British groups storm the American charts. Not.

The Manics don't do well in America because they hate America.

for Robbie Williams to succeed in the States would be completely illogical. what appeal does he have for Americans? he may bring a cack-handed ideal of Britishness to MOR-loving Anglophiles out there but i'm sure the majority 'just don't get it, just don't want it' just as you won't see The Streets selling anywhere near as many albums as Gorillaz did over there.

Robbie, Coldplay etc. make enough money so i still dont get why they're perceived as failures for not having proper hits in the U.S. - they're just as horrendous as everything else in the charts out there though so on that basis its a shame they dont fit in. i suppose it comes down to how well the tours go out there and how much cock you're prepared to suck. i was quite impressed with Craig David for speaking out about the stupid situations he found himself in out there (being told to replace white guitarist, lose the dark skinned girls in the video and go for more mixed-race types instead etc.).

blur, on the other hand, never saw the light of day over here, except among the indie crowd.

i know you can connect the dots that i'm drawing here, but i'll go ahead and finish the picture for you anyhow...the american mass public's tastes and the american mass public tastemakers' tastes are simply wretched, non-existent.

people, this is the same country where george bush is president!! how can you expect possibly expect moronic americans to appreciate quality exported music?

most of the british artists who did well here in the '80s were pretty sucky. i submit for you: wham, paul young, uh, phil collins, etc.

the soft cell thing was restricted to one single and had to do with the fact of: the novelty of mtv, the song ('tainted love') included the 'where did our love go' part which all americans recognized and so could latch onto, and probably there was funny stuff in the water here at the time, or a weird astrological situation.

at any rate, u.s. radio has become markedly narrowed and consolidated over the years, so what would have made it onto the airwaves in the early '80s would never have made it on air after 1988 or so.

The Smiths are a pretty decent-selling "cult" band in the U.S. Their singles compilation is platinum I think?

The Manics refuse to properly tour America. When Sony finally convinced them to do so, Richie offed himself and they cancelled the tour. They haven't bothered since, because they are too busy breaking the important Cunban market. And eating pie.

The Pet Shop Boys had several U.S. hits, not just "West End Girls".

And the first three Oasis albums went platinum in the U.S., the second two albums going into the top ten! Wasn't Be Here Now #1 or #2 its first week out?

And I find any conversation blasting the "public" as wretched pretty disagreeable.

You know I hate to refute you, Ally, but the Manics toured here for the This Is My Truth.. album. I even went to see them play at the Bowery Ballroom. That they didn't show up (James had laryngitis, apparently) is another matter.

Actually, they supported Oasis on their Oasis-level touring, and bagged out halfway thru (yet another time I was going to see the Manics and they bagged it).

"And I find any conversation blasting the "public" as wretched pretty disagreeable."

why? how are most people not wretched? at least in their political thinking, music tastes, and the like.

50% of americans voted for george bush. the majority of people support him now. the man is demonic. hence, the public is wretched in their political thought process and decision-making.
the american music public goes crazy over stuff like limp biscuit. hence, the public has wretched taste in music.
fox news.
clear channel.
suv's.
wretched. wretched. wretched.
the evidence is everywhere. most people suck. i wish them all the best, but the human species ain't gonna last much longer, because most people are making really wretched decisions. it's fucking 2003 c.e., and people are still fighting 'wars' to solve conflicts. and the majority of the american public says 'yay', 'we're #1', 'let's wave our flags'...while people are being traumatized and slaughtered. that's fucking wretched. that's fucking obscene.

That's "Song #2" to you, cretin

.... was only a hit because it was in a bunch of tv commercials and promos and such.

Wrong.

plus it sucked, so of course it became a huge hit.

You have dung in your ears and a rancid, rotting eggplant for a brain.

Whatever, anyway. You wanna say the American public is crap, so be it. They're no more or less crap than any other nation's public, however. I fail to see how Limp Bizkit is more or less annoying than, for example, Atomic Kitten.

"Song 2" was all over MTV before it got put into ads. And Gorillaz did very very well (I was recently on a plane and the 13-year-old girl next to me had a Gorillaz desktop on her laptop... I wanted to talk to her about music but figured it might be kind of, you know, sketchy).

Anyway, some time last year was the first time since before the British Invasion that there wasn't a single British album on the Billboard top 100.

But it doesn't have as much to do with "the public" as it does the basic nature of the music industry in the US versus UK.

The thing about the U.S. that most British bands don't get -- and Ally is OTM on this one -- is that it takes SHITLOADS of touring and persistence to make it. Unlike in the UK, where a few Radio 1 spins and you're the next big thing, here you have to press the flesh of every radio programmer and promoter and whoever.... It seems to me that Coldplay made a conscious effort to do this, plus they have that sort of broad, fratboy/sororitygirl appeal (same with Travis, although they're pretty much done now, right?).

I do think it's funny how the "cooler" indie bands are breaking in the UK before the US. That should tell you how much easier it is over there. But, again, I blame the institutions rather than any sort of dumb public... who, remarkably, DO tend to get it right most of the time.

so was 'song #1' the 'woo song', with just woo-(silence) woo-(silence), and then damon or alex or whoever was like, 'hey, wouldn't this song be even better if we made a 'hoo' noise right after the 'woo' noise? then it'd be sure to get selected to be used in annoying car commercials and the like...and then maybe a sizeable segment of the dumb-ass american public would buy our records, since they have no way of hearing our music through any other means, since all the airwaves are controlled by clear channel and just one other company, and their playlists have just 5 songs in rotation at any given space in time, and those 5 songs are by alanis morrisette, papa roach, blink-sum-#, avril lavigne, and lee greenwood....and the only record stores in the u.s. are big-box outfits like wal-mart and best buy, and they don't stock cds unless they include songs that people know from suv commercials....we can call it 'song #2', though anyone with any sensibilities will probably just refer to it as that really annoying new blur song in that car commercial, where they try to sound really 'rock' and keep going 'woo-hoo'"

if the dung and rancid eggplant prevent me from evaluating the 'woo-hoo' song as a quality one, then their presence is surely a blessing.

actually the american public is more crap than other countries'. no other country (with the possible exception of n. korea, and there they have no choice in the matter) has a public that is so bizarrely patriotic and jingoistic...& the public in other countries is not as arrogant, ignorant, unquestioning, consumed with nonsense...would never voice approval of the gang of criminals that the bush administration consists of...

...would never voice approval of the gang of criminals that the bush administration consists of...

You're VERY out-of-touch with American musicians dude.

broad, frat/sorority appeal=the public! the dumb-ass masses!

"And we forgot to mention MTV, the real tastemaker for teenagers' taste."

yeah. as i said in my earlier post, it's not just the the american mass public's tastes that's to blame, but also the american mass public tastemakers' tastes. basically it's mtv and the insanely conservative radio stations dicating to the american public by playing the same 5 songs over and over again. i'm not even going to address the nme vs the big american press like rolling stone or spin, 'cos even the very ink they all are printed with is the non-recyclable shit-based variety.

"But, again, I blame the institutions rather than any sort of dumb public... who, remarkably, DO tend to get it right most of the time"

they do get it right most of the time? what does you mean? now you are sounding like geir hongro. in fact, i think he said almost the exact same thing re the public in one of his posts yesterday.

I scratched my head. Cuz I don't remember when Dan the Automator and Del became citizens of the UK.

The Brit charts are pretty damn shoddy - but compared to the US charts, we are a pinnacle of creativity.

Cracking America is purely money based - and whenever there's the merest sniff of a success, the act themn needs to be dumbed down, any apparent creases ironed out, teeth fixed and music made as bland, uninteresting and generic as possible.

There's loads wrong in Britain - but thank God we still have the finest music acts in the world today.

yes, the 'song' is a fucking horror. i've heard people describe monster truck rallies as being rowdy fun, but that doesn't mean i have any interest in paying to witness one

'You're VERY out-of-touch with American musicians dude.'

like which ones? lee greenwood? or the iraq, i roll guy? god, i hope so. i think the 'american musicians' you're probably thinking of may as well be in the athletic shoe business or something. they're just interested in marketing a product, moving units. artistic creation (and i'm being very generous in referring to it as such) for them is just a means to making $.

Also: LEE GREENWOOD AND ALANIS MORRISSETTE???

seriously, i'm living in california. in a city. near the pacific ocean.

lee and alanis: i was trying to be humorous, hyperbolic...i figured anyone living in the u.s., in this sad cultural climate would get it as the joke that it was...and recognize the truth behind it.

supposed to be, yeah, but it's NOT FUNNY! it just sucks, i tell ya'! i don't like it when people take comedy in vain. thankfully that song had all but disappeared in the past couple years, and now it's been resurrected by this evil thread. i better go away. i hope the 'woo-hoos' don't follow me.

"Yes, DY, obviously all the Americans on this thread are recognizing the truth behind your jokes and posts, that's why we're all agreeing with you! You found us out!"

say what? you lost me. please dumb it down for poor dallas.

james, i thought 'yoda by the bay' was steve perry. i dunno if i could play something that would 'blow your mind'...not sure of your tastes. do you consider 'woo-hoo" to be mind-blowing?

and 'pop crap'?-- most of the music i like i would consider to be pop. just no pap, please.

alex in nyc, jeez...just 'cos i don't like 'woo-hoo', alanis, lee greenwood, blinks, sums, limp biscuits, and the one or two other things i poked fun at...that means i hate all music? tons of music appeals to me...like most people on these boards, too much. i actually like blur. just not anything after parklife.

ok, i grabbed some cd's that were piled on top of a speaker, that i haven't bothered to file back away yet...let's see: love, the tyde, hopkirk and lee, felt, mark hollis, big star, beach boys, the la's

and here's a stack of records i ain't got around to putting back where they belong: laura nyro, markley: a group, david ackles, paul williams, vu, steven halpern, chick corea, the buoys
yup, i hate all music. and trees, of course.

so your taste in soft drinks is as indiscriminate as your taste in blur songs...

If the Manics would stop eating pie and start being proactive, they'd get famous in the U.S. The question is, do they actually even give a shit at this point.

Anyway, sure there are lyrics and song titles that aren't particularly marxist. But, I mean, seriously, look at such titles as "Freedom Of Speech Won't Feed My Children". And also, there is the fact that they chose to play a concert in Cuba.

I am pretty sure you are right that hardly any Americans have ever heard of Manics. But why is that? Well, partly because Nicky Wire wouldn't even dream of touring a country he absolutely hates. But I also doubt a lot of American radio stations would have had the balls to put them in their playlists anyway.

Geir you have truly outdone yourself, bravo

Geir, you are aware the Manics existed prior to 2002 correct?

You cut away my reasoning. I always agree with whatever is critical towards US or Americans. Even speeches by Ayatollah Khomeiny, Idi Amin or Stalin would get a point in my book for the fact that they were at least anti-US. :-)

I suggest you give a listen to the other FIVE MANICS ALBUMS before you post about their socialist lyrics again, Geir.

More on Manics and marxism may be found following this link:
http://www.geocities.com/teal_c_2000/MANICS.html

Please explain how three examples plus one anti-American-race-relations song is "enough" to prove that a band with five albums plus non-album singles plus b-sides is too lyrically Marxist to make it outside of England (obv. a Marxist state in and of itself, correct?).

Also, please tell me that you are kidding with that link.

The Manics have been around for over a decade, Geir. You can't point to a handful of songs from the past two years, well into their failure with America, and blame them as the reason why the Manics didn't crack America. "Motorcycle Emptiness" is not exactly a hotbed of Leninistic rantings.

How very, very militant!

http://www.sonymusic.pl/grafika/specjaly/wywiady/d/msp.jpg

i wish i could agree with you, blount, about girls aloud's chances for us success, but i find them doubtful at best. the matrix/linda perry/ccm axis of non r&b-skewing girl-fronted pop dominating radio stations right now^* is a much more laid-back and, and i think this is crucial, a lot less busy than what girls aloud (and, to use another example, the sugababes) are putting out right now. when 'one touch' was released over here i wrote a review that said that america is not ready for the sugababes; i daresay that this is still the case.

^* i would say that britney can get away with more upbeat, less dentist's-office-friendly music because she is an already existent pop brand

http://radio.disney.go.com/music/top3.html

(also augh hampster dance!!)

Yeah right. I think your average rock fan in America could give two shits about what those brothers have to say, not that you could understand them anyway.

Talking big and acting like asses in a band that sounds like The Las might work to the punters in the UK, but it wasn't going to work over here, their music just doesn't have the testosterone.

Really? When did this happen? Did they really say they totally hate us Yanks? Is that why that album with "Go Let It Out" on it was such a monumental flop over here?

oasis faded cause their music is a bit wimpy which didn't go with their image which was allegedly all about being hooligans. they need to get barry bonds to deal them some roids.

it's pretty hard of me to think of any british acts nowadays that could be sufficiently bad-ass for certain american tastes -- in the back of our minds, we'll always be thinking "yeah they're tough by british standards. but let 'em be dropped off in the worst part of (random american city) and see how long it is before they get their limey asses kicked. fuckin' soccer riots ain't shit compared to what happens THERE!"

Maybe they could push the "Cheryl's a bit tasty with a right hook" angle for some hoolie kudos?

Girls Aloud have a song on Freaky Friday - maybe that'll do the trick.