>>>>


http://new.music.yahoo.co...ll-on-top/


Week Ending Aug. 23, 2009: Over 50 And Still On Top
Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:18pm PDT by Paul Grein in Chart Watch

In a lot of fields, workers over the age of 50 are not in great demand. That's not the case for top recording stars. This is the second week in a row that an artist over 50 has topped The Billboard 200. Reba McEntire, 54, debuts in the top spot with Keep On Loving You. She displaces George Strait, 57, who debuted on top last week with Twang. McEntire is the second oldest woman ever to have a #1 album on this chart. Barbra Streisand was 55 when she achieved the feat in November 1997 with Higher Ground.

McEntire and Strait aren't the only artists over 50 to have topped the chart this year. In February, Bruce Springsteen, 59, debuted at #1 with Working On A Dream. (And of course Michael Jackson, who was 50 when he died, had the best-selling album in the country for six weeks with Number Ones.) Two other artists in their 50s have peaked at #2 this year. R&B star Charlie Wilson, 56, hit the runner-up spot in February with Uncle Charlie. Prince, then 50, scored in April with Lotus Flow3r/MPLSoUND/Elix3r.

This year's charts have even been receptive to artists over the age of (gasp) 60. Robert Plant, then 60, returned to #2 in February with Raising Sand, his Grammy-winning collaboration with Alison Krauss. Bob Dylan, 68, debuted at #1 in May with Together Through Life. Last week, Neil Diamond, also 68, opened at #2 with his latest, Hot August Night/NYC. All of this bodes well for Barbra Streisand, 67. The diva's latest, Love Is The Answer, is due Sept. 29.

What's going on here? Today's fans are staying connected to pop music and their favorite artists far longer than fans used to. Also, "record buyers" of a certain age are among the CD's most loyal customers. They grew up with LPs and enjoy the tactile experience a CD provides (holding it, looking at the artwork, and reading the liner notes). Plus, older fans may be less inclined to illegally download, for two reasons: Cost isn't as much of an issue as with younger fans and they may be more apt to think it's wrong. (I want to thank my over-50 friends for clueing me into the psychology of the older buyer. Otherwise, how would I know?) <<<<<
[Edited 8/27/09 6:20am]

Of course they are in big demand. Hell, just look at all the current music made by these little youngsters these days. It's all so damn slow that even an over 70 crowd would fit in.

vainandy said:

yeah too bad Whitney wont fall in this category when her album drops . shes ONLY 46 .

Oh she applies. As a matter of fact, she's the poster child for the over 50 crowd. She's always been old for her age. When she was 24, she had the taste of someone 74.

The older acts always BRING it. Young acts got a lot to learn.

Let's hope the next crop of musicians coming up know how to make people dance like the old school did/still does in some cases. I'm sick of stiff 'rock' songs and lame club music. There are some beautiful things happening in jazz and alt-country, but that's about it unless you go to the elders.

exenn said:

It's funny how people my age and younger are making boring music, yet one project for someone who's over 30, 40 can still rock my socks off. Age ain't shit these days.
[Edited 8/27/09 11:06am]

One of the only people from our generation (outside of the afore-mentioned genres) whose music I really enjoy would be M.I.A., and while she has some songs that don't move me, the ones that do are amazing. The production, the violence, all the percussion (mostly on Kala).....that's my kind of dance music.

Wow, less hope the epiphany Mr.Paul Grein has had happens to music/artist, radio, and the music industry as a whole.

I mean if you are a music listener/lover why would anyone think you would stop purchasing music? Duh, it would seem to me you follow, support, and buy the music of artist of your youth. Prince is 50 well damn, most of Prince's fans are going to be around'bout his age. The 50+ crowd purchase Cd's, (they have more moeny) those dumbassed (aka record suits) crushed the golden egg laid by the golden goose, for themselves. Granted I don't feel sorry for them, I'm just sayin.

_____
[Edited 8/27/09 12:24pm]

TD3 said:

Exactly. I still support people that I grew up listening to. Ain't no way that'll stop.

Timmy84 said:

Yeah its been this way ever since the game became ALL about being young. When POP blew up in the later 90's and was the cash cow, everyone went young for the most, radio wont play anyone older, a new Bruce Springsteen song HAS to only be played on an Oldies radio station and a "classics" video stattion. But this all backfired, YOUNG acts dont sell records for the most part like they did back in the day. And im sorry but it does have to do with talent and INTEREST in these artists, i mean John Lennon and Paul McCartney were doing things like "tomorrow never knows" and "eleanor rigby" when they were 25, now a 25 year old is doing things like "SexyBack" or "Birthday Sex" real fucking talented and musical growth, give me a break. These acts like Neil Diamond,Manilow etc..all have sold in the past and still will, there is loyality, there is no more loyality today nor should there be with the crop of acts coming out

lastdecember said:

Yeah , what artist in their 20s today will have a Top 10 album 30 years from now?

vainandy said:

lastdecember said:

There's a lot of truth 2 that. Acts like Sly, Marvin, Aretha, Jimi, Stevie, Joni, Dylan, P, MJ, Neil Young, Rick James during their "twenty-something" years were obviously more talented and most importantly more daring in pusing the musical envelope. Hell even Janet and Madonna did a heck a lot more as compared 2 some of these acts 2day. Don't get me wrong there's a few out there (Outkast, AK, Beyonce- 2 a certain degree, perhaps John Mayer and the Roots); but that's about it.

vainandy said:

lol - I agree!

Timmy84 said:

Damn skippy! I don't know what these young-uns have against up tempo jams and variety or why they're not capable of making a solo album without featuring a whole bunch of guest artists.

Or why so many of them lack the imagination and creativity to write and perform songs about a variety of topics instead of the same old subjects with music created with the same tired techniques of samples/loops/gimmicks?

MJ had a hit song about a daggone rat!

And don't get me started on the live performances. There's not many new acts out there that can bring it onstage without tons of electronic and theatrical spectacle to prop up the weak content in their shows.

I saw Kool and the Gang a few months ago and I'll be seeing the BarKays, Lakeside and Peabo Bryson next week. It's funny how the old school entertainers still smoke the hell outta most acts half their age.

Back in the day bands and singers had a distinctive style and sound that was recognizable. With few exceptions they all sound pretty much alike today. It's like the industry is creating them from the same templates and formulas and it's tiresome.

The music industry needs to evolve into something less superficial.

exenn said:

I saw her live and she was terrible

babynoz said:[quote]

Timmy84 said:

It's not like they are creating them like this. It is exactly that they are creating them like this. The problem is that the music industry is making so less money today than they once did that they just look for the next big hit and not the next great musician. They are not willing to invest time and money in an artist. Imagine if Prince would start his career today. Would any company be willing to tolerate 2 minor selling albums until the breakthrough come? No way. And of course that is also one of the reasons why the music sales went down in the first place along with many others. The dominance of one genre of music (Hip-Hop) does not help things either as it takes away from artist's creativity.

Smittyrock70 said:

Madge started the game at 25

Timmy84 said:

I know right , I stay listening to old school music

Thibaut said:

I'd heard that about her. Maybe a live band would help.