Ian Tamblyn's article on why artists are no longer making a living making music.

brianlux

What a great article!  I would encourage any of you will set aside some time to read the whole article.  It's worth the time to read, music fans! 

https://www.rootsmusic.ca/2019/03/14/a-brief-history-of-why-artists-are-no-longer-making-a-living-making-music/

mace1229

Thanks for sharing, I saw you referenced this article in another thread.
It was an interesting article, although not a lot of new thoughts or ideas about the dying music industry for me.
Most of it I agreed with, a few thoughts I had.
He makes it almost sound like CDs were bad, and the start of the end for music. CDs were not a bad thing. He mentions the quality wasn't as great as everyone thought, it only sounds cleaner because there's less music in it. But if you consider what CDs really replaced, it was a great improvement. They replaced cassette tapes and walkmans. I could now have a portable form of music that sounded great. That was good for the music industry. Not many people were still listening to vinyl by the time CDs became popular, so they did not replace a superior product, they just replaced cheap cassettes. Tapes sounded bad to begin with, were a pain to skip songs and wore out. Its like comparing VHS to DVD. It took 15 years from the point CDs were released until streaming/downloading was a thing, so even though they were the original digital format, I dont think it helped make the leap to streaming. It was going to happen.

Another big factor of the digital age are how bands are formed. I think that is a huge factor in the industry. I can't think of a single band who have come out in the last 15 years that in another 15-20 from now will still be important in the music world (I'm sure there's lots of great new bands, but not on the pop radio). Growing up in the 90s we had great bands from current to 30 years old being played on rock stations, Tom Petty, Who, etc. So many bands who bad been around for 20-30 years were still important, and still are even today. I feel like the 90s was the last decade where musicians are going to leave a mark. Music today just sucks and won't be around for a long time. Record companies and radio just want the next catchy hit that gets overplayed for 6 months then never heard from again.  I think, at least in part, some of that has to do with character that was built by working hard. It seems like musicians today want to expect to be discovered over night via YouTube or some TV show. Bands don't put in years of effort like they did before.  I've read stories about G n' R , how they shared a small apartment and lived together for years struggling to break through.
Not that I want every musician to struggle, but it has to form some sort of drive to go through that, versus being discovered in a parking lot and thrown into a studio because you look like the next pop star and have a team of writers writing for you. If you look at top selling artists of 2018 they aren't people I expect to make a lasting mark on music. This generation is more interested in internet stars than creating good music.  Does anyone really think people will be listening to Bruno Mars 15 years from now? The closest to rock represented in the top 50 of 2018  are Maroon 5 and Imagine Dragons.....no wonder music isn't selling.

brianlux

mace1229 said:

Thanks for sharing, I saw you referenced this article in another thread.
It was an interesting article, although not a lot of new thoughts or ideas about the dying music industry for me.
Most of it I agreed with, a few thoughts I had.
He makes it almost sound like CDs were bad, and the start of the end for music. CDs were not a bad thing. He mentions the quality wasn't as great as everyone thought, it only sounds cleaner because there's less music in it. But if you consider what CDs really replaced, it was a great improvement. They replaced cassette tapes and walkmans. I could now have a portable form of music that sounded great. That was good for the music industry. Not many people were still listening to vinyl by the time CDs became popular, so they did not replace a superior product, they just replaced cheap cassettes. Tapes sounded bad to begin with, were a pain to skip songs and wore out. Its like comparing VHS to DVD. It took 15 years from the point CDs were released until streaming/downloading was a thing, so even though they were the original digital format, I dont think it helped make the leap to streaming. It was going to happen.

Another big factor of the digital age are how bands are formed. I think that is a huge factor in the industry. I can't think of a single band who have come out in the last 15 years that in another 15-20 from now will still be important in the music world (I'm sure there's lots of great new bands, but not on the pop radio). Growing up in the 90s we had great bands from current to 30 years old being played on rock stations, Tom Petty, Who, etc. So many bands who bad been around for 20-30 years were still important, and still are even today. I feel like the 90s was the last decade where musicians are going to leave a mark. Music today just sucks and won't be around for a long time. Record companies and radio just want the next catchy hit that gets overplayed for 6 months then never heard from again.  I think, at least in part, some of that has to do with character that was built by working hard. It seems like musicians today want to expect to be discovered over night via YouTube or some TV show. Bands don't put in years of effort like they did before.  I've read stories about G n' R , how they shared a small apartment and lived together for years struggling to break through.
Not that I want every musician to struggle, but it has to form some sort of drive to go through that, versus being discovered in a parking lot and thrown into a studio because you look like the next pop star and have a team of writers writing for you. If you look at top selling artists of 2018 they aren't people I expect to make a lasting mark on music. This generation is more interested in internet stars than creating good music.  Does anyone really think people will be listening to Bruno Mars 15 years from now? The closest to rock represented in the top 50 of 2018  are Maroon 5 and Imagine Dragons.....no wonder music isn't selling.

Great points you make here, Mace.

As far as "portable" music goes, I agree that CDs are a vast improvement over tapes.  I had to use my wife's care recently when mine was in the shop and she has a CD + tape player (a rare thing these day!) and the CD player doesn't work so I popped in a tape and went to skip a song... and that's too much trouble while driving!  Plus the tapes sound a bit worn and stretched out.  So yeah, CD's have their place.  (At home it's almost always vinyl!)

Yeah, it's really sad that few bands with staying power are around these days.  Part of the problem is that bands are given time to develop the way they used to.  The Rolling Stones are a good example.  When they started out, they played and recorded mostly covers with little original material but their label and management saw their potential and gave them the opportunity to mature and develop- and it paid off big time!  We don't see that much today. 

pjhawks

mace1229 said:

Thanks for sharing, I saw you referenced this article in another thread.
It was an interesting article, although not a lot of new thoughts or ideas about the dying music industry for me.
Most of it I agreed with, a few thoughts I had.
He makes it almost sound like CDs were bad, and the start of the end for music. CDs were not a bad thing. He mentions the quality wasn't as great as everyone thought, it only sounds cleaner because there's less music in it. But if you consider what CDs really replaced, it was a great improvement. They replaced cassette tapes and walkmans. I could now have a portable form of music that sounded great. That was good for the music industry. Not many people were still listening to vinyl by the time CDs became popular, so they did not replace a superior product, they just replaced cheap cassettes. Tapes sounded bad to begin with, were a pain to skip songs and wore out. Its like comparing VHS to DVD. It took 15 years from the point CDs were released until streaming/downloading was a thing, so even though they were the original digital format, I dont think it helped make the leap to streaming. It was going to happen.

Another big factor of the digital age are how bands are formed. I think that is a huge factor in the industry. I can't think of a single band who have come out in the last 15 years that in another 15-20 from now will still be important in the music world (I'm sure there's lots of great new bands, but not on the pop radio). Growing up in the 90s we had great bands from current to 30 years old being played on rock stations, Tom Petty, Who, etc. So many bands who bad been around for 20-30 years were still important, and still are even today. I feel like the 90s was the last decade where musicians are going to leave a mark. Music today just sucks and won't be around for a long time. Record companies and radio just want the next catchy hit that gets overplayed for 6 months then never heard from again.  I think, at least in part, some of that has to do with character that was built by working hard. It seems like musicians today want to expect to be discovered over night via YouTube or some TV show. Bands don't put in years of effort like they did before.  I've read stories about G n' R , how they shared a small apartment and lived together for years struggling to break through.
Not that I want every musician to struggle, but it has to form some sort of drive to go through that, versus being discovered in a parking lot and thrown into a studio because you look like the next pop star and have a team of writers writing for you. If you look at top selling artists of 2018 they aren't people I expect to make a lasting mark on music. This generation is more interested in internet stars than creating good music.  Does anyone really think people will be listening to Bruno Mars 15 years from now? The closest to rock represented in the top 50 of 2018  are Maroon 5 and Imagine Dragons.....no wonder music isn't selling.

Bruno Mars is probably not a great example to use.  he is super talented and can play different instruments.  he was fantastic at the Super Bowl a few years go.  I think if isn't a fuck up in his personal life he will be around and relevant.  

Maroon 5 is more pop than rock.  I don't get Imagine Dragons but i guess some people like them.

It's hard to tell what will be around in the future. I mean Toto's Africa which came out in 1983 has been a hit in late 2018/early 2019.  who could have foreseen that? and Journey is back in fashion after the last episode of the Sopranos.

I think the Black Keys and Twenty One Pilots will be around and relevant in 15 years. Twenty One Pilots is really interesting because they are a group that the teens/early 20s crowd seems to be really into.  To me they are a group that gives me hope that the generation of teens/early 20s today may start to head more towards rock and away from the rap crap.  

brianlux

pjhawks said:

mace1229 said:

Thanks for sharing, I saw you referenced this article in another thread.
It was an interesting article, although not a lot of new thoughts or ideas about the dying music industry for me.
Most of it I agreed with, a few thoughts I had.
He makes it almost sound like CDs were bad, and the start of the end for music. CDs were not a bad thing. He mentions the quality wasn't as great as everyone thought, it only sounds cleaner because there's less music in it. But if you consider what CDs really replaced, it was a great improvement. They replaced cassette tapes and walkmans. I could now have a portable form of music that sounded great. That was good for the music industry. Not many people were still listening to vinyl by the time CDs became popular, so they did not replace a superior product, they just replaced cheap cassettes. Tapes sounded bad to begin with, were a pain to skip songs and wore out. Its like comparing VHS to DVD. It took 15 years from the point CDs were released until streaming/downloading was a thing, so even though they were the original digital format, I dont think it helped make the leap to streaming. It was going to happen.

Another big factor of the digital age are how bands are formed. I think that is a huge factor in the industry. I can't think of a single band who have come out in the last 15 years that in another 15-20 from now will still be important in the music world (I'm sure there's lots of great new bands, but not on the pop radio). Growing up in the 90s we had great bands from current to 30 years old being played on rock stations, Tom Petty, Who, etc. So many bands who bad been around for 20-30 years were still important, and still are even today. I feel like the 90s was the last decade where musicians are going to leave a mark. Music today just sucks and won't be around for a long time. Record companies and radio just want the next catchy hit that gets overplayed for 6 months then never heard from again.  I think, at least in part, some of that has to do with character that was built by working hard. It seems like musicians today want to expect to be discovered over night via YouTube or some TV show. Bands don't put in years of effort like they did before.  I've read stories about G n' R , how they shared a small apartment and lived together for years struggling to break through.
Not that I want every musician to struggle, but it has to form some sort of drive to go through that, versus being discovered in a parking lot and thrown into a studio because you look like the next pop star and have a team of writers writing for you. If you look at top selling artists of 2018 they aren't people I expect to make a lasting mark on music. This generation is more interested in internet stars than creating good music.  Does anyone really think people will be listening to Bruno Mars 15 years from now? The closest to rock represented in the top 50 of 2018  are Maroon 5 and Imagine Dragons.....no wonder music isn't selling.

Bruno Mars is probably not a great example to use.  he is super talented and can play different instruments.  he was fantastic at the Super Bowl a few years go.  I think if isn't a fuck up in his personal life he will be around and relevant.  

Maroon 5 is more pop than rock.  I don't get Imagine Dragons but i guess some people like them.

It's hard to tell what will be around in the future. I mean Toto's Africa which came out in 1983 has been a hit in late 2018/early 2019.  who could have foreseen that? and Journey is back in fashion after the last episode of the Sopranos.

I think the Black Keys and Twenty One Pilots will be around and relevant in 15 years. Twenty One Pilots is really interesting because they are a group that the teens/early 20s crowd seems to be really into.  To me they are a group that gives me hope that the generation of teens/early 20s today may start to head more towards rock and away from the rap crap.  

I hope you're right.  Today was a reminder of how base that crap can get (not all of it, but a lot).  I was with my wife and told her I was going to run into the store for something.  She said she would wait in the car and knit.  When I came back out a few minute later, some dude had parked next to her and with windows rolled down had rap playing- not super loud but easily heard with thudding bass- next to my wife who is 66 and knitting.  Not your typical rap fan.  As we took off I said with due sarcasm, "So did you enjoy that guys music?"  She said, "No, it was nothing but 'motherfucker this', 'kill the fucker' that, 'fuck that bitch' and so forth."  Real classy that some guy would do that next to someone who obviously isn't a fan.  I rarely say this about any music but I hate that kind of shit.

HughFreakingDillon

brianlux said:

pjhawks said:

mace1229 said:

Thanks for sharing, I saw you referenced this article in another thread.
It was an interesting article, although not a lot of new thoughts or ideas about the dying music industry for me.
Most of it I agreed with, a few thoughts I had.
He makes it almost sound like CDs were bad, and the start of the end for music. CDs were not a bad thing. He mentions the quality wasn't as great as everyone thought, it only sounds cleaner because there's less music in it. But if you consider what CDs really replaced, it was a great improvement. They replaced cassette tapes and walkmans. I could now have a portable form of music that sounded great. That was good for the music industry. Not many people were still listening to vinyl by the time CDs became popular, so they did not replace a superior product, they just replaced cheap cassettes. Tapes sounded bad to begin with, were a pain to skip songs and wore out. Its like comparing VHS to DVD. It took 15 years from the point CDs were released until streaming/downloading was a thing, so even though they were the original digital format, I dont think it helped make the leap to streaming. It was going to happen.

Another big factor of the digital age are how bands are formed. I think that is a huge factor in the industry. I can't think of a single band who have come out in the last 15 years that in another 15-20 from now will still be important in the music world (I'm sure there's lots of great new bands, but not on the pop radio). Growing up in the 90s we had great bands from current to 30 years old being played on rock stations, Tom Petty, Who, etc. So many bands who bad been around for 20-30 years were still important, and still are even today. I feel like the 90s was the last decade where musicians are going to leave a mark. Music today just sucks and won't be around for a long time. Record companies and radio just want the next catchy hit that gets overplayed for 6 months then never heard from again.  I think, at least in part, some of that has to do with character that was built by working hard. It seems like musicians today want to expect to be discovered over night via YouTube or some TV show. Bands don't put in years of effort like they did before.  I've read stories about G n' R , how they shared a small apartment and lived together for years struggling to break through.
Not that I want every musician to struggle, but it has to form some sort of drive to go through that, versus being discovered in a parking lot and thrown into a studio because you look like the next pop star and have a team of writers writing for you. If you look at top selling artists of 2018 they aren't people I expect to make a lasting mark on music. This generation is more interested in internet stars than creating good music.  Does anyone really think people will be listening to Bruno Mars 15 years from now? The closest to rock represented in the top 50 of 2018  are Maroon 5 and Imagine Dragons.....no wonder music isn't selling.

Bruno Mars is probably not a great example to use.  he is super talented and can play different instruments.  he was fantastic at the Super Bowl a few years go.  I think if isn't a fuck up in his personal life he will be around and relevant.  

Maroon 5 is more pop than rock.  I don't get Imagine Dragons but i guess some people like them.

It's hard to tell what will be around in the future. I mean Toto's Africa which came out in 1983 has been a hit in late 2018/early 2019.  who could have foreseen that? and Journey is back in fashion after the last episode of the Sopranos.

I think the Black Keys and Twenty One Pilots will be around and relevant in 15 years. Twenty One Pilots is really interesting because they are a group that the teens/early 20s crowd seems to be really into.  To me they are a group that gives me hope that the generation of teens/early 20s today may start to head more towards rock and away from the rap crap.  

I hope you're right.  Today was a reminder of how base that crap can get (not all of it, but a lot).  I was with my wife and told her I was going to run into the store for something.  She said she would wait in the car and knit.  When I came back out a few minute later, some dude had parked next to her and with windows rolled down had rap playing- not super loud but easily heard with thudding bass- next to my wife who is 66 and knitting.  Not your typical rap fan.  As we took off I said with due sarcasm, "So did you enjoy that guys music?"  She said, "No, it was nothing but 'motherfucker this', 'kill the fucker' that, 'fuck that bitch' and so forth."  Real classy that some guy would do that next to someone who obviously isn't a fan.  I rarely say this about any music but I hate that kind of shit.

even as a teen when i was into guns n roses and all that sexist shit, if i was around people who i knew would obviously not dig 'motherfucker' or 'she goes down' and other things like that, i'd turn it down.  i also wouldn't swear on the bus in earshot of adults and kids. my friends would though. i think it's just the george costanza in me. 

WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY!!! WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ACT IN A CIVILIZED WAY!!!

brianlux

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

pjhawks said:

mace1229 said:

Thanks for sharing, I saw you referenced this article in another thread.
It was an interesting article, although not a lot of new thoughts or ideas about the dying music industry for me.
Most of it I agreed with, a few thoughts I had.
He makes it almost sound like CDs were bad, and the start of the end for music. CDs were not a bad thing. He mentions the quality wasn't as great as everyone thought, it only sounds cleaner because there's less music in it. But if you consider what CDs really replaced, it was a great improvement. They replaced cassette tapes and walkmans. I could now have a portable form of music that sounded great. That was good for the music industry. Not many people were still listening to vinyl by the time CDs became popular, so they did not replace a superior product, they just replaced cheap cassettes. Tapes sounded bad to begin with, were a pain to skip songs and wore out. Its like comparing VHS to DVD. It took 15 years from the point CDs were released until streaming/downloading was a thing, so even though they were the original digital format, I dont think it helped make the leap to streaming. It was going to happen.

Another big factor of the digital age are how bands are formed. I think that is a huge factor in the industry. I can't think of a single band who have come out in the last 15 years that in another 15-20 from now will still be important in the music world (I'm sure there's lots of great new bands, but not on the pop radio). Growing up in the 90s we had great bands from current to 30 years old being played on rock stations, Tom Petty, Who, etc. So many bands who bad been around for 20-30 years were still important, and still are even today. I feel like the 90s was the last decade where musicians are going to leave a mark. Music today just sucks and won't be around for a long time. Record companies and radio just want the next catchy hit that gets overplayed for 6 months then never heard from again.  I think, at least in part, some of that has to do with character that was built by working hard. It seems like musicians today want to expect to be discovered over night via YouTube or some TV show. Bands don't put in years of effort like they did before.  I've read stories about G n' R , how they shared a small apartment and lived together for years struggling to break through.
Not that I want every musician to struggle, but it has to form some sort of drive to go through that, versus being discovered in a parking lot and thrown into a studio because you look like the next pop star and have a team of writers writing for you. If you look at top selling artists of 2018 they aren't people I expect to make a lasting mark on music. This generation is more interested in internet stars than creating good music.  Does anyone really think people will be listening to Bruno Mars 15 years from now? The closest to rock represented in the top 50 of 2018  are Maroon 5 and Imagine Dragons.....no wonder music isn't selling.

Bruno Mars is probably not a great example to use.  he is super talented and can play different instruments.  he was fantastic at the Super Bowl a few years go.  I think if isn't a fuck up in his personal life he will be around and relevant.  

Maroon 5 is more pop than rock.  I don't get Imagine Dragons but i guess some people like them.

It's hard to tell what will be around in the future. I mean Toto's Africa which came out in 1983 has been a hit in late 2018/early 2019.  who could have foreseen that? and Journey is back in fashion after the last episode of the Sopranos.

I think the Black Keys and Twenty One Pilots will be around and relevant in 15 years. Twenty One Pilots is really interesting because they are a group that the teens/early 20s crowd seems to be really into.  To me they are a group that gives me hope that the generation of teens/early 20s today may start to head more towards rock and away from the rap crap.  

I hope you're right.  Today was a reminder of how base that crap can get (not all of it, but a lot).  I was with my wife and told her I was going to run into the store for something.  She said she would wait in the car and knit.  When I came back out a few minute later, some dude had parked next to her and with windows rolled down had rap playing- not super loud but easily heard with thudding bass- next to my wife who is 66 and knitting.  Not your typical rap fan.  As we took off I said with due sarcasm, "So did you enjoy that guys music?"  She said, "No, it was nothing but 'motherfucker this', 'kill the fucker' that, 'fuck that bitch' and so forth."  Real classy that some guy would do that next to someone who obviously isn't a fan.  I rarely say this about any music but I hate that kind of shit.

even as a teen when i was into guns n roses and all that sexist shit, if i was around people who i knew would obviously not dig 'motherfucker' or 'she goes down' and other things like that, i'd turn it down.  i also wouldn't swear on the bus in earshot of adults and kids. my friends would though. i think it's just the george costanza in me. 

WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY!!! WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ACT IN A CIVILIZED WAY!!!

Yes!  And we call all learn and grow.  When we went to see Henry Rollins a few months ago I thought my wife might not dig it because I pictured him swearing a lot- not that she's a prude, she just doesn't go for a lot of unnecessary swearing.  Turns out the ONLY swear word Henry used in an over two hour talk was "son of a bitch" and he was quoting someone else.  His language was smart, articulate and highly descriptive.  Nice!