quote:

---

quote:

---

I'm not the one with friends driving around in bands. I'm the one with 30+ years in the music industry, and I can tell you unequivocally that talent does not equal success. There's a certain degree of talent that is mandatory - beyond that, it becomes a matter of luck, hard work, and timing. For some it happens, for others it doesn't. It's not remotely like a slugger in the minor leagues with a hole in his swing. I've worked with amazingly talented people who had everything going for them but luck. I've seen talentless hacks make it huge. It's not a linear process, and if it were as simple as "talent + marketing = success", then it wouldn't be true that 90% of the acts signed to major labels never make it, and sometimes the most random, unconnected event can stop a promising career in its tracks. Billy Joe Royal (Down In The Boondocks) was having a huge comeback in the 80s, and had a record flying up the charts called "Burned Like A Rocket". Then the space shuttle blew up, and the record was gone, off the charts, in one week and the comeback was over. The Dixie Chicks were the hottest thing going until they decided to get stupid political, and they've been virtually invisible ever since. If that can happen to successful acts, imagine the stuff that can happen to up and comers. It's a crazy business, and success just isn't as black and white as you're trying to make it.

---

I'm just making it as black and white in the broad sense that you're describing things that happen in almost every industry. Very talented people don't always catch the breaks. That doesn't mean the industry is flawed like no other, that's just the way the world works.

As a previous poster pointed out -- someone is out there purchasing those Nickelback albums. The demand is there for that music and obviously wasn't for the amazingly talented music you were around.

---

We may be arguing semantics, but the point I'm making is that for a myriad of reasons, sometimes the public simply doesn't get the opportunity to "vote". It's not always a demand issue, sometimes it's that the machine around a given artist breaks down. A better sports analogy than a minor league baseball player is NASCAR. You can have the fastest car and win the pole of a given race, but if your engine blows you don't win. There are landmines everywhere on the way to fame/success, and most of them don't have a thing to do with demand for what you're doing. Part of the problem is that if there is a failure at any stage of your career, it follows you and you get the blame for things that were beyond your control. For example, I know around a dozen different acts that had their record label go out of business/merge/etc. right when their first single was ready to ship, or was beginning to chart, and so the promotion went away and the records died. That didn't have a thing to do with the artist or their viability, but they get the label of a "failed artist" and other record labels stay away. I've seen other acts get tied up in lawsuits with crooked managers that lasted for years and crushed the acts' momentum. Another great example is a friend & co-writer of mine, Deryl Dodd. Deryl was about to be a big star when he contracted viral encephalitis, was bed ridden for 6 months and needed 18 months of therapy after that. Lost all his momentum due to getting sick. Again, just making the point that it's not something you can make black and white.

I see your point. I wasn't trying to imply "only good music makes it to the mainstream audience", but I think "making it big" encompasses a lot more than just being talented which is why a soulless band like Nickelback can "make it big" but a talented guy may not be able to.