ABBA vs. Bee Gees
Jason Schmit
Number of hits?
Number of gold albums?
etc.
Cheers,
Jason
sfp
Abba were very successful for their `span` from the mid 70`s to early 80`s
but the Bee Gees blitzed them in terms of success (2nd best selling group of
all time after the Beatles - 5th most successful act after presly,beatles,
jacko and mccartney) Then there is all their song writing for others that
were successful.
The Bee Gees (esp in the US in the mid/late 70`s) were massive (and yes Abba
were massive too) with 6 consecutive number 1s and at one stage *5* tracks
either by them or written by them in the top ten at the same time.
to put it another way - they are not short of a few bob ;)
PaulT
--
-= This outgoing mail was scanned by Norton Antivirus Professional 2003 =-
"Jason Schmit" <mail2...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Zhk6a.60289$Hb.16...@news1.west.cox.net...
maggtt2000
Whereas the Bee Gees have recorded from the last 1960's to present
day, they have only sold 120 millions records worldwide. ABBA who were
only a group for less than 10 years have sold over 300 million. They
rank as the 2nd most popular group in the world regardless of what the
Bee Gees documentry had to say.
ABBA Gold, which was released almost a decade after they broke up has
raked up sales of 30 million making it the biggest selling
complilation of a group ever.
The facts as quoted below are almost word for word from the Bee Gees
documentry, and well, repeating a false fact does not make it true.
M
* Mick
I wasn't aware it was a competition.
sfp
abba gold)! - seriously, regardless of popularity/ cultism and sales of
greatist hits albums - the facts ARE that they are the 5th most succesful
(read money made) artists in the world. I do not know where ABBA would be on
that list, yet I do recognize (as I did originally) that ABBA were a
phenomenon all of their own in the seventies (and I do like them) and this
would explain their popularity and wealth. The BEE GEES are not my number
one favourite group - just one of them (prob 2nd/3rd), so I have no reason
to falsify what is pretty much general knowledge. If this general knowledge
is proven to be wrong, then I have no qualms in admitting, i`d be more
concered as to WHY the music industry and docu makers would lie in this way.
And that `fault` would be fall at their feet and not mine. `Don`t shoot the
messenger` - if its wrong just say its wrong without getting cocky about it.
OK to put it another way - if you are saying Bee Gees sold just over
120million records, and ABBA (apparently) sold over 300 million - this does
not take into account, royalties from song writing etc - which makes the
brothers gibb as succesful as they are - popularity is very hard to measure
Popularity can change from year to year - and an overall ammount of records
sold doesn`t always sum up a groups ongoing popularity. I concede that Abba
may be more popular to the average person in the street.
PaulT
--
-= This outgoing mail was scanned by Norton Antivirus Professional 2003 =-
<maggtt2000> wrote in message news:3e673de3....@news.qsi.net.nz...
sfp
the most money, and I thought it was the BEE GEES (going on what everything
I have to hand tells me), I really do not care if it is ABBA - success like
that has meant nothing to me over the years - my number one favourite band,
is a group from Chester in the uk who you have probably never heard of...
And I think they are all the better for not being `mega stars`.
I also didn`t realise it was a `troll` like post in some respects as it was
x-posted to the ABBA newsgroup too. And I for one will not be drawn into
petty arguments about the two groups cos I think they are both great, but
to me the Bee Gees have a far greater legacy, catalogue and of course are
still going (after a fashion).
PaulT
--
-= This outgoing mail was scanned by Norton Antivirus Professional 2003 =-
"* Mick" <n...@org.org.org> wrote in message
news:dNX6a.107423$F63.2...@news.xtra.co.nz...
maggtt2000
The facts are correct, the tone is not. (however the doco did annoy me
on this point). The facts that they were stating I would have to guess
were for the US market, not worldwide.
The fact of the matter is that both are brilliant in their own right,
and I should not have detracted from this point. I am not a Bee Gees
fan, but it is only their brilliance as song writers and performers
that has kept them near the top of the music industry for 30 something
years.
The itinial question was 'who is the most popular/gold albums etc,
well this 'is' determined by album sales. The last details I know of
from the Guinness Book of Records, was that the Beatles were so far in
front at over a billion album sales, that nobody is even close. For
popular music, ABBA came a 'distant' second at over 300 million.
As for popularity, yes I concede, this does not have to be based on
sales. Most of the most popular groups at the moment will have only
limited sales, So, I would have to say that the popularity of the Bee
Gees is very strong at the moment, and again it is well deserved.
So, sorry for sounding cocky, I was trying to correct a fact.
M
Jason Schmit
a gentlemen's bet with a friend... that's all, nothing more. I appreciate
the responses and also happen to like both ABBA and the Bee Gees, and The
Who, Beatles, Rolling Stones, Kinks, and many more artists.
Cheers,
Jason
"sfp" <nos...@noway.com> wrote in message
news:7lY6a.554$lV6.2...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
sfp
No. :)
> So, sorry for sounding cocky, I was trying to correct a fact.
>
> M
OK - we are all friends again - seems the isle of man and sweden can get
along again ;)
Beatles = great group
ABBA = great group ( Who I personally like more than the Beatles!)
ELO = Great group (who I personally like more than ABBA)
Bee Gees = Great group (who I personally like more than ELO)
(insert at least 2 groups here that I prefer to all to the above (one was
very big in the early 80`s, the other is the aforementioned `mystery`
Chester Band led by Paul Draper) - but they are all so close (except the
beatles, I really dig a lot of what they did, but on a personal level I
don`t get as much enjoyment from their songs as I do from the Brothers Gibb
for instance) - we should just be thankful there IS such beautiful /
interesting music around that will last forever, in the face of *most* of
the current crop of crap)
PaulT
sfp
> ABBA = great group ( Who I personally like more than the Beatles!)
> ELO = Great group (who I personally like more than ABBA)
> Bee Gees = Great group (who I personally like more than ELO)
hmm I forgot Queen in my quick sum up of big 70`s bands that I really
like... (insert between ABBA and ELO) ah well. And if anyone is wondering, I
don`t just like big 70`s supergroups I am only 28 after all, it`s just that
I grew up listening to the above through parents ;)
PaulT
Angel
> Chester Band led by Paul Draper) - but they are all so close (except the
I went to see Mansun in Newcastle about 4 or 5 years ago and they were
great, their new album's out soon aswell.
sfp
Yes Ive seen them in cardiff couple years back (and bristol last year) heard
the small selection of new tracks they had = great. Pics on my site of their
gig (www.spacehotel.tk) in the html version. The new album will be out
around summer I bet, which for me is not `soon` ;) -
sorry for OT didn`t think anyone would know who I was on about :) out of
interest were you replying from alt.music, abba or beegees?
PaulT
--
-= This outgoing mail was scanned by Norton Antivirus Professional 2003 =-
"Angel" <m...@me.com> wrote in message
news:vz47a.5250$EN3....@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net...
Angel
> Yes Ive seen them in cardiff couple years back (and bristol last year)
heard
> the small selection of new tracks they had = great. Pics on my site of
their
> gig (www.spacehotel.tk) in the html version. The new album will be out
> around summer I bet, which for me is not `soon` ;) -
>
> sorry for OT didn`t think anyone would know who I was on about :) out of
> interest were you replying from alt.music, abba or beegees?
I haven't heard any of their new stuff yet. I was replying from
alt.music.abba
Lipgor
the world is the fact that they were signed up with countless labels
around the world. 99% of other artists had only one label taking care
of them, so it's pretty easy now to trace the sales of those artists
even back to the 60s. This is the case with The Bee Gees.
Only now with Universal it becomes possible to know the worldwide
sales of Abba Gold, More Gold, Box Set, and their re-releases.
Anyone who read C-M. Palm book "Complete Recording Sessions" could
recall that the author had huge problems with tracing the recording
dates, etc because so much of a paperwork at Polar has been misplaced
or lost over the years. So it's hard to make correct estimates. One
has to contact different former Abba labels some of which don't exist
anymore to calculate the estimate or rely on sales accounts from those
years only.
As I understand, Universal don't really care about those estimates
(they are happy with 350 millions), and Abba themselves or their
business associates never tried to get that information.
I tried to estimate the amount of how much Abba sold in the States
overall, incl. Gold, and singles. It's around 20 million copies. It's
quite easy to do. Check the chart positions if you don't know the
sales, and you can make a pretty good estimate. For example, Super
Trouper single was #45, so it means that around 80,000 - 100, 000
copies in general were sold. On the other hand, it's known that
Dancing Queen was a "gold" single, in the 70s, it meant that 1 million
copies was sold (currently "gold" is 0.5 million singles sold). So
"Dancing Queen" total will be 1million plus, perhaps 1,1 -1,2
millions, because there were still sales after it's been certified
gold.
I wonder if Atlantic still has correct Abba sales figures in America.
Also, with Abba in America the problem is that the group didn't have
any releases in the country for 10 years until 1993, because they
didn't have a label there after they stopped recording. Atlantic, as I
recall, ended the contract with Abba in 1983. During those 10 years,
noone re-issued their LPs on CDs in America, and the only way to get
them was to buy import titles which were not added to domestic sales.
Lipgor
CatGOD29
>the world is the fact that they were signed up with countless labels
>around the world. 99% of other artists had only one label taking care
>of them, so it's pretty easy now to trace the sales of those artists
>even back to the 60s. This is the case with The Bee Gees.
The problem with any claim is one has to take the word of the source that the
figures are accurate, whether that source is the artist or group or the record
labels. Michael Jackson, for instance, seems to feel that all of his albums
since "Thriller" have sold more copies than what the figures have to say (he
claimed at one point that "HIStory" sold some 30,000,000 albums) - a claim that
would be believable if the facts supported his claim. His albums have shelf
life (longevity) but his old recordings (in the US anyway) don't each move
10,000 copies per week.
I'd like to believe that ABBA has sold 350 million recordings worldwide but
I've got some doubts about the claim. For starters, I remember hearing that
claim in '79 while ABBA was still together. One would think that after almost
twenty-five years, that total would've been upped.
As for some of the sources, such as the Guiness World Book of Records, I do
not accept any of their claims on any of the artists listed in their books -
such as the Beatles or Elvis or ABBA - for one simple reason: they have never
seen the account books on any of the various labels and further, the labels are
not going to allow them to see the books. So the Guiness books proclaiming this
artist or that artist has sold a certain amount is a baseless claim. (They also
used to mention in their book that Bing Crosby had sold some 800,000,000
recordings but I believe that claim is no longer listed.)
As you mention, ABBA being on countless labels around the world is the major
problem with the figures claimed. Labels tend to be more interested in
promoting acts that are signed directly to the label. As far as ABBA is
concerned, the labels had distribution rights to the recordings but I don't
believe that ABBA as a group were signed to any of the labels. No matter what
label an ABBA recording was released on, it was always noted somewhere on the
label that the recording belonged to Polar and not to the label it was on.
ABBA did respectable business in the US but I always felt that Atlantic
didn't promote them as much as they could have because they weren't signed to
the label per se. The albums should've done better on the charts than what they
did - same holds true for the singles.
>Only now with Universal it becomes possible to know the worldwide
>sales of Abba Gold, More Gold, Box Set, and their re-releases.
>
Maybe, although I'm not sure Universal is all that interested in promoting
ABBA or any other act from the 60s or 70s. The Bee Gees's contract with
Universal ended with the release of "The Record: Their Greatest Hits" and the
Bee Gees weren't interested in negotiating a new contract with them. The Moody
Blues - who used to have their own label! - likewise were signed to Universal
but were unhappy with the lack of promotion for their last studio album and
bolted from the label.
>Anyone who read C-M. Palm book "Complete Recording Sessions" could
>recall that the author had huge problems with tracing the recording
>dates, etc because so much of a paperwork at Polar has been misplaced
>or lost over the years. So it's hard to make correct estimates. One
>has to contact different former Abba labels some of which don't exist
>anymore to calculate the estimate or rely on sales accounts from those
>years only.
>As I understand, Universal don't really care about those estimates
>(they are happy with 350 millions), and Abba themselves or their
>business associates never tried to get that information.
>
Universal, through its acquisition of Polydor/Polygram, has the publishing on
the songs and they're happy with that (with the success of the stage play
"Mamma Mia," who wouldn't be?). However, I also remember reading a few years
back that the four ABBA members were unhappy with the artist royalty
arrangements (as well as the publishing royalties for Benny, Bjorn and Agnetha)
on the reissues and were trying to have the contracts rescinded. That Universal
still has them must mean they worked out the disputes or that the lawyers for
ABBA couldn't find a way to break the contracts.
>I tried to estimate the amount of how much Abba sold in the States
>overall, incl. Gold, and singles. It's around 20 million copies. It's
>quite easy to do. Check the chart positions if you don't know the
>sales, and you can make a pretty good estimate. For example, Super
>Trouper single was #45, so it means that around 80,000 - 100, 000
>copies in general were sold. On the other hand, it's known that
>Dancing Queen was a "gold" single, in the 70s, it meant that 1 million
>copies was sold (currently "gold" is 0.5 million singles sold). So
>"Dancing Queen" total will be 1million plus, perhaps 1,1 -1,2
>millions, because there were still sales after it's been certified
>gold.
Billboard's album and single charts do not necessarily reflect the true sales
figure: an album may be a slow seller, be on the charts for a long period of
time, long enough to qualify for the minimal gold award. Case in point: several
of Elvis Presley's soundtrack albums were slow sellers, had lousy chart
positions but long shelf life and sold well enough to eventually earn gold
record awards. Some sold well enough to qualify for the platinum award (don't
know if those albums have been certified as such).
The standard for a gold single is the same as it's always been: one million
copies sold, although most of the labels in the US don't even bother with
singles anymore. The standard for a gold album is the same: 500,000 copies. An
album is certified platinum for sales of one million copies while a single (if
it's available) must sell two million copies for platinum certification.
Any album which sells in excess of ten million copies is eligible for the
RIAA's diamond award. However, the RIAA does have a practice which is
deceptive: on packages with two or more discs, if the package sells enough to
meet the qualifications for any of the awards, the RIAA treats each disc in a
multi-unit package as if each disc sold whatever figure is claimed. Thus, if a
label issued a five disc set on a certain artist and the box set sold five
million copies, the RIAA would acknowledge that box set as having sold
25,000,000, instead of what was actually sold.
sfp
>
>
> > Yes Ive seen them in cardiff couple years back (and bristol last year)
> heard
> > the small selection of new tracks they had = great. Pics on my site of
> their
> > gig (www.spacehotel.tk) in the html version.
> I haven't heard any of their new stuff yet. I was replying from
> alt.music.abba
ok last post on this as I don`t want to continually be Off topic AND cross
posting.
I heard 5 new tracks (as my page/gig review says) secrets, keep telling
myself, getting your way, this is my home and slipping away. 4 of them were
excellent, a lot more like the old days but with new twists and very loud
(and rocking), `keep telling myself` was slower and very polished even then.
You can get bootlegs on the net from a few mansun sites, but maybe waiting
for the album is a good thing - hear them properly the first time.
Paul
Lipgor
positions, but still one can do that based on a position in the charts
and total number of weeks in the chart.
In fact, I mis-typed my estimate of sales in US. It's actually around
28 million copies.
What I'm surprised about is that noone close to Abba actually tried to
make an accurate estimate. It seems that everyone is satisfied with
the figure of 350 million which, in fact, is not corroborated by
actual sales research.
I don't know whether it was Atlantic who didn't promote Abba enough
in the States. I don't think Abba tried THAT HARD to make it really
big in America. They never even visited the country for TV promotion
as a group after 1979 tour, only sent their promotional films.
And still, despite that absolute lack of promotion , The Winner Takes
It All single hit #8 on Billboard Hot 100 and #1 on Adult Contemporary
charts, and Super Trouper album reached #17 and sold close to 1
million. Can you imagine what could've happened if they truly wanted
to become megastars in the US and came, at least, for TV and radio
appearances for a couple of weeks couple of times a year?
Lipgor
Shatanzo
>in the States. I don't think Abba tried THAT HARD to make it really
>big in America. They never even visited the country for TV promotion
>as a group after 1979 tour, only sent their promotional films.
>And still, despite that absolute lack of promotion , The Winner Takes
>It All single hit #8 on Billboard Hot 100 and #1 on Adult Contemporary
>charts, and Super Trouper album reached #17 and sold close to 1
>million. Can you imagine what could've happened if they truly wanted
>to become megastars in the US and came, at least, for TV and radio
>appearances for a couple of weeks couple of times a year?
>
>Lipgor
fan of Abba's and pop music in general. In the seventies, it it wasn't album
rock, music had no credibility.Not my opinion, but that was the consensus in
America. Abba had no way of making it big because they were labeled bubblegum(
although my true definition,they weren't). Europe had more of a pop flavor so
Abba was huge. Just boiled down to different cultures.
Jeff Thomas
> Which of the above two bands have been more successful and/or popular?
ABBA remains the most successful and popular popgroup since The Beatles.
Currently, around 7 million albums are sold yearly with fans buying an
average of 824 ABBA albums every hour. Few groups can attain such sales.
Remaining the only, popgroup offered the highest amount ever for any group
to reform of US$1 Billion for hundred concerts around the world.
The covergroup, "Bjorn Again" are filling the void, for live stage
performances and has been operating since 1989. Rarely, do covergroups
last that long.
As for popularity, the group's music is revived within "Mamma Mia!"
musical which is breaking box office sales everywhere its been from
Broadway to London.
Lipgor
> In the seventies, it it wasn't album
> rock, music had no credibility.Not my opinion, but that was the consensus in
> America. Abba had no way of making it big because they were labeled bubblegum(
> although my true definition,they weren't). Europe had more of a pop flavor so
> Abba was huge. Just boiled down to different cultures.
I strongly disagree with that. Olivia Newton-John is just one example
of being a pure bubblegum and still making it really big in the
States.
Just consider this. After their tour in 1979 Abba as a group NEVER
came to America again, and despite that they still had hit singles and
albums.
As far as Abba and bubblegum, it seems that they projected themselves
in the States as a pure bubblegum. Just watch the ABC "Olivia" show
with Abba. It's one of the cheesiest programs I've ever seen, the only
cool part being a jam session. All the rest is sickly sugary.
The book about "Saturday Night Live" recently came out, and it says
that Abba were the only artists in the history of the program who
fully "lip-synched" their performance ( I don't think it's true, by
the way), and represented kitsch. I think it's true, just look at
their clothes on this show.
I don't say that they were bad, they were just inappropriate for this
show which was billed as very "hip". They should've chosen something
quite different.
I am quite convinced that Abba did not have any serious marketing
strategy for America. Sid Bernstein in his book says that there was
nothing wrong with Abba music and he is convinced that Abba simply
were not promoted properly in America. I think that Abba just didn't
care that they were not as big in America as elsewhere. I mean they
never really tried to be huge in the States. I don't believe for a
second that it's American public that was blind and didn't appreciate
Abba.
It's just that Abba were nowhere to be seen.
maggtt2000
I would have to say that ABBA were very successful in the USA. When
you consider how many groups have been around in the last 35 years,
there can't be many that say that they have sold this many. They may
not be in the top 5, but would consider them to be in the top 100. So
I do think that they were popular, just not as popular as everyone
expected them to be.
I do not believe that promoting themselves had much to do with it. You
just have to look at Roxette, they were massive in the USA before
reeasing their first single. And then look at David Bowie, who
promoted himself heavily, but only made slight inroads to the US
Market.
I believe (and it is only my opinion), that yes, it did have to do
with the US public. ABBA were not snubbed, but Americans considered
that other people (like Olivia Newton John, Bee Gees, Donna Summer
etc) were already catering for this type of music, and in their eyes
doing it better.
The American market has always been hard to get into, that is why you
have groups that are extremely popluar in Europe/Asia but America has
no interest. And as ABBA were also lucrative business people, rather
than pushing for a market they already knew they could not conquer,
they instead pushed (successfully) into the Japanese and Latin America
market.
And, well, I wish that 'somebody' was able to determine accurately
their sales worldwide in comparison to other groups. The Guinness Book
of Records is the only source I know, and is so unreliable. At one
stage The Beatles had sold 500 million, and ABBA 350 million, then I
believe this has been amended to Beatles to something like 1.2 billion
and ABBA down to 300 million. Rumor has it that this will drop further
to 250 million. So, ABBA will be in their books again as the group
with the fastest unselling records! (so are 100 million people
returning their records after 30 years?)
Does anyone know for sure how many albums were 'offcially' sold in the
US, and what other groups have done in comparison? And website anyone
can direct me to?
thanks
Maggott
Lipgor
> just have to look at Roxette, they were massive in the USA before
> reeasing their first single.
Roxette's case is unique. And don't forget that American student who
brought their record to the radiostation sued the group. I wonder on
what grounds...
> The American market has always been hard to get into, that is why you
> have groups that are extremely popluar in Europe/Asia but America has
> no interest. And as ABBA were also lucrative business people, rather
> than pushing for a market they already knew they could not conquer,
> they instead pushed (successfully) into the Japanese and Latin America
> market.
If you look at the schedule of Abba's visitis to the US and the time
of their US releases and the way they projected themselves to the US
audience, you'd understand why I think they never really had any
strategy in properly promoting themselves in the States.
> Does anyone know for sure how many albums were 'offcially' sold in the
> US, and what other groups have done in comparison? And website anyone
> can direct me to?
The only indirect sales figures when Abba were active are available
through different Billboard chart books . So you will know which
singles and albums were gold and platinum. Or you may want to contact
Atlantic or K-Tel.
While neither Fernando nor Name of The Game were certified gold as
singles, at the time Atlantic reported that sales of each single were
close to 1 million.
Lipgor
Raimund Scheucher
wrote:
>Jason Schmit wrote:
>
>Currently, around 7 million albums are sold yearly with fans buying an
>average of 824 ABBA albums every hour. Few groups can attain such sales.
>
>Remaining the only, popgroup offered the highest amount ever for any group
>to reform of US$1 Billion for hundred concerts around the world.
>
We should stop to through our money into any direction of Björn,
Benny, Agnetha or Frida! They have sooooo much money from us! ... at
least ENOUGH money to life like kings.
I have bought all records as LP, Cassettes and CDs. They did not give
us any new records/compositions. Only unknown Recordings from the 70s
are on "new" CDs or the internet.
The former ABBA members seems to give a shit on us fans. They stopped
ABBA, because they THOUGHT that we do not like more recordings from
them. History showed they was wrong, but they did not continue. :-(((
Bee Gees are the oposit. I like the music of ABBA more, but the Bee
Gees are fair. Although they often did not like each other, they came
again and again together to compose and record new music. ... and very
often: very good music.
mfg
Raimund
Angel
"Raimund Scheucher" <Raimund....@MarsSociety.de> wrote in message
news:cpf76vsrc2sgjn933...@4ax.com...
Oh dear, someone hasn't been taking their medication!!!
Lipgor
> If the figures quoted for US sales are correct ie 30 million ... then
> I would have to say that ABBA were very successful in the USA. When
> you consider how many groups have been around in the last 35 years,
> there can't be many that say that they have sold this many. They may
> not be in the top 5, but would consider them to be in the top 100. So
> I do think that they were popular, just not as popular as everyone
> expected them to be.
People tend to forget that Abba were a fixture on the US charts,
especially singles chart, for almost a decade - 1974-1982. They had 14
Top40 Hits on Billboard Hot 100, and 10 Top20 Hits.
It's just because they rarely came to the country and kept a generally
low-key profile, they were not considered a major commercial force
here.
These are my rough estimates of total Abba sales in the US:
21 singles charted:
10 Top 20 Hits – 10 million copies
4 Top 40 Hits - 1.5 – 2.0 million copies
7 Top100 and bubl. under – 1 million copies
Total: 13 million
Albums:
1.Waterloo and Abba – total – 0.2-0.3 million
2. GH1 – 1.3 million
3. Arrival – 0.9 million
4. The Album – 1.3 mln
5. Voulez Vous – 0.9 mln
6. GH1 – 0.8 mln
7. Super Trouper – 0.9 mln
8. The Visitors – 0.4 mln
9. The Singles – 0.4 mln
10. Abba Gold – 6.5 mln
11. More Gold – 0.2 mln (Billboard report on sales)
12. Abba Oro (and Mas Oro) – 0.3 mln (the same)
13. Definitive Collection – 0.2 mln (the same)
14. The Magic of Abba – 1.9 mln (according to VH-1 TV feature on K-Tel
label which released that compilation)
Total: 16.3 million
Grand Total: 29.3 million, not including US original album (1999 and
2001) CD re-issues. So it's roughly 30 million copies by now.
Lipgor
Podmix
>
> "Raimund Scheucher" <Raimund....@MarsSociety.de> wrote in message
> news:cpf76vsrc2sgjn933...@4ax.com...
> > ABBA, because they THOUGHT that we do not like more recordings from
> > them. History showed they was wrong, but they did not continue. :-(((
> >
> > Bee Gees are the oposit. I like the music of ABBA more, but the Bee
> > Gees are fair. Although they often did not like each other, they came
> > again and again together to compose and record new music. ... and very
> > often: very good music.
> >
> > mfg
> > Raimund
>
> Oh dear, someone hasn't been taking their medication!!!
I have been!
It still didn't make any sense to me either....
Maybe a change of dosage?
Podmix
Jeff Thomas
bootlegs for years.
Never before released tracks, made available in recent years:
"I Am The City" (1993 on "More ABBA Gold"), "Put On Your White Sombrero" (1993
as a cd-single and bonus track on reissued 1997/2001 "Super Trouper" album), a
huge collection of previously 'deleted' stuff and other rarities (1994
"ThankYou For The Music" 4-disc boxset) and lately, the extended version of
"Voulez-Vous" (2002 "The Definitive Collection" 2-disc set). And possibly, more
stuff!
Podmix
"Jeff Thomas" <a2fo...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:3E70FB28...@usa.net...
And the best part is that they'll release it in little dribs and drabs.
I can hardly wait for the next amazing release of whatever unreleased track
to appear in 2005, then another in 2008 etc.
It's not bad releasing 3 tracks in 10 years... still, can't complain. At
least we got 'em...
Cheers
Podmix
Raimund Scheucher
wrote:
>Actually, they have released new recordings that were in the vaults and
Most of this records I know ... but they was made before 1982 ... and
you can remix as much as you want ... the basic material is from the
70's or early 80's ... 20 to 30 years old. They do not produce
anything ... "Chess" was good ... made in the 80's ... but the newer
stuff is ... eeeeehhhh ... let's say strange and not compareable with
the music of ABBA.
Why do they nothing more? ... ANSWER: They have enough money! They are
not hungry to fulfil our wishes. If we are happy or not ... they are
not interested. They do what they want ... and they want not to make
music to make as much people as possible happy.
As we say in german ... "sch.....ade".
Raimund
Gary Kirchherr
Raimund Scheucher <Raimund....@web.de> wrote:
> Why do they nothing more? ... ANSWER: They have enough money! They are
> not hungry to fulfil our wishes. If we are happy or not ... they are
> not interested. They do what they want ... and they want not to make
> music to make as much people as possible happy.
This isn't entirely fair. ABBA churned out great music for a decade, but
people grow, and it was time for them to move on with their lives. But
you're saying they're being selfish because their lives don't revolve
around pleasing *you.*
The idea that they must stay together to make their fans happy is itself
incredibly selfish. Who wants to be doing exactly the same thing they
were doing 20 years ago? And why should they?
Podmix
"Gary Kirchherr" <lo...@me.now> wrote in message
news:look-40FF1F.2...@news.newsguy.com...
Also, added to that: from a purely philosophical musical point, what sort of
artistic or musical value can be gained from creating music purely for the
purpose of pleasing the fans?
One of the things I've always admired ABBA for was the fact that they made
music that they were (generally) happy with. Not just to please a bunch of
fickle fans.
They always said they'd continue doing it as long as it was fun (and let's
face it, what's wrong with a little self-gratification, now & then;-).
It stopped being fun, and they stuck to their word and stopped ABBA. At
least they were honest to themselves.
Cheers
Podmix
Can Altinbay
more? Many other acts have continued on and on, producing worse and worse
stuff until by some miracle, they broke up.
"Podmix" <pod...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:Ogcfa.118$OZ6....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...