Do Bon Jovi have to please too many different fans?

very well put. Music by numbers, that's pretty much what it seems to be. That doesn't mean that some of those numbers aren't good. But albums have to suffer. On the other hand, a lot of people pay 3 dollars and download one song they like so probably it is much more lucrative to address songs to individuals than to masses....I don't like it.

much as i love the band i do feel a bit manipulated by the content of the last few albums. it's just a bit predictable...
maybe albums by numbers if not necessarily music by numbers x

I know what you're saying and I agree, I was just mentioning that both albums were built to be an album, and not just a mix of songs. One was great These Days, the other was crap, Bounce.


Ponrauil

I totally agree too. I m gonna do a little guessing concerning Jovis next album:
A few months ago, we all thought that the next record would be a Jon&Richie thing and totally country stylish. Now this would certainly not satisfy all of the bands different fans since not everyone likes country music. By now Jon has stated that it is gonna be a band Album and country without the twang or something like that. I fear that the next Album will consist of different kinds of songs (anthems, ballads, mid-tempo, etc) and that simply two or three pop-rock-country songs (like WSYCGH) will be included too in order to satisfy to the recently attracted country fans.
Just guessing, but they would once again widen the range of fans that buy their records and come to see them live, which would certainly please the record company and the band...

No, we all didn't. Some of us have been trying to tell those who thought it was a Jon and Richie CD that they meant that Jon and Richie were in the process of writing, not that Jon and Richie were excluding the other guys from the CD totally.

Anyway, I think some very interesting points have been made in this thread. There is definitely a by-the-numbers feel to certain songs and the way they've released singles. You know they're only aiming for an audience when they release a bottled formula song like All About Loving You that they won't even play live when it's the current single. I've always thought Bon Jovi was a better band than their singles indicate. There are some songs that I'm glad were not hits because I don't want to hear them at every show for the rest of my life! I've come to dread the ballads because they usually seem so contrived. I was very pleased with Have a Nice Day because there wasn't a "Thank You for Loving Me" or "All About Loving You" kind of song.

At the same time, I think that diversity on an album is a sign of creativity, not necessarily a sign of catering to the audience. Consistency can equate to monotony for the listener and for the artist. I don't think they want to record and play 10 of the same kind of songs any more than I want to listen to 10 songs that sound that same.

I don't know, I like all of the recent albums by the band, I won't deny that there are some songs that I'm not really fond of but that happens to me with every band. But I think that HAND is definetly the most consistent of the 3, the only songs that sound like they don't belong there is Wildflower. But I like it on it's own.

I could've predicted every single sentence of your post

Consistency does not have to be monotony. Look at Queen albums. Does any song sound like the other? Probably not. Do their albums sound consistent? Yes, no doubt! Of course there are bands who rewrite d rewrite their songs. I am just listening to A Matter of Life and Death by Maiden and I have the feeling that I heard "These Colours Don't Run" on all of their previous records.

Diversity might be a sign of creativity but not with Bon Jovi. It's My Life, Everyday, Bounce, Have A Nice Day are all the same. They might be distinct songs on the individual records but by no means Bon Jovi are creative by rewriting the same bullshit over and over but on different albums. So yeah, they already did record 10 of the same kind of songs, not on the same album though.

An album is an album because it sounds as an entity. I mean, look at THE GREATEST albums ever. Back in Black, Apetite for Destruction, Black Album, These Days...they might have "outliers" like Sweet Child O' Mine or Nothing Else Matters or Damned but these songs fit perfectly on those CDs despite being "different". Why? Because in my opinion, they address more than one audience WITHIN these individual songs . I mean, Damned is NOT just a hard rock song as Nothing Else Matters is NOT just a ballad as Sweet Child O' Mine is NOT just a mid-tempo. I am not sure if you get what I mean...

Even if I did get what you mean and even if I'm one of the ones--like you-- complaining because the harder songs are elimitated first, you're STILL going to disagree with anything I say. So what's the point? In case you weren't aware, we've both posted enough on this board that we're predictable. LOL

My prediction is that after These Days, when the quality of the ballads begins its speedy decline, the hard rockers will begin to stay in much longer. I would be surprised if One Wild Night didn't finish first or second on Crush, same with Last Man Standing on HAND.

Fair enough prediction, but the hard rockers got softer over the course of the years, and that's something that's gonna play a huge role as well for the fans of the softer songs.