View Full Version : A Philosophical question on Garth Success

01-14-2018, 11:02 AM
What other artist has been able to live off the success of the first five years of a career like Garth has over and over? I am not complaining as a fan. I like it. I keep buying it. And, yes, he has had success outside of the first five years of his career. But when you look back at it all, the Vegas gig was mostly stories that influenced him that produced the big hits from his first five years, his live show is based mostly on that era of his career, the Double Live album and now the Ultimate Hits that he is hoping to get another diamond award for, and of course Part I of the Anthology. It's a tribute to what he did produce and become during that time. We can even say Studio G is set up for that time. I don't see the stadium tours being much different. It's going to be the same.

How do we compare this to Elvis, the Beatles, George Strait, U2 and others? (Actually, I bet U2 would be equivalent.)

01-14-2018, 11:06 AM
Correction. Forgot he got a diamond award for TUH already.

01-14-2018, 12:49 PM
I would think that the vast majority of long term successful artists have seen their greatest success within the first five years. It's at that point when they are fresh and new. Most of them begin tweaking and altering their sounds and styles to keep up with the current trends. We certainly saw this with Garth, no doubt. I can remember about the time of Fresh Horses when I really began to see a bit of a backlash against Garth. The sound was changing and I remember a huge disliking of Fever because of the rock sound it had. George Strait is one that I personally think never really tweaked his style at all. He remained George through and through and we love him for it.

01-14-2018, 03:19 PM
Good point on Fresh Horses. I remember the backlash The Fever got.

01-15-2018, 09:41 AM
I also remember listening to Fresh Horses and thinking it sounded a bit different. For me, in my mind, I still sort of view it as the outcast of those original albums. However, I like change...within reason. I love Fresh Horses and, in fact, my favorite "non-hit" is there...That Ol' Wind.

I'm all about change, but within reason. I used to really like Mumford and Sons. They had that cool folky/banjo/rock sound. For their last album, they went all electric and I simply lost interest. If you like an artist for their sound, then they drastically change their sound...it can be pretty disappointing.

01-15-2018, 11:41 AM
hmm- interesting question- one group (and one of Garth's influences) that has also seemingly lived on the first 5 years is KISS

their first release was 1974.. between then and 1979 they had 7 studio albums, 2 live albums, and 4 'solo' albums released... Haven't been to a show from them in 7 years, but if you look at setlists and you have paid any attention to their career.. Once that first 5 years was over, they had a bit of a slump (though I personally liked their 'dynasty' album that was at the tail end of the 5 years)..

then they 'took the makeup off', had some hits here and there but were largely an average hair metal band..in the 80s

they 'reunited' in 1995/1996 with original 4 members and unplugged, and then the reunion tour w/ the makeup being put back on, etc.. and from there on out they've had

17 rehash/re release/ greatest hits / live / compilation albums

they've released 6 boxed sets

they've only released 3 singles that made ANY splash since then...

KISS lives on it's first 5 years of success... (largely it seems they're a nostalgia act now..) (a mistake Garth can still avoid if he is cognizant of the issue)

01-15-2018, 12:43 PM
Skywise, you just found the exact match to Garth I do believe.

01-15-2018, 03:16 PM
Skywise, you just found the exact match to Garth I do believe.

hehe Thanks ;) Garth has said many times they were an influence on him- (I know I've been lambasted multiple times for talking about Garth's decisions being ones that may relegate him to nostalgia act status.._