Page 4 of 4
Posted: Sun 27 Aug 2006, 6:48 pm
by Pet Shop Girl
Synature wrote:Pet Shop Girl wrote:I am sure that any other band like Sugababes would not record a song like 'I made my excuses and left' would not have recorded it in the slow manner that PSB did. And 'Fundamental' can be a mainstream success with the right PR like U2 always manage to get out of each album.
If U2 recorded 'Fundamental' it would be a mainstream success.
U2 have an image that appeals to the mainstream. Most U2 PR are stories of Bono saving the world from oppression and confronting politicians.
He's like the Amnesty International Rambo with a band. The everyman superhero fighting for justice on a global scale. Mother Teresa meets Sumner Redstone.
I don't think it really matters what U2 releases, it will be a mainstream success.
You are right on that one Synature. I am sick of Bono and his constant talk of saving the rain forest and recycling his sandals.
Posted: Sun 27 Aug 2006, 10:58 pm
by patrick
Pet Shop Girl wrote:I am sure that any other band like Sugababes would not record a song like 'I made my excuses and left' would not have recorded it in the slow manner that PSB did.
...which is exactly my point.
And 'Fundamental' can be a mainstream success with the right PR like U2 always manage to get out of each album.
But U2 don't record albums that sound like
Fundamental, do they?
Posted: Sun 27 Aug 2006, 11:03 pm
by patrick
Rent wrote:Where did I write that Fundamental was a mainstream record?!
This is what you wrote:
If anyone else (read current teeny bopper or Paris Hilton) had released Fundamental it would have been top 5 at worst.
If you would like to make the bizarre argument that Top 5 albums are not mainstream then be my guest.
You're still evading the question: what do you call a "mainstream record" or a "hit". You keep on harping about these as if there was an objective criteria or formula.
It's one thing to be able to predict hits - it's another thing entirely to have enough perspective to know what
isn't going to be a smash. Off the top of your head, how many recent hit singles can you name that have been recorded in ragtime style? You mention
Bob the Builder but how many similar cases have their been? Please, let logic be your friend before your next baseless rant.
I agree that image is part of the problem. These guys are approaching middle age. They're not cool. They're not sexy. They're not hip. But the fact of the matter is that they're
also not writing songs for the contemporary radio scene. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't mean we should stick our heads in the sand and pretend that
Twentieth Century would be a smash if only it was sung by Robbie Williams.
Posted: Sun 27 Aug 2006, 11:04 pm
by patrick
Synature wrote:If U2 recorded 'Fundamental' it would be a mainstream success.
Has everything that U2 has done been a hit? I don't think it works that way.
Posted: Mon 28 Aug 2006, 3:41 am
by Pet Shop Girl
patrick wrote:Synature wrote:If U2 recorded 'Fundamental' it would be a mainstream success.
Has everything that U2 has done been a hit? I don't think it works that way.
You know what, Neil may not want to be a mainstream success. So lets just leave it at that. We can just simply enjoy their music and if you like 'Fundamental' then great! If you do not, then there are issues.

Posted: Mon 28 Aug 2006, 3:24 pm
by Synature
patrick wrote:Synature wrote:If U2 recorded 'Fundamental' it would be a mainstream success.
Has everything that U2 has done been a hit? I don't think it works that way.
'patrick', I did put a smiley after that statement. It was mostly meant as humor.
IMO, I think U2 could put out an album of bird calls and it would sell. Obviously I'm being over the top but I do believe they have surpassed the point of being judged for their music.
Posted: Mon 28 Aug 2006, 4:20 pm
by patrick
Synature wrote:Obviously I'm being over the top but I do believe they have surpassed the point of being judged for their music.
If this is true, then sales figures for their singles and albums should be constant rather than fluxuating. I don't think we'll find that's the case. I can see what you're getting at but I don't think it really applies to the
Fundamental issue the way you think it does because the PSB too have surpassed the point of being judged for their music.
Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006, 9:10 am
by Rent
patrick wrote:blah blah blah
Oh we get it.
What kind of obtuse logic drives you to conclude that liking Fundamental is "stick[ing one's] head in the sand"?! Sorry to break it to you but *shock-horror* some people
do like Fundamental.
DEAL WITH IT.
I also note you're still dodging answering the question. Just spouting unsubstantiated rubbish (your so-called 'truths') & insults but not a shred of logic to be forthcoming.
Well, since rational argument is a foreign concept to you, I'll let you go on jabbering like a brainless parrot.
PS: Oh and you might also try
reading people's posts before letting loose so much of your incoherent verbal diarrhea.
Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006, 10:08 am
by !
Why's it always patrick that's involved in these 'debates'?

Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006, 1:25 pm
by Synature
patrick wrote:Synature wrote:Obviously I'm being over the top but I do believe they have surpassed the point of being judged for their music.
If this is true, then sales figures for their singles and albums should be constant rather than fluxuating. I don't think we'll find that's the case. I can see what you're getting at but I don't think it really applies to the
Fundamental issue the way you think it does because the PSB too have surpassed the point of being judged for their music.
My original comments were about U2's PR / image.
Just a light hearted reply to 'Pet Shop Girl's comment.
Nothing really to do with any 'Fundamental' issue.
Over and out...
Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006, 5:56 pm
by patrick
Rent wrote:What kind of obtuse logic drives you to conclude that liking Fundamental is "stick[ing one's] head in the sand"?!
What an astonishing rhetorical contortion you've gone through here. I haven't concluded that "liking
Fundamental is sticking one's head in the sand" and I defy you to find a direct quote of mine indicating anything similar.
What I object to is your absurd notion - and I'm quoting you directly here - that
"if anyone else (read current teeny bopper or Paris Hilton) had released Fundamental it would have been top 5 at worst." That is the attitude I described as sticking one's head in the sand.
And of course now we have Paris selling just 75,000 units and bombing, which puts paid to the notion that we're dealing solely with image. On some level the music matters. Those "current teeny bopper[s]" aren't recording songs like
Indefinite leave to remain and that might just have something to do with who's charting where.
Sorry to break it to you but *shock-horror* some people do like Fundamental.
Including me. Reading isn't enough; comprehension is also required.
I also note you're still dodging answering the question.
The one about how to define mainstream hits? If you have to ask, you'll never get it.
Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006, 5:56 pm
by patrick
! wrote:Why's it always patrick that's involved in these 'debates'?
Because he doesn't suffer fools gladly.

Posted: Wed 30 Aug 2006, 8:55 pm
by stew
still dont fully understand why Sodom wont be a single myself....
Posted: Thu 31 Aug 2006, 12:19 am
by dVTB
I'm just listening to live recordings of PSB... - And I just realised which live track should be a double A-side with the new single, on cd1...
of course: After All !!
It's the Fundamental song that's not on Fundamental. It's one of Pet Shop Boys' most recent masterpieces. A better song than 11 of the 12 Fundamental tracks, no matter how good Fundamental is.
Coupling that song to Numb or any other single they pick, is just perfect. It would give deserved attention to Battleship Potemkin and to one of PSB's best tracks ever, and to the upcoming live album.