love, Empire Burlesque and Down in The Groove as well-it was not a kind decade for Bob, throw in Dylan and the Dead as a bonus
>>130402080Gordon Lightfoot had some duds in the 80s after a solid 60s and 70s run. This was probably his worst.
>>130401281Yeah that’s the lowest point of the album for sure. Brownsville Girl is obviously a gem. A couple of other ok ones.
>>130402415I'm trying to keep it one per artist CSNY are on there because group / solo are different but I feel like I might be reaching so I'll likely get rid of one or the other. Not sure which though.
>>130395376Reminds me of how nowadays everyone has to sound like Taylor swift to try to impress zoomers. This era is very similar to the 80s
Many of the black pop gang from the 60s-70s were still doing pretty well in the 80s.>Aretha>had a resurgence after totally falling off in the disco era, huge hit with "Sisters Are Doin' It For Themselves" even if it required the help of the young, currently hot Annie Lennox to do it>Patti LaBelleStill plugging along>Dionne WarwickDitto.>Diana RossHad a loyal gay fanbase to support her.>James BrownHe was finally running out of gas and ended up in serious legal trouble at decade's end but still had a major hit with "Livin' In America">Kool & The GangHad morphed into a reliable adult R&B factory>Lionel RitchieHa ha 'nuff said.
