Wayne
05-03-2011, 04:31 AM
Popularised in the 1950's/1960's by Elvis Presley, Tom Jones, the Rat Pack etc, a Las Vegas residency is basically one artist or act committing themselves to so many shows over a given time, in one city. Much like in the 40's, when performing in Jazz clubs was a measuring stick, in the 50's and 60's - if you had a gig or residency in Vegas, you'd made it.
Fast forward 35 years to 2002, Celine Dion makes the announcement that she'll be returning to the pop scene with a new album, and a new show in Las Vegas; most people thought she was mad, basing herself in one city, asking the question - how in 2003, can one artist draw enough people to a $95m theater, with tickets costing as much as $250, five nights per week, for three years? Well she proved everyone wrong. She revolutionised the concept of Las Vegas residencies, and soon after Celine, other stars followed - Prince, Elton John, Barry Manilow, Garth Brooks, Carlos Santana, Toni Braxton, Rod Stewart.
One thing to notice is that 95% of those performers taking these residencies now no longer score hits on the singles charts, at least not regularly, mainly because their music doesn't cater to the radio or to the demographic that tends to buy singles. That's not to say they're past it - I mean anybody that makes $400m in four years is not past it [Celine Dion] - but Vegas wouldn't be the correct move for someone like Beyonce, or Katy Perry, or Rihanna. However, artists such as Madonna, Britney Spears & Kylie Minogue have all been linked to a Vegas deal, which disproves the theory that Vegas is for the old timers or has beens.
With all of this being said...
Is a Vegas residency good for one's career, or will be detrimental to their future successes?
Which artist/act should next move to Vegas for a residency?
Fast forward 35 years to 2002, Celine Dion makes the announcement that she'll be returning to the pop scene with a new album, and a new show in Las Vegas; most people thought she was mad, basing herself in one city, asking the question - how in 2003, can one artist draw enough people to a $95m theater, with tickets costing as much as $250, five nights per week, for three years? Well she proved everyone wrong. She revolutionised the concept of Las Vegas residencies, and soon after Celine, other stars followed - Prince, Elton John, Barry Manilow, Garth Brooks, Carlos Santana, Toni Braxton, Rod Stewart.
One thing to notice is that 95% of those performers taking these residencies now no longer score hits on the singles charts, at least not regularly, mainly because their music doesn't cater to the radio or to the demographic that tends to buy singles. That's not to say they're past it - I mean anybody that makes $400m in four years is not past it [Celine Dion] - but Vegas wouldn't be the correct move for someone like Beyonce, or Katy Perry, or Rihanna. However, artists such as Madonna, Britney Spears & Kylie Minogue have all been linked to a Vegas deal, which disproves the theory that Vegas is for the old timers or has beens.
With all of this being said...
Is a Vegas residency good for one's career, or will be detrimental to their future successes?
Which artist/act should next move to Vegas for a residency?