So why did Abba music became "classic" while AOB´s has fallen into "90´s eurotrash" category?
Well for one thing AOB were around for like two albums and Abba were around for 8 yrs producing pop classic after pop classic. Outside the US, Abba are infinitely bigger than AOB ever were.
That simply isn´t an answear for the "why" question. You just say it is because it is.
Maybe not, but I did give you extremely sound, logical and probable reason behind “why”, so “why” carry on against Phoenix83’s answer?
But imagine if, for some reason, the band had split before "Arrival" and never released anything else. Would songs like Mamma Mia and Waterloo be regarded as classics? NO. They´d just be old songs that nobody cares anymore.
“Why”, must we always “imagine” with you, it is not even educated subjective supposition, it is complete “what if”. Can you not stick to what we know or what can be reasonably deduced from fact, rather than what you think or feel how “something” might have turned out, if “something” had happened. You do not know how “something” might have turned out and neither do I, quite simply because it didn’t happen, so don’t offer these kind of answers as answers.Joao wrote:
Which goes back to my point that sometimes, older material just gets the "classic" status because the band manages to stick around longer, and it has nothing to do with the inner quality of the material. Same goes for MJ, Madonna, and all other artists people regard as "icons". That´s not to say their material didn´t have quality at all, but their early material wouldn´t be regarded as "classic" if they didn´t manage to stick around.
Again, more “I think”! You do not know how their material would be regarded, if they didn’t manage to “Stick around”, because they did. So all you are doing is stating how you “think” things “might” have turned out, plenty artists have “stopped” after 1 or 2 albums and remain revered and “classic”. Joao wrote:
And NO, sticking around for longer has nothing to do with the quality of the material or talent either. Sometimes artists go away because they die early, bands split because problems among the members, and so on... Sometimes artists begin to loose their chart sucess exactly when their music quality starts to improve, etc, etc.
Yes, some of this is true, but some artists do “stick around” because they are talented and do release quality material. You are too quick to impress your opinion as fact or give very ambiguous answers. You state things, such as “And NO, sticking around for longer has nothing to do with the quality of the material or talent either.”, when it can be, it may not be the key reason or the only reason to “sticking around”, (in my mind there are many), but clearly in some cases, it is one of the factors for an artists longevity. Joao wrote:
To think the whole discussing has started because some people argued that 21 wasn´t as big as older classics because it isn´t a classic itself. Were any of the aforementioned releases regarded as "classics" on the 1st year after their releases?
I don’t think I’ve really discussed the merits of 21. It is a hard one to decide (and who decides) when something becomes classic or what makes it classic. Classic status is not determined by chart position, staying power or sales…yes chart position, staying power and sales can be used or are often quoted, when describing some classic album such as Led Zeppelin IV, Dark Side of The Moon or Thriller, but the same cannot be used for every “Classic” album. As an example;
*Weeks are for initial chart run or until first drop off.
1979 The Clash – London Calling US No.9 20wks (1xP 1996) “Classic”
1979 The Eagles – The Long Run US No.1 (9) 57wks (1xP 1980) (7xP 2001) “Non Classic”
London Calling is clearly the “Classic”, often finishing in the Top 10 of “Best Ever” lists, yet it’s initial performance is dwarfed by The Long Run and to this day, it’s sales. It has often turned up in catalog, whereas TLR has never, but was still only certified for 1m in 96, while TLR was certified for 7m in 97.
1971 Led Zeppelin – IV US No.2 151wks (1xG 1971) 23xP 2006) (SS 3.7m 2011) “Classic”
1971 Marvin Gaye – What’s Going On US No.6 48wks (No Cert) (SS 1.1m 2006) “Classic”
Both albums are thought of as classics, but their weeks on chart initially, are vastly different and even subsequently, IV has 11 re-entries (100+ wks), WGO has 1 (5wks) around his death and sales are not even worth compairing, yet both are classics.
Classic albums quite simply, do not become classic through sales or performance. Yes, sales and performance can certainly become a benefit of being “classic”, but they do not determine the status.
IMO opinion, “Classic Albums” are determined by White Middle Class, anal music journalists and their elitist lists, views and articles on what is “cool”, “timeless”, “ground breaking” etc etc etc. I am not saying a lot of these classic albums do not deserve praise, some of them are fantastic, just that it is kind of prescribed brainwashing, based on perception, rather than popularity.
Classic – Something determined by elitists, but not necessarily popular or successful, although can be
Popular – Something determined by the public, but not necessarily classic or critically acclaimed, although can be.
Complete Crossover - Something which is classic, critically acclaimed, popular and successful, which is lauded by the elitists and bought in mass quantities by the general buying public.