The Issue:
In case you needed further evidence that what passes as popular music is void of any artistic integrity---

Lee:  
Honestly though, this brings up a good debate.  I don't think Patti's made a bad record.  I don't own the last one, but I've got the others. Do you have stats on them?  Arista's tried to break her (I still don't understand why "People Have The Power" wasn't a top 20 single), but I think from that point on (Dream Of Life) - it was over.  Wouldn't Patti have been better off doing it on her own (or on a smaller imprint)?  She would have had the option of re-signing or gettng distribution from someone if she had a hit.  And, there's where my argument kicks in.  If Patti pressed up 30,000 copies of Gung Ho on her own, things would be pretty great.  If she'd have done 50,000 it wouldn't be as good, and ANY sales lost to Napster would be felt.  Do you know how many Arista pressed?  I know they spent some bucks, (I've seen the stuff for sale on eBay), but there's obviously been no return.  But, Clive loves her, so she stays on the label.  I'm glad the stuff's out there, but when it gets down to numbers, you need as many as possible when you're in that position.  

Dan:
Patti Smith has passed the commercial peak in her career and has been watching it get smaller in the rear view mirror for quite some time now. It has nothing to do with the quality of the music she's releasing (which is excellent), it's just the way it works. Not everybody who bought the last Patti Smith album is going to buy this one. Not everyone who bought this one is going to buy the next. Why? A music consumer also reaches a peak and then begins to buy less and less, meaning there's fewer guaranteed sales with each subsequent release. Meanwhile, the flow of new fans will also dry up and, well, you do the math. Even a commercially successful artist like John Mellencamp now finds it hard to get airplay when he puts out a new record. That's because the pop music charts are determined by the young buying public for the most part and they're usually going to purchase what they consider to be the new, fresh sounds. It's been this way at least since the advent of rock and roll, but what stinks now is the lack of quality "product" aimed at the youngsters today. There was Presley in the 50's, The Beatles in the 60's...even Elton John early on and Michael Jackson at his peak...that was some good stuff there. Good stuff that still holds up today.

Jack:
I think that it is often commercially "over" for artists like Patti because there is not a real outlet or radio format for artists of their kind or demographic. Combine that with an aging fan base that is decreasing their record purchases (if they buy at all) and you've got shrinking sales in the face of great reviews (so much for critics driving sales these days). Enter the internet sales model. You are right on the money if Patti decreases her overhead (leave Arista -- which she is doing to follow Clive where ever he goes) by selling direct she will make real money on what are low sales figures (see "Crystal Ball", Prince made about 5 million on it with low sales figures). It's the future and I hope she sees it clearly before signing a new record contract. 
So what does happen to artistically vibrant but aging performers in an time of disposable pop music? (please exclude a certain Neil Young in your answer-- an obvious exception to any rule)  
  Who out of the current group of top selling billboard artists is even going to have something remotely called a career??  

Dan:
Does anyone honestly think people will be talking about Britney Spears or Limp Bizkit  ten years from now? Are they talking about Tiffany or the Spin Doctors now? Which triggers a happy thought when you ponder the existence of Patti Smith in the world today. She still continues to make viable music, it's still being released and there are still people out there who want to hear it. That's a whole lot better than the "dropping off the face of the earth because nobody cares" option. (Or surrounding herself with the hot young "name artists" of today and producing a piece of work that becomes a commercial success and award winning dynamo but fails to live up the the high quality standards of her previous body of work.)

Yes, Neil Young is the one guy who runs rings around the aging artist  theory ...and God bless him for it

What do you think? 
Post you reply to our community bulletin board.