Quote:
Originally Posted by Feather Blade
Isn't it funny how just under three years between albums was considered such a LONG wait. Sigh, how times change.
|
There was time in the music industry when it was standard for artists to constantly release music to stay marketable. Often they would produce several albums and/or singles in a year. Many groups/artists achieved great success and status despite being short lived.
One of my favorite groups of the sixites is The Mamas and Papas. They only existed for three years, but managed to make four albums between 1966-1968. (a fifth one was made in 1971, but only because they each were sued a million dollar fine for not fulfilling their record contract!)
Neil Young is one of those rare prolific artists who never seems to stop. He releases an at least one (sometimes two) albums a year. I've been attempting to keep up with him. I've acquired about forty of his albums, but I'm still about fifteen short...and he keeps on cranking them out!
I wish Fleetwood Mac, in it's Lindsey/Stevie configuration, could have been more prolific (which is why one last album from them is so significant). But consolation comes from the band's long, rich history and diversity, which served as a hub for solo ventures/careers and some great music.
When Mirage was released, it was portrayed in the media as a reunion, seemingly as if they broke up, since had been a long three years since their last album. It's hard to imagine them having made an album every three years. It's just wasn't their fate, for better or worse.