4 ms·
If we take the following ingredients: 1. Regression to the mean and survivorship bias (a band with an atypically good first album has much more chances to make
by Al-Khwarizmi 2y ago
If we take the following ingredients:
1. Regression to the mean and survivorship bias (a band with an atypically good first album has much more chances to make a second, but can find it difficult to live up to the first because maybe it was mostly luck),
2. The album that people consider "the first" actually being "the first big hit" (e.g. how many people know the album that came before Jarre's Oxygene?),
3. The first hit done with no pressure, the following album under pressure and deadlines because there's a public wanting to hear it,
I would actually be surprised if the discussed effect didn't exist.
- oneeyedpigeon 2y agoI prefer the "good art requires suffering" argument.
- notTooFarGone 2y agoI'd say 3. is more of a "because there's the record label wanting to sell it"
- francisofascii 2y agoI suspect 1 and 2 are related, in that the first album only becomes an actual album when is survives initial scrutiny and becomes good enough to be produced. The first album is essentially the "greatest hits" of the band in its infancy.