Madonna's new song

[julieann]

These songs make the list because they were all released towards the beginning of the time period. How do you expect a song to make a "best of the decade" list when it was released less than 5 years ago or even just last year? Look at a more recent round up of radio songs and get back to me. I also have constantly spoken of POP and that is what I am referring to. Madonna's airplay is in no way affected by what goes on in country radio and 3 of those songs are by country artists. Who cares if country radio likes playing older artists, Madonna is not a country artist. The other acts are ALL considered HAC/AC staples. None of them are Pop staples anymore. Guess the average age of Pop radio listeners compared to country/HAC/AC.

P.S. I am rounding up the ages of all the singers/lead singers and so far Kroeger (lead singer of Nickelback) was in his 20's when the song was released. The lead singer of Lifehouse was in his lower 20s! I can't find the age of the lead singer of 3 Doors Down but what do you know, their song was released in 2001. I am willing to bet he was in his 20's as well. Womack and Hill were not in their 20's but again, country. Train lead singer appears to be in his 30's upon released but what do you know, the song released in 2001. So what did you do? You found a list of the biggest hits of 2001 that continued to get radio play throughout the decade. It says absolutely NOTHING of which you claim.

Only two of those artists were in their early 20s, the rest were 27 and older. Nielsen scans all stations not just country and BTW, the the "country" songs were played so heavily on mainstream pop stations it launch Faith Hill to a new fan base that she would not have otherwise enjoyed and still does.

It really had nothing to do with age, Madonna's new song sucks, no matter if a 53 year old is singing it dancing around with pom-poms or Katy Perry, the song is just bad.

I wish she would have sung Ray of Light, I think with the screens on the floor it would have looked and sounded really cool.

[orbitz]

She might have a concert at the new stadium in Wroclaw this year but I don't think I am willing to spend a huge amount of money to see her lip-synch, regardless of how impressive the staging is.

Madonna usually sings live for at least 90% of her concert.

[Ziggy]

They certainly were at the time she worked with them, if you would bother to find out anything about them.

It's one thing to be accomplished in the music industry and it's another thing to be recognised, seen as edgy and cool, etc. by Madonna's target audience.

Justin Timberlake and Nicki Minaj have both sold a lot of records and are/were seen as quite hip.

M.I.A. is edgy and loved by the indie crowd.

Did you catch RuPaul's tweet to Madonna, pre-Super Bowl?

Madonna, the time has come for U to ...

If you're not a RuPaul's Drag Race viewer, that's the line that comes at the end of every episode.

Madonna usually sings live for at least 90% of her concert.

Ok, in this case I might maybe desist from eating for three months and shell out a huge amount of money to see her live.

[Kruss]

I hate her new song but I think she did a great job for the halftime performance. It was entertaining, and yeah she was lip-syncing at some points, but she had to do some dancing so that's not surprising. I would never pay $300 to go see her live, but she knows how to put on a good show.

Madonna usually sings live for at least 90% of her concert.

Madonna is one of the few pop singers who does sing live with all the dancing she does. Which is why her lip-synching bothered me last night.

I still think Springsteen and The Who had the best half-time shows of recent years. Even with diminished vocal ability, they really did a great job - and they sung live!

[loulou]

I hate her new song but I think she did a great job for the halftime performance.

I'm a fan. And yet I don't like her new song and didn't like the show. Which is unfortunate because even when I didn't like the songs, I've always loved the shows.

This time:

• she visibly struggled with her balance during her developpe in Vogue;
• she tripped at the beginning of Music (while trying to climb a bench);
• the lip-synching was either badly done or looked so since we're not used to see Madonna do it;
• the vocal was shy;
• she lacked energy overall in a was I've never noticed before.

but she knows how to put on a good show.

She does! That's why I think she must be disappointed too. Also, that couldn't be unforseen for someone as experienced as she is: why did she accept the gig if she couldn't pull it off? - Money's not enough of a reason. Madonna has always been all about money, as long as the job was well done.

It really had nothing to do with age, Madonna's new song sucks, no matter if a 53 year old is singing it dancing around with pom-poms or Katy Perry, the song is just bad.

Agreed.

Madonna is one of the few pop singers who does sing live with all the dancing she does. Which is why her lip-synching bothered me last night.

Second that.


Do you guys remember her Live Earth back in 2007?
That one was amazing.
Ray of Light
Hung Up
La Isla Bonita
All the other songs too that day were incredible!
Choreograpies were smart, costumes well designed, songs well chosen, dancers were cool, she moved and sung like she was 20, she was as beautiful as she ever got - and her developpe during Hung Up was catchy.

[Aussie Willy]

It really had nothing to do with age, Madonna's new song sucks, no matter if a 53 year old is singing it dancing around with pom-poms or Katy Perry, the song is just bad.

Agree. It is just a bad song.

[manleywoman]

[*]the lip-synching was either badly done or looked so since we're not used to see Madonna do it;

Keep in mind that she may have been lip sycing perfectly, but the audio traveling to the camera was a few seconds off. When I saw Michael Jackson in concert ages ago, I was sitting waaaay back. His lips moving on screen did not match what I was hearing by the time the sound got to me.

[loulou]

Keep in mind that she may have been lip sycing perfectly, but the audio traveling to the camera was a few seconds off. When I saw Michael Jackson in concert ages ago, I was sitting waaaay back. His lips moving on screen did not match what I was hearing by the time the sound got to me.

Which Madonna should've taken into account.

I'm sorry: I don't mean to make my point at all costs, it's just that however you spin this, it doesn't look good.

[PeterG]

I still think Springsteen and The Who had the best half-time shows of recent years. Even with diminished vocal ability, they really did a great job - and they sung live!

But their dance routines were utterly horrid!!!

[orbitz]

She does! That's why I think she must be disappointed too. Also, that couldn't be unforseen for someone as experienced as she is: why did she accept the gig if she couldn't pull it off? - Money's not enough of a reason. Madonna has always been all about money, as long as the job was well done.

Madonna admitted she was nervous doing this. When an artist do a concert tour, he has mutliple opportunities to work out the kinks the first month or so of touring, and someone of Madonna status would've had full control over every aspect of the concert. The Super Bowl was a once-only chance for Madonna to pull it off in an evironment where she was not in complete control. Sure the whole thing could've been better, but she did the best that she could at that moment in time.

I'm sure Elton and his hubby probably had a field day watching it though .

[susan6]

This time:

• she visibly struggled with her balance during her developpe in Vogue;
• she tripped at the beginning of Music (while trying to climb a bench);
• the lip-synching was either badly done or looked so since we're not used to see Madonna do it;
• the vocal was shy;
• she lacked energy overall in a was I've never noticed before.

Some of that is probably due to "inadequate amount of practice in the couture boots that Givenchy made for her." Those boots weren't made for walkin'. Or dancin.'

Some details about the fashion:
http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/2012/02...y-couture.html

I was surprised that Tom and Lorenzo didn't pick up on the fact that her entrance (outfit and choreography) was a direct nod to "Liz Taylor as Cleopatra".

I thought that half-time show was pretty darn good, even though the dancing was a bit problematic with those boots (and a reported hamstring injury....walk it off, Madge).

As for the song....not her best, but catchy enough for a sporting event.

[loulou]

Madonna admitted she was nervous doing this. When an artist do a concert tour, he has mutliple opportunities to work out the kinks the first month or so of touring, and someone of Madonna status would've had full control over every aspect of the concert. The Super Bowl was a once-only chance for Madonna to pull it off in an evironment where she was not in complete control. Sure the whole thing could've been better, but she did the best that she could at that moment in time.

I saw the interview, it didn't prepare me to the gap between last of her shows I saw and this one.

I think Madonna carefully plans her quotes: they're not to describe reality, as much as they are to picture one. She may or may not have been nervous.

I have a hard time imagining Madonna that jumps on a once only chance to not be in control, expecially if it's work.

Oh damn it, I'm just a disappointed fan!

Some of that is probably due to "inadequate amount of practice in the couture boots that Givenchy made for her." Those boots weren't made for walkin'. Or dancin.'

That's what I thought. That's what she should've been thinking!

The balance and the tripping alone, thought a bit sloppy for Madonna's standards, wouldn't have been that disappointing as her lack of overall energy. She looked slow, Jennifer Robinson slow.

[jenniferlyon]

The new Madonna song is OK, but it does bear a more than passing resemblance to Avril Lavigne's "Girlfriend." I heard bits and pieces from a couple of Madonna's other new songs when they were leaked onto YouTube and I liked those better. She is at her best when she works with William Orbit, IMO.

As for artists over 50 on Top 40 radio, last year around this time "All You Need Is Now" by Duran Duran got a lot of airplay.

[BigB08822]

Duran Duran's "All You Need is Now" peaked at #38 on ADULT pop songs. No mention of where it got on CHR/POP which probably means it never even made it on the charts. Maybe it got play where you live but it looks like they got play where all the older artists have to get play, Adult pop.

[jenniferlyon]

Duran Duran's "All You Need is Now" peaked at #38 on ADULT pop songs. No mention of where it got on CHR/POP which probably means it never even made it on the charts. Maybe it got play where you live but it looks like they got play where all the older artists have to get play, Adult pop.

I didn't check the chart position; I just know it got played a lot on the Top 40 station that my middle school aged niece listens to. The song really stood out compared to the rest of this station's young-and-hip playlist (Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, Bruno Mars), which is why I remember it so well.

I'm not sure about the adult pop stations, because I don't listen to those very often. When I do, it seems they play mostly old songs from the 80s with a few new ones (Lady Antebellum, Kelly Clarkson, Michael Buble) sprinkled in. I don't know if they'll play the new Madonna or not. It might be too bubblegummy for them. But if Bon Jovi records another country-pop ballad, it will be a shoo-in.

[PeterG]

The last time Duran Duran had a song make the top 40 of the pop charts (the Billboard Hot 100) was 1993. "Come Undone" peaked at #7.

Let's face it, if you're over 30...fuggedaboutit!

[Southpaw]

(((Old Man Simon)))

[BigB08822]

The last time Duran Duran had a song make the top 40 of the pop charts (the Billboard Hot 100) was 1993. "Come Undone" peaked at #7.

Let's face it, if you're over 30...fuggedaboutit!

I agree with you but the Billboard Hot 100 is not the same as the Pop Charts. The Billboard Hot 100 is 45% sales, 50% airplay and 5% streaming. This, of course, is different than it was in 1993 but the idea is that the Hot 100 takes into account ALL genres. A song can debut at #1 on the Hot 100 but barely get any airplay at all if the sales are high enough and this often happens for big debuts from big time artists.

P.S. Here is the link to track Pop radio. Is there anyone besides Madonna who is over the age of 40? Jay Z, perhaps? I don't know his age. Even then, both Madonna AND Jay-Z have artists attached to their songs, neither is getting a solo hit at the moment. Not many appear to even be in their 30's although I do see a few.

http://kworb.net/radio/

Finally, I would like to say once more, for the record, I don't give a hoot how old someone is. I love music and it doesn't matter if the person making it is 15 or 115. If I like it, I like it. I just think it is ABSURD that people want to sit here and claim radio will play someone that is considered "old." Sure, exceptions will always occur but one look at current and recent radio charts will show you how very unlikely that is. The general rule, by and large, is you need to be 20 something years old (especially for females) and preferably good looking or controversial (better yet, both!).

[PeterG]

Finally, I would like to say once more, for the record, I don't give a hoot how old someone is.

Are you feeling that they are people in this thread saying that "old people suck"?

[Southpaw]

Finally, I would like to say once more, for the record, I don't give a hoot how old someone is.

Just a hoot? Why not a rusty hoot? Come on, BigB, don't be cheap! Give us a rusty hoot, wouldya?!?!