As things stand now, digital music has failed.

newrival · January 2011

shack wrote: »

Maybe some of the "older" people compare the talent of today against music of the past and find it lacking. If you look at the demographics of who is buying the music of some of these 60s-70s-80s artists I believe it is very much the "younger" people that are discovering their music for the first time and finding it appealing. I happen to be around a lot of 20 somethings because of my kids and 30 somethings at work and some of them lament about the lack of current musical substance. I said in another thread that greatness in music stands the test of time. I firmly believe that.

I think there may be talent out there, but the music industry has become so controlling of how the content is developed a lot of good stuff never makes it through the marketing machine. Some of your best music can be found on websites and venues that never make it to the recording companies. If it doesn't have flash, or a hook, or something outlandish to market they are not very interested. Lady Gaga is a good example...musically she is average at best IMO. Would Katy Perry be where she is if she wasn't so smokin’ HOT (better than Gaga I think...but great?). Justin Beiber...PLEASE...:rolleyes:

Lacking how? So music talent has crescendo'ed and we're headed into the musical dark ages? Hardly. You're comparing modern pop artists to classic vocalists. Lady Gaga and Justin Beiber are pop talent, it's meant to be immediately relevant and little else. Do you think the Hollywood Argyles were the musical stuff of genius? how many "youngsters" you see rocking out to Little Anthony & the Imperials?

Sure you see 20 and 30-somethings listening to classic rock, but does that mean 20 years from now kids won't be cranking vintage 311 or Kings of Leon? The music industry is about making money, and if you think there was a point in history where it wasn't then you're mistaken. Great music won't get hand delivered to your lap. Nor will you likely hear it on a pop radio station. Pick up a magazine, read some reviews. Digital music and the internet has made it easier than ever to find. Hell there are sights that do all the thinking and research for you and lay out associated and similar music based on your tastes.

The reason you're not hearing good music is not because talent isn't out there. It's because you're avoiding it. Good music is out there you need only to get over your preconceived notions and dip your old wrinkly toes in the stream. Welcome to the future, the water's warm.

ps, i mean geezer as a term of endearment :biggrin:

newrival · January 2011

ysss wrote: »

The market is a-changing...

1. Big labels are losing grip on their monopoly. They used to have strong grip on the strategic posts (distribution channels, airwaves, etc), they're late going into digital distribution so now there are many 3rd party middlemen (Amazon, Apple) eating into their profits and having a say in the market's direction.

2. Digital distribution enables track by track purchase... this is where a band's quality issue would show up on their financial bottomline. In the past, you're forced to pay the full admission price. Not anymore.

3. I bet there are more music genres in the market now than ever was in our history. This kind of market segmentation is probably a logistic nightmare and works against the economy of scale that big companies capitalize on.

4. Easier to master and distribute music than ever. These create a sizeable (and still growing) indie scene, and they basically lower a big label's value on negotiations with new artists.

5. Piracy definitely matters, though probably not in the scale that the RIAA has been trying to portray it to the media.

Great points.

thesurfer · January 2011

Go back, and look at albums in the 60,s until the early 80,s When a band like led zeppelin the beatles the rolling stones,, just to name a few, put out an album,, thats what it was,, an album that at its release was the best that artist,, or group could muster,, as the 70,s came to a close,, all that had pretty muched changed,, suddenly it was one or two good songs on a record,,, but,, if they werent released as singles, and you like a certain song, you had to buy the album,,, not any more,,, now you can just download the cream of the crop,,,, Remember when bob segar put out a good album??? or anyone else for that manner,,, Even back then,,, artist figured, hey, lets put 2 catchy songs on here, and the rest filler,,,, its nothing new,,, its just the fact that now,, you can get the 2 songs without buying the whole cd,,, fans just got tired of getting ripped off,

shack · January 2011

newrival wrote: »

Lacking how? So music talent has crescendo'ed and we're headed into the musical dark ages? Hardly. You're comparing modern pop artists to classic vocalists. Lady Gaga and Justin Beiber are pop talent, it's meant to be immediately relevant and little else. Do you think the Hollywood Argyles were the musical stuff of genius? how many "youngsters" you see rocking out to Little Anthony & the Imperials?

Sure you see 20 and 30-somethings listening to classic rock, but does that mean 20 years from now kids won't be cranking vintage 311 or Kings of Leon? The music industry is about making money, and if you think there was a point in history where it wasn't then you're mistaken. Great music won't get hand delivered to your lap. Nor will you likely hear it on a pop radio station. Pick up a magazine, read some reviews. Digital music and the internet has made it easier than ever to find. Hell there are sights that do all the thinking and research for you and lay out associated and similar music based on your tastes.

The reason you're not hearing good music is not because talent isn't out there. It's because you're avoiding it. Good music is out there you need only to get over your preconceived notions and dip your old wrinkly toes in the stream. Welcome to the future, the water's warm.

ps, i mean geezer as a term of endearment :biggrin:

By lacking...I mean not very good...AFTER listening to it. There was also a lot of music produced in the 60s-70s-80s that was "lacking" (that means not very good). I have always had a pretty good ear for what is and is not good when I first hear it and history has borne out a lot of what I perceived.

Now, you haven't a clue as to what I do or do not listen to. My musical tastes run very diverse. I bet I listen to almost as much "current" music as you and bet I am much more versed in the "oldies/classics/whatever" than you. How many college or underground stations do you regularly listen to? Me? Three or four. I often visit indie artist sites to sample their wares based on what I hear. I listen to the music my kids bring home or recommend to me. My youngest spends summers traveling to various music festivals around the country and keeps me up on some of the new stuff. There may have been a period in the late 90s and very early 00s where I was not as interested in music as life took overbut otherwise I have been pretty attuned to the direction of music.

My point was as much about what was being produced by the Recording Industry as about talent. I made it very clear there was talent out there but the industry wasn't making it available...which was a big part of their problems. I KNOW I understand the business and profit motive aspect better than you.

Lastly, I have been buying new music for 40 years and still do so today. So take your lecture about my "preconceived notions" about music and KISS MY ****! (And I mean that in the nicest of ways.)

thesurfer · January 2011

shack wrote: »

By lacking...I mean not very good...AFTER listening to it. There was also a lot of music produced in the 60s-70s-80s that was "lacking" (that means not very good). I have always had a pretty good ear for what is and is not good when I first hear it and history has borne out a lot of what I perceived.

Now, you haven't a clue as to what I do or do not listen to. My musical tastes run very diverse. I bet I listen to almost as much "current" music as you and bet I am much more versed in the "oldies/classics/whatever" than you. How many college or underground stations do you regularly listen to? Me? Three or four. I often visit indie artist sites to sample their wares based on what I hear. I listen to the music my kids bring home or recommend to me. My youngest spends summers traveling to various music festivals around the country and keeps me up on some of the new stuff. There may have been a period in the late 90s and very early 00s where I was not as interested in music as life took overbut otherwise I have been pretty attuned to the direction of music.

My point was as much about what was being produced by the Recording Industry as about talent. I made it very clear there was talent out there but the industry wasn't making it available...which was a big part of their problems. I KNOW I understand the business and profit motive aspect better than you.

Lastly, I have been buying new music for 40 years and still do so today. So take your lecture about my "preconceived notions" about music and KISS MY ****! (And I mean that in the nicest of ways.)

Bravo, well put,

cnh · January 2011

As one of the older but not so old farts here (I'm with Shack some on this one). I can't agree that there is a 'lack of talent' out there. I spend a lot of time listening to our college radio station so I get to hear a lot of NEW stuff and am usually surprised by how much of that music has links to the artists that Jesse (if doro is correct) and I probably listen to.

Record labels and the Industry need a wake-up call. There is 'talent' all around but it is becoming more localized in nature and 'distribution' systems will or can be FREED from corporate monopolies. One artist who has been effectively trying to use the internet is David Byrne who has his own mailing lists, etc. There are others.

This is a NEW age for artists. And a small war is brewing between self-marketing and distribution and the BIG BOYS. It might be nice if the little guy came out on top there. The same problem exists in the FILM industry where there is a plethora of Indie filmmakers....many far more talented than what actually makes it to Hollywood. New models and opportunities are what is needed?

cnh

ceyman · January 2011

I haven't heard anyone in this thread mention Pandora as a tool for finding new artists you like. I have a number of stations going on Pandora while I'm at my desk When someone new I like comes up I can go right to their biography or jump to Amazon and purchase. ImportCD's has gotten a lot of business from me the past year or so.

cnh · January 2011

ceyman wrote: »

I haven't heard anyone in this thread mention Pandora as a tool for finding new artists you like. I have a number of stations going on Pandora while I'm at my desk When someone new I like comes up I can go right to their biography or jump to Amazon and purchase. ImportCD's has gotten a lot of business from me the past year or so.

Good Point, I'm just exploring this myself--give us 'time'?

And, WELCOME TO CLUB POLK!

cnh

cfrizz · January 2011

The digital revolution is shaking up every major entertainment industry from music, film and books. All of them have been dragging their heels kicking and screaming against digital entertainment & making consumers out to be the problem with obsessing about piracy.

They don't want to change their modes of operation, and simply making it difficult for honest people to BUY what they want digitally. They want to convince us we only are leasing that $20 album, book, film that we've downloaded. It's really not yours to keep & do what you want with.

The more they dig their heels in, the more defiant we are going to become, and the fewer dollars we are going to be willing to pay to enable them to continue to be stuck in the 20th century, and continue to rip consumers, musicians, actors, & writers off.

Face · January 2011

Today's music isn't that bad, it's the mastering that kills most of it for me.

treitz3 · January 2011

Shack Daddy, you and Face have nailed it.

ben62670 · January 2011

When I was listening to 80's music everyone 20 years older than I was saying it was crap. Then came the 90's. Everyone 20 years over the average listener said it was crap. Then 2000 came... same thing happened. To me the 60's put out way more crap than nearly any decade. Don't get me wrong there was some good stuff happening, but you want to talk about over played pop! I listen to some of the 80's stuff once in a while, but at least I'll admit a lot of it was crap pop. Can you? There will always be tons of crap music.

newrival · January 2011

shack wrote: »

Lastly, I have been buying new music for 40 years and still do so today. So take your lecture about my "preconceived notions" about music and KISS MY ****! (And I mean that in the nicest of ways.)

Fair enough. But for someone with their finger on the pulse of modern music, it seems curious that you'd offer up Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber as your case-in-point. While I'll concede you likely have a broader knowledge of music pre-'94 than me, I wouldnt be so sure about the last 2 decades. Sure, I listen to college stations, have been in several bands, have friends in the industry (artists and producers/engineers), and listen to new albums daily, but what does that prove? I applaud the lengths you go to to try new music but I think misunderstand the point. It wasn't ABOUT YOU so much as it was about using your specific comments as a stereotypical basis to explain that the paradigm has changed. I can see why you may take that personally, but I was really just using your comments as a means to an end. So for whatever that's worth I apologize for any perceived offense.

I hear older generations say that quality talent isn't getting produced, but it's crap. It's getting produced. Maybe not by warner or sony, but that doesnt matter anymore. Here's my main issue with this: we live in the greatest time for music that there's ever been. Even the girl you saw at the coffee shop last saturday has her album up on itunes. You want it? youve got it in 4 minutes. want to share it with your friends? done. Hell, last night I watched a DVD of this kid my friend manages in Lithuania that absolutely kills it on guitar. He's all over youtube and is now signing a release deal in the states. As further proof, just look at the taxonomy of music; we have tertiary sub genres of "artcore," it's insane. We've never before had a greater opportunity to be exposed to great music than this very moment, and it's only getting better.

As pointed out very poignantly by another member, the record labels are not once they once were. For one, "Indie" music is hardly Indie anymore and even the smallest of bands have the means to record an EP and get it to thousands of people with very little investment. Label monopolies are slowly being pulled apart y the foundation because their backing simply isn't needed anymore (to get heard).

shack · January 2011

newrival wrote:

But for someone with their finger on the pulse of modern music, it seems curious that you'd offer up Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber as your case-in-point.

Because this thread is about the recording industry and the the contention that the digital age is a failure because of their lack of sales due to piracy.

I stated the problem was not piracy but what they are selling and the lack of talent. I then stated that the recording industry is holding up Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber as the best of the best by the fact they are Grammy Nominees (I mentioned Katy Perry as well but she gets a pass...because anyone who looks that good...must have talent)...since by their own admission:

The recording industry's most prestigious award, the GRAMMY, is presented annually by The Recording Academy. A GRAMMY is awarded by The Recording Academy's voting membership to honor excellence in the recording arts and sciences. It is truly a peer honor, awarded by and to artists and technical professionals for artistic or technical achievement.

Even if they don't win, they are still top 5...and if they are considered the best artists by the recording industry...then therein lies the problem IMO.

THAT was my point.

RuSsMaN · January 2011

Does anyone really get out and TOUR anymore, and earn their money? I couldn't walk 20 feet in a public area in the 80's or early 90's without seeing at least ONE concert tee - and a REAL concert tee, not a Spencers or Kohls off the rack special.

I will throw up props to bands like Dave Matthews. They addressed the whole 'pirate' issue by letting fans record and distribute live shows (at no profit) via mp3. In return, all they asked was that when the new album came out, that they bought it and didn't share it. I'm not saying it worked 100%, but it helped. It helped more than say, Lars Ulrich's approach - although I do agree with what he was saying, it was moreso his delivery that killed.

As far as bubble gum, and what sells - that's not going to change. The industry can sell billions of copies to teenage girls, or a couple hundred thousand to middle aged male audiophiles. What do you expect them to do? Pay their mortagage on a mansion, or 'do the right thing' and just stay in the downtown condo on principle?

It will pan out, digital is the future, love it, hate it - embrace it, it's here. Support the cause on a local level, with local artists. Buy it, post about it, promote it, link it. Grass roots, one CD or Album at a time.

Cheers,
Russ

dkg999 · January 2011

Listening to WXRT on the way home from work today the DJ was talking about how Cake's new album debuted at #1 on the Billboard chart, with 44,000 copies sold. He was comparing that against Billboard #1 albums of 20 yrs ago where being #1 on the chart meant that your album was selling several hundred thousand copies. It's a different world!

txcoastal1 · January 2011

50-80's still make money and still "remember when talk about"...really don't here of alot of talk of 90's or better much longer than they hit "The Hit List"

mdaudioguy · January 2011

F1nut wrote: »

Lack of talent is the problem, you idiots.

Jesse, I read through this whole article word for word without glancing at your retort, and nearly lost it when I read that! :biggrin:
I have to say, though, that although I have my oldies that I love and come back to now and then, I've always thrived on finding the new stuff. Sometimes it's not really brand new, but simply just new to me. The way I see it, is that there's more good music out there than I'll probably ever get to hear... But I'm gonna try!

Great thread. It sure has sparked some long, thoughtful responses.

PolkClyde · January 2011

well,I just about like it all,except music with foul language.

BlueFox · January 2011

RuSsMaN wrote: »

It helped more than say, Lars Ulrich's approach - although I do agree with what he was saying, it was moreso his delivery that killed.

I remember when Napster was going strong, and Metallica was always complaining about it. After some point I finally got tired of reading about Metallica complaining about Napster, so I installed Napster, and downloaded every Metallica song I could find.

That was my first foray into digital music, and I was surprised it actually sounded pretty good. I had gone to Frys and bought some Yamaha speakers with a little sub, and they played off the cheapo sound card installed in the PC. After Napster was shut down I tried some of the other share sites, but they had to much ads, spy ware, and other crap, so I gave up.

tonyb · January 2011

Have to go with the lack of talent assesment, and it's not 'cause I'm older either. The music industry has turned into one big American Idol. It's who they can market, on looks, buzz, video, behavior, and talent is almost none existant on the list. They employ others to write their songs, arrange the music, choreograph the dance steps, teach them how to lip synch on TV, so they just have to sing, and even thats a struggle for alot of them.
Anyone can be a star with this formula, and thats pretty evident these days.

Freddy Mercury...where are ya ?

Danny Tse · January 2011

dkg999 wrote: »

Listening to WXRT on the way home from work today the DJ was talking about how Cake's new album debuted at #1 on the Billboard chart, with 44,000 copies sold. He was comparing that against Billboard #1 albums of 20 yrs ago where being #1 on the chart meant that your album was selling several hundred thousand copies. It's a different world!

That's an extreme example though. Taylor Swift moved several hundred thousand, if not over a million, units in the first week of release just several months ago when her last album enter the Billboard album chart at #1.

ysss · January 2011

dkg999 wrote: »

Listening to WXRT on the way home from work today the DJ was talking about how Cake's new album debuted at #1 on the Billboard chart, with 44,000 copies sold. He was comparing that against Billboard #1 albums of 20 yrs ago where being #1 on the chart meant that your album was selling several hundred thousand copies. It's a different world!

But what does that mean?

It could mean that the market is much more segmented (#3 on my list), so the sales are spread thin across the many genres/options.

It could mean that people are getting the songs from venues that are not counted by Billboard (piracy, unauthorized sales channels, etc).

Could it mean the total music sales are down? Very unlikely; with the population explosion, lower cost of ownership, much wider distribution channels, etc.

Could this be related to 'quality' issue? (very very subjective) and how does that relate to sale?

zombie boy 2000 · January 2011

tonyb wrote: »

Have to go with the lack of talent assesment, and it's not 'cause I'm older either. The music industry has turned into one big American Idol. It's who they can market, on looks, buzz, video, behavior, and talent is almost none existant on the list. They employ others to write their songs, arrange the music, choreograph the dance steps, teach them how to lip synch on TV, so they just have to sing, and even thats a struggle for alot of them.
Anyone can be a star with this formula, and thats pretty evident these days.

Freddy Mercury...where are ya ?

Oh wait... nevermind. I thought you were talking about Motown Records for a second. Carry on.

As things stand now, digital music has failed.

Comments

As things stand now, digital music has failed.