Why has "...Ready for it?" flopped?

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

18 hours ago, TheCureinMalibu said:

It debuted at #4 Billboard Hot 100 with 4 days of tracking week and 4 days of streaming week.

It could have been debuted at #1 if it had a full tracking week. Plus the MV came out like almost 2 months after the song lmao

I honestly think longevity is more important over initial hype. The song hasn't reached the Top 10 again since it fell out after its release right? 

Honestly, from an outsider who doesn't care for Taylor Swift either way, it just seems as though the Reputation era came and went quick. I'm not presenting facts, chart performance, etc. I just haven't heard about it since it's release. Even when the album dropped on Spotify weeks later...at that point I had lost interest. 

[Mikolaj 11,635]

17 hours ago, Ziggy said:

It’s not a good song to a lot of people and larger audiences are not here for her. Tbh she’s being obnoxious because everyone else moved on from this drama and she talks about how she wants to not be a part of it but this album just keeps bringing her drama back up again. Then she has this faux tough girl image that rings really hollow. Gaga had the horns, K8tea had the blond spiky cut, and Taylor has this. You won’t always resonate with the wider public.

On the other hand, everyone would have been reminded about the drama the moment she started new album cycle even if it hadn't been focused on the drama itself. 

[AlexanderMagno 10,746]

Because LWYMMD aged pretty badly. In fact, most of Reputation has. The hype was huge, but once the initial response was gone it didn't hold for long. About three or four songs have true longevity value and ...Ready For It? isn't one of those.

 

And for those defending that "music quality is subjective": it's not. Music taste is.

[Drin Lon 7,875]

It could have done much better if it wasn't released 1 week after LWYMMD. She literally didn't even upload an audio in her Vevo channel  

For all of those saying people weren't here for it / not radio friendly....the reason it was picked as the 2nd single is that it managed to debut at #4 with only 4 tracking days and radio started playing it without any adds from Taylor's label  They clearly were surprised that it got a good reception and decided to go with it as the 2nd single. It's just that the whole release / promo / video release were so messy and far from each other, so the song was bound to "flop". As people mentioned, it got a boring video 2 months after release...that didn't help either.

If they were smart they would have done a double lead single release, both Look and Ready in the same week, with videos for both songs ready, kind of what Ed did. Then the GP could have chosen which one they preferred (and it would have probably been Ready considering LWYMMD's tragic chart run on radio ).

[Ziggy 11,800]

3 hours ago, Oivind said:

I don't think you realize how subjective everything you say is. I have listened to "Reputation" many times, and the production is excellent, just like it was on "1989". The production suits the music just as well as the production on Lorde's album suits her music. The lyrics are pretty good too, as usual with Taylor Swift. There's no pettiness (have you even listened to the album?). I don't even see why some people see LWYMMD as petty. Just because she sings a song seen from the perspective of a petty and vengeful person, doesn't mean she is one. Some people read too much into her songs (like when they think this song is about that boyfriend). OTOH, the same people don't seem to get irony at all.

It was pretty predictable that Lorde's album would be praised by critics, while critics are divided over Taylor Swift's album. The metacritic ratings are not far from what I would have guessed (91 for "Melodrama", 71 for "Reputation"). We all knew critics would be divided over Lady Gaga too, and they will continue to be. Lady Gaga and Taylor Swift are much more controversial than Lorde, and that's the only reason their albums score lower among critics. Some critics are overly concerned about their credibility and whether or not they're supposed to like an artist. So they come up with bullshit arguments which are obviously based on their perception of the artist, not on the music. Arguments like Taylor Swift lacking credibility when she (almost) raps, as if you can tell by listening to something that it lacks credibility.

You’re right to say there’s subjectivity involved but also remember who is reviewing these albums. They listen to HOARDES of different kinds of music during the year. You have to do something to stand out and Reputation does not do that by following production trends that are already slightly dated depending upon what you listen to in music. And they’re going to dig into why that is.

 

I did listen to it. If someone writes a song from a petty perspective that’s what people are going to hear. No one gives two shits about what her *real* opinion is if this is the one she’s putting out for others to listen to.

 

I would ask, have you listened and considered the critiques? Because not all of them are rooted in personal dislike of her. Keep in mind, critics LOVED 1989 and her other albums mostly as well (though a 71 means they don’t hate Reputation either). Critics outside of Indy music blogs don’t have a reason to be pressed about TSwift. 1989 was just a better album on certain technical fronts. It did more things well and stood out more in the context of its release meanwhile I struggle to remember Reputation. It may be different for Taylor but it’s kind of like ARTPOP where if you listen to the musical genre she’s pulling from, the songs seem thinner and less inspired (in terms of the music). TSwift can write nice songs, I’ll admit that, but critics have not liked this album for the reasons I said. Sure it’s subjective like anything else, but that subjectivity is not from them harboring a grudge (like that NYT Joanne interview which as CRAZY). It’s just natural it’s subjective because they’re people. However their opinions are also informed by their deeper knowledge of music. They aren’t reviewing an album purely on an enjoyment level. That may factor in, but they’re concerned with technical aspects. The point of a critic is to give a personal opinion that is rooted in professional knowledge of the topic at hand. To that end, Melodrama is a technically superior album in their eyes for what it seeks to do, for how it does it, and then also enjoyment. You don’t have to like their opinion, but brushing it off as some conspiracy against the artist is complete crap in this case.

 

I read some reviews, they seem fair to me. They may like the album, but can also say at the same time that some of the production is bland, same-y, and derivative. Or that some lyrics are REALLY cringey (that bad reputation hook? She may barely pull it off, but lord she shouldn’t have to work so hard to do it; if it reads as clunky it’ll sound clunky haha). I say the same thing about, say, Kanye. He’s a terrible lyricist imo, but his production is outstanding and his work with Rick Rubin is inspired and still ahead of its time. Liking an album shouldn’t spare you from recognizing its shortcomings. I like the production of RFI, but I’ll also say that I like it specifically because it sounds like something else I also like (I’m not saying she copied or anything).

[vertigostick 2,444]

Not creative, same boring generic mess we‘ve heard from Minaj and others.

And Joseph Kahn related productions deserve to flop anyway, it‘s Karma.

[The Child 18,997]

19 hours ago, Oivind said:

I think it's pretty random how successful any piece of popular music is. Taste is subjective, many critics are mostly concerned about their credibility, and teenagers are often concerned about what's hot and what's not. Whichever artist your older siblings listened to, will often turn out not to be hot in your eyes, so whichever artist was hot a few years ago, have an uphill struggle to stay on top. I just don't think quality (whatever that means) has much to do with success, when it comes to mainstream music. I happen to think "...Ready for it?" is excellent, and the album is excellent too, but for some reason, Lorde is hotter among credibility-craving critics, and I don't know which name is the hottest among teenagers at the moment. I just know it's not Taylor Swift or Lady Gaga anymore. BTW, I Iove Lorde, but IMO, "Reputation" is a much better album than "Melodrama".

Nowadays teenagers aren't really faithful to one artist in particular, they are into hip hop, rap & trap and they don't care about whatever artist. They just follow what everybody listens to. They are not that into pop music and they have no remorse making an artist successful to then throw them away.

18 hours ago, MeloArtDramaPop said:

probably because no hype surrounded it or more like it was hyped as promo single, so all hype was directed towards LWYMMD, so when it officially was sent to radio for single treatment, since people already heard it, it didn't become as successful. Now imagine if A-Yo was sent to radios after PI, I think it would suffer the same fate, however, my opinion still holds that if A-Yo was to be the lead single it would have smashed in shake it off-esque fashion

I'm still torn between A-Yo or MR as the lead, last year I wanted A-Yo to be the lead so badly but after seeing the success & the reception MR got, I think MR would have shook the GP and the fans who were expecting a bop as a lead. Plus, MR still sounds great a year later whereas A-Yo sounds annoying now.

[Doot 2]

17 hours ago, NIGHTCRAWLER said:

well MR kind of flopped, even though I heard this song a million times on radio, it's not popular on youtube or in the GP's mind

False. 

[My Little Phoney 658]

 

 

[Joga 3,813]

The single release was squashed between the LWYMMD serving hit and the album being hyped to be released. I don't get why they did that. Plus, they thought ...Ready for It? could smash, but it didn't, and they did the worst mistake ever of pulling LWYMMD out of the radio. The chart position of LWYMMD is just a free-fall, same as BTW, which is technically like, RFI is her Judas.

[Mirages 20,259]

21 hours ago, Rumours1977 said:

if she had released End Game as the lead (as it and NYD are the only songs on Reputation that I bothered listening to again .)

Where's that excuse me no when you need it the most  End Game is one of the weekest songs on the record, featuring Ed at this point is like torture for my ears and the other one is totally unnecessary for the song 

Ready for It and Call It What You Want are the highlights of the album

[Phlop 4,773]

It didn’t need a SuperBowl performance to peak at the sameness position as MR so flop who?

I believe it also had a higher AI.

[Oivind 287]

9 hours ago, Ziggy said:

I would ask, have you listened and considered the critiques?

I haven't read that many reviews, but the one norwegian review I read had the typical bullshit about her lacking credibility when she tries to rap, etc. An opinion purely based on the reviewer's perception of the artist. But I do read reviews sometimes, and I rarely find them to be of much value to me, and I'm assuming the reviews of "Reputation" won't have much value either. Don't take this as criticism against you, but when you say the songs sound thinner and less inspired that sounds like just the kind of thing reviewers often say. The first statement is too vague, the second I don't even know what means, with regards to musical content. I have no idea what "less inspired" sounds like. I don't know what "bland" sounds like, either. I know what it sounds like when someone sings off-key, just to mention something which does have a specific sound. I'm not an expert on production, but I have a pretty deep understanding of music from the viewpoint of a musician. I would love to see more reviews which really analysed a piece of music in depth, and talked about things like harmony, melody, rhythm, song structure, etc. I would also like to see more reviews which talked about what music it was inspired by etc. Such a review would convince me the reviewer has deep knowledge/understanding about music. But most reviews leave me with the impression that the reviewer is just someone who listens to a lot of music, and has an opinion, nothing more.

[Oivind 287]

10 hours ago, CrazyMonster said:

Nowadays teenagers aren't really faithful to one artist in particular, they are into hip hop, rap & trap and they don't care about whatever artist. They just follow what everybody listens to. They are not that into pop music and they have no remorse making an artist successful to then throw them away.

I don't think this is something new, though. As someone who was a teenager in the 80s, and which is now a high school teacher, my impression is that it's more common today to be faithful to certain artists or genres. When I grew up, there were a few metal heads, but the rest just listened to whatever was on the radio. Now I think there are more dedicated metal heads, and there are also dedicated fans of other genres, especially hip-hop.

[Ziggy 11,800]

3 hours ago, Oivind said:

I haven't read that many reviews, but the one norwegian review I read had the typical bullshit about her lacking credibility when she tries to rap, etc. An opinion purely based on the reviewer's perception of the artist. But I do read reviews sometimes, and I rarely find them to be of much value to me, and I'm assuming the reviews of "Reputation" won't have much value either. Don't take this as criticism against you, but when you say the songs sound thinner and less inspired that sounds like just the kind of thing reviewers often say. The first statement is too vague, the second I don't even know what means, with regards to musical content. I have no idea what "less inspired" sounds like. I don't know what "bland" sounds like, either. I know what it sounds like when someone sings off-key, just to mention something which does have a specific sound. I'm not an expert on production, but I have a pretty deep understanding of music from the viewpoint of a musician. I would love to see more reviews which really analysed a piece of music in depth, and talked about things like harmony, melody, rhythm, song structure, etc. I would also like to see more reviews which talked about what music it was inspired by etc. Such a review would convince me the reviewer has deep knowledge/understanding about music. But most reviews leave me with the impression that the reviewer is just someone who listens to a lot of music, and has an opinion, nothing more.

“Thinner” refers to the production as in it isn’t very layered or textured. “Uninspired” means that it doesn’t sound like the artist’s heart is in it and that it lacks originality. “Bland” holds a similar connotation: it doesn’t excite the listener and that is usually due to a lack of originality. That’s what I mean by those words and I’d lob every one of them at this album because I’ve heard what it sounds like when Taylor’s “in” a song. You listen to Love Story and can hear it. I’m not even that acquainted with her as an artist and I can hear these things. This group of songs felt like she was doing a sort of genre karaoke where she wasn’t totally comfortable but just trying it on for size. It felt a little gimmicky. She can do whatever she wants, it’s her life and clearly some like it, but that’s my response to her sound and others’ as well.