The current state of music

[saki]

I noticed that in the last two years it seems like there are a good number of really promising talented bands that are coming out.  It sort of reminds me of the late 70's punk explosion or the wave of post-punk garage bands that came out in the early 2000's.  Except it seems like this wave of new bands is even bigger and more diverse than the early 2000's.  I'll give examples:

Yeasayer, MGMT, The Whigs, The Born Ruffians, The Walkmen, Fleet Foxes, Dr. Dog, The Dodos, The Avett Bros, Animal Collective, Blitzen Trapper, Kings Of Leon, Vampire Weekend, John Butler Trio, and there are probably more that I just don't know about.  

By the way, I realize that probably more than a few of these bands didn't come out in the last two years.  My point is that in the last two years a lot of their music has been given a lot of exposure.  

My question is:  What do you think of the current state of music and are we going through some kind of wave like in the late 70's, except this one is broader and harder to categorize?  

[goodjam2bn]

I was discussing this with my 21 year old son. Using him as a gauge it seems that the music that is raw and hard  is regaining popularity. He totally rejects electronica. It must be real and performed by real people.  

[red]

Over-saturation.  Whether that is good or bad, I'm not sure.  

[bold99]

I don't think the state of music is that great.  There is some good stuff out there if you go look for it but for the most part a lot of these bands get overhyped by the blogs/media.  I don't see bands with staying power like you saw in the 60's/70's.  Especially now with Itunes, everything is about a "song" rather than whole albums.  My buddy is a DJ and he was saying how kids now don't even know the names of songs, artists, albums etc...they just come up to him and are like "the song goes like this...." and they just start humming it, but they have no idea who sings it.  I don't think there are a whole lot of bands that will be remembered like those 70's bands were.

[Jaimoe]

I don't think the state of music is that great.  There is some good stuff out there if you go look for it but for the most part a lot of these bands get overhyped by the blogs/media.  I don't see bands with staying power like you saw in the 60's/70's.  Especially now with Itunes, everything is about a "song" rather than whole albums.  My buddy is a DJ and he was saying how kids now don't even know the names of songs, artists, albums etc...they just come up to him and are like "the song goes like this...." and they just start humming it, but they have no idea who sings it.  I don't think there are a whole lot of bands that will be remembered like those 70's bands were.

I agree with some of what you say. The download generation is ruining albums and album sales. More than ever, music is a disposable commodity and artists are the ones that suffer, even when music companies cry foul the loudest.

Sadly, the era of "the album as an art form" is long gone. However, I think we are in another transition period, so don't write off music of this era yet. It's too early to see where the important bands/artists from this decade will rank when the dust settles. I'm holding out hope.

[bold99]

I don't think the state of music is that great.  There is some good stuff out there if you go look for it but for the most part a lot of these bands get overhyped by the blogs/media.  I don't see bands with staying power like you saw in the 60's/70's.  Especially now with Itunes, everything is about a "song" rather than whole albums.  My buddy is a DJ and he was saying how kids now don't even know the names of songs, artists, albums etc...they just come up to him and are like "the song goes like this...." and they just start humming it, but they have no idea who sings it.  I don't think there are a whole lot of bands that will be remembered like those 70's bands were.

I agree with some of what you say. The download generation is ruining albums and album sales. More than ever, music is a disposable commodity and artists are the ones that suffer, even when music companies cry foul the loudest.

Sadly, the era of "the album as an art form" is long gone. However, I think we are in another transition period, so don't write off music of this era yet. It's too early to see where the important bands/artists from this decade will rank when the dust settles. I'm holding out hope.

I'm holding out hope too.  I just think its going to be hard.  I just don't see enough bands putting out the kind of music with staying power.  A lot of times its not their fault either, its just the way the music business is these days.  I've seen a lot of great albums go by the wayside and you never hear a thing about them because they aren't backed by the record company.  Also we live in the era of no artist development.  Bands that became legends a lot of times did so not on their first album, but their 3rd or 4th....these days record companies drop bands if their first album doesn't do well.  

[Jaimoe]

I don't think the state of music is that great.  There is some good stuff out there if you go look for it but for the most part a lot of these bands get overhyped by the blogs/media.  I don't see bands with staying power like you saw in the 60's/70's.  Especially now with Itunes, everything is about a "song" rather than whole albums.  My buddy is a DJ and he was saying how kids now don't even know the names of songs, artists, albums etc...they just come up to him and are like "the song goes like this...." and they just start humming it, but they have no idea who sings it.  I don't think there are a whole lot of bands that will be remembered like those 70's bands were.

I agree with some of what you say. The download generation is ruining albums and album sales. More than ever, music is a disposable commodity and artists are the ones that suffer, even when music companies cry foul the loudest.

Sadly, the era of "the album as an art form" is long gone. However, I think we are in another transition period, so don't write off music of this era yet. It's too early to see where the important bands/artists from this decade will rank when the dust settles. I'm holding out hope.

I'm holding out hope too.  I just think its going to be hard.  I just don't see enough bands putting out the kind of music with staying power.  A lot of times its not their fault either, its just the way the music business is these days.  I've seen a lot of great albums go by the wayside and you never hear a thing about them because they aren't backed by the record company.  Also we live in the era of no artist development.  Bands that became legends a lot of times did so not on their first album, but their 3rd or 4th....these days record companies drop bands if their first album doesn't do well.  

Bands aren't the investment they once were, especially now with profits dwindling due to piracy etc...

However, I think there's tons of great music out there, but you have to know where to look for it. In the "olden days", there was far less diversity and discovering bands was easier. I think we have been in another golden age of rock for almost 10 years, but popular music is so splinted and segregated nowadays that some bands get buried or left to fend for themselves, and are unsavy when it comes to self-promotion.

[capt. scotty]

However, I think there's tons of great music out there, but you have to know where to look for it. In the "olden days", there was far less diversity and discovering bands was easier. I think we have been in another golden age of rock for almost 10 years, but popular music is so splinted and segregated nowadays that some bands get buried or left to fend for themselves, and are unsavy when it comes to self-promotion.

I agree with this the most out of everything in yinz guys conversation.

Fact of the matter is, popular music these days is different and most bands that people around here listen too will never have the ability to bring record companies the most money, so they wont be legendary or very popular. They'll always have staying power if the people who are fans now enjoy the music for what it is. Its not like if MMJ disappears in 10 years and never get more popular than now, I still wont be rocking out 40 years from now to OBH. They are legendary to me.

bold99, I disagree with what you said about people not knowing bands/songs anymore. There's always been people like that, and there always will be (the generalization would be frat boys and dumb blondes). People who care about music go to lengths that they need to to discover this information.

[Jaimoe]

However, I think there's tons of great music out there, but you have to know where to look for it. In the "olden days", there was far less diversity and discovering bands was easier. I think we have been in another golden age of rock for almost 10 years, but popular music is so splinted and segregated nowadays that some bands get buried or left to fend for themselves, and are unsavy when it comes to self-promotion.

bold99, I disagree with what you said about people not knowing bands/songs anymore. There's always been people like that, and there always will be (the generalization would be frat boys and dumb blondes). People who care about music go to lengths that they need to to discover this information.

Although I think iPods (and their ilk) has made the album and the context of a song placement and/or order irrelevant, and thus less meaningful. I do think having thousands of songs at your fingertips can make people not know what song they are listening to; and certainly, specific albums can get lost in the shuffle. For example, I have a friend who likes Zeppelin - and she's new to them. I looked at her playlist and it looked like a messy poorly-constructed compilation of half-albums and jumbled tracks. She also didn't know any of the original albums.

[red]

The resurgence of vinyl is what has me most excited these days.  I still wish I could have been a teenager in the early 80s, though.  

[Jaimoe]

The resurgence of vinyl is what has me most excited these days.  I still wish I could have been a teenager in the early 80s, though.  

Trust me: No you don't.

[aMillionDreams]

I've got to disagree. I think the age of downloading and internet has helped music in general.  There is more exposure so artists like Nick Drake don't die without ever receiving any recognition.  Musicians don't have to rely on getting their "big shot" anymore they just have to afford a Mac and an internet connection and the whole world can find their music.  No more record execs "discovering" talent, exploiting it, and leave the artist penniless.  Sure artists are still penniless under the new paradigm, but it's better for fans of music and musicians who for whatever reasons don't appeal to record executives.

[Jaimoe]

I've got to disagree. I think the age of downloading and internet has helped music in general.  There is more exposure so artists like Nick Drake don't die without ever receiving any recognition.  Musicians don't have to rely on getting their "big shot" anymore they just have to afford a Mac and an internet connection and the whole world can find their music.  No more record execs "discovering" talent, exploiting it, and leave the artist penniless.  Sure artists are still penniless under the new paradigm, but it's better for fans of music and musicians who for whatever reasons don't appeal to record executives.

Yes, that is very true. However, artists have to have the business savy, capital and of course talent to pull it off, and even then it's still a crap-shoot. Downloading without paying is stealing - not counting when music samples are offered up with an artist's approval. Unless you intend on going to every tour by every artist you've hoarded via burns or downloads, then you ain't supporing the artist.

One thing that business-oriented indie artists do to find some sort of success is to tour endlessly and by selling their mechandise directly to fans at gigs.

[bold99]

However, I think there's tons of great music out there, but you have to know where to look for it. In the "olden days", there was far less diversity and discovering bands was easier. I think we have been in another golden age of rock for almost 10 years, but popular music is so splinted and segregated nowadays that some bands get buried or left to fend for themselves, and are unsavy when it comes to self-promotion.

I agree with this the most out of everything in yinz guys conversation.

Fact of the matter is, popular music these days is different and most bands that people around here listen too will never have the ability to bring record companies the most money, so they wont be legendary or very popular. They'll always have staying power if the people who are fans now enjoy the music for what it is. Its not like if MMJ disappears in 10 years and never get more popular than now, I still wont be rocking out 40 years from now to OBH. They are legendary to me.

bold99, I disagree with what you said about people not knowing bands/songs anymore. There's always been people like that, and there always will be (the generalization would be frat boys and dumb blondes). People who care about music go to lengths that they need to to discover this information.

I think its a fact that this is true.  I'm a huge music fan and even I am guilty of not knowing songs/albums just because the way music is presented now.  Someone sends you a download of some album you hardly sit there with that album until you know every song title etc...it goes on your ipod.  Its just a whole different ballgame.  Back in the days of vinyl and even cds you had the physical thing sitting in front of you when you listened to it.

Anytime you have more options things get spread thinner.  I'm not sure the way the music business is today is so much a good thing.  Maybe for fans it is easier to find music, and bands can get their music out there just by putting it on some site or blog but does that mean the quality is really better?  I remember an interview with Jack White and he was saying back in the day artists got in a room with 4 tracks and they had to make what they could out of that.  Now every kid with a computer can make an album.  Sure some good comes of that but for the most part its oversaturizing the industry and a lot of it is crap.  Which is why people don't know songs/albums, there is just so much of it to take in.  

[aMillionDreams]

I've got to disagree. I think the age of downloading and internet has helped music in general.  There is more exposure so artists like Nick Drake don't die without ever receiving any recognition.  Musicians don't have to rely on getting their "big shot" anymore they just have to afford a Mac and an internet connection and the whole world can find their music.  No more record execs "discovering" talent, exploiting it, and leave the artist penniless.  Sure artists are still penniless under the new paradigm, but it's better for fans of music and musicians who for whatever reasons don't appeal to record executives.

Yes, that is very true. However, artists have to have the business savy, capital and of course talent to pull it off, and even then it's still a crap-shoot. Downloading without paying is stealing - not counting when music samples are offered up with an artist's approval. Unless you intend on going to every tour by every artist you've hoarded via burns or downloads, then you ain't supporing the artist.

One thing that business-oriented indie artists do to find some sort of success is to tour endlessly and by selling their mechandise directly to fans at gigs.

Musicians do need to be more business-savvy, that's true, but it's better than them just getting screwed over by businessmen.  Plus, musicians are born-self promoters, it comes more naturally for some than you might think.

To your next point an artist makes the same amount if not more money from someone's ticket to a live show or cut from a Tshirt sale than they do from CD sales, so I don't understand how you think it is necessary to follow a band on a complete tour which would cost into the thousands of dollars because you skipped out on a 15 dollar CD that the artist sees only a dollar or two of.  I don't want to get off on this debate, I'm just saying, that part of your argument doesn't hold water.  If something is downloaded without permission, that it is illegal, I won't argue that point.

But... ever make a mixtape for anyone?  Is that "stealing"?  Did you follow each artist on that mixtape for an entire tour to make up for terrible deeds you had done to their property?

[Vadie Stark]

As a listener the current state of music is the current state of my collection ;)

[Jaimoe]

I've got to disagree. I think the age of downloading and internet has helped music in general.  There is more exposure so artists like Nick Drake don't die without ever receiving any recognition.  Musicians don't have to rely on getting their "big shot" anymore they just have to afford a Mac and an internet connection and the whole world can find their music.  No more record execs "discovering" talent, exploiting it, and leave the artist penniless.  Sure artists are still penniless under the new paradigm, but it's better for fans of music and musicians who for whatever reasons don't appeal to record executives.

Yes, that is very true. However, artists have to have the business savy, capital and of course talent to pull it off, and even then it's still a crap-shoot. Downloading without paying is stealing - not counting when music samples are offered up with an artist's approval. Unless you intend on going to every tour by every artist you've hoarded via burns or downloads, then you ain't supporing the artist.

One thing that business-oriented indie artists do to find some sort of success is to tour endlessly and by selling their mechandise directly to fans at gigs.

Musicians do need to be more business-savvy, that's true, but it's better than them just getting screwed over by businessmen.  Plus, musicians are born-self promoters, it comes more naturally for some than you might think.

To your next point an artist makes the same amount if not more money from someone's ticket to a live show or cut from a Tshirt sale than they do from CD sales, so I don't understand how you think it is necessary to follow a band on a complete tour which would cost into the thousands of dollars because you skipped out on a 15 dollar CD that the artist sees only a dollar or two of.  I don't want to get off on this debate, I'm just saying, that part of your argument doesn't hold water.  If something is downloaded without permission, that it is illegal, I won't argue that point.

But... ever make a mixtape for anyone?  Is that "stealing"?  Did you follow each artist on that mixtape for an entire tour to make up for terrible deeds you had done to their property?

I didn't mean that a fan should follow a band around on an entire tour like some misguided Phishhead. And yes, I have made mixed tapes and mixed CDs. But I refuse accepting burns and/or making burns for someone, especially when associated with smaller artists. Actually, a mixed CD is a good promotion tool. Labels have done it since the beginning of the recording industry.

I have a friend that burns everything and downloads songs via a Russian website. He infuriates me. However, he argues: "I support all the bands by going to the concerts." Now, he has over 800 CDs and I know he doesn't go to very many concerts. He's being a selective music moralist.

Listen, I don't care too much if someone gets an illegal download of the big artists such as the Stones or even a newer band like Coldplay - these guys are huge - but the small indie acts get screwed no matter how you look at it. For example, I'm going to see The Von Bondies tonight. They got dumped off their old label and are now doing things on their own, including releasing their new album via their own label. They are playing their second concert in Toronto in 4 months. I know for a fact they'll be manning the swag table themselves before the show. My point is, bands have to constantly tour nowadays since album sales via traditional methods are decreasingly lucrative. I think we'll see another revolution in the near future, whether that comes with music download accountablility and/or a change in attitude (which is unlikely).

I don't want to come off as a music snob (although admittedly I am), but what really burns my britches are people that don't buy anything, including movies - everything they get is illegally downloaded and/or burned.

[aMillionDreams]

I agree that a mix CD is a good promotional tool.  But why do burnt CDs get privilege over downloaded music.  It's both free music, but one, in your view, is stealing and the other a good promotional tool.  Is that not selective morality?  I'm not understanding the essential difference between the act of the ripping CD for free and downloading an album for free. Both are promotional tools whether or not they are approved by the once-mighty record labels and they are both illegal.

Jaimo, you and I are both music snobs, so I think we should be able to agree on this point: The artists that are trying to make it by the traditional standards, for the most part these days, are artists could not make it without a record companies backing.  I say level the playing field.  If the Jonas brothers just had a  myspace page I wouldn't have to hear about them so damn much and maybe there would more time on the radio for actual bands like MMJ, who don't need a record label to be successful.  (I know they have one but they signed during the old paradigm and could do it now with no help (hopefully will be soon))

[Jaimoe]

I agree that a mix CD is a good promotional tool.  But why do burnt CDs get privilege over downloaded music.  It's both free music, but one, in your view, is stealing and the other a good promotional tool.  Is that not selective morality?  I'm not understanding the essential difference between the act of the ripping CD for free and downloading an album for free. Both are promotional tools whether or not they are approved by the once-mighty record labels and they are both illegal.

Jaimo, you and I are both music snobs, so I think we should be able to agree on this point: The artists that are trying to make it by the traditional standards, for the most part these days, are artists could not make it without a record companies backing.  I say level the playing field.  If the Jonas brothers just had a  myspace page I wouldn't have to hear about them so damn much and maybe there would more time on the radio for actual bands like MMJ, who don't need a record label to be successful.  (I know they have one but they signed during the old paradigm and could do it now with no help (hopefully will be soon))

I agree with your last paragrph.

To clarify, I don't think there's any difference between illegally downloading an album via the internet for free and burning a CD.

Mixed tapes/CDs are what they are and have been used by everyone. I'm on the fence with them. I generally don't like mixes, but traditionally, if you heard a song you liked on a mix from an artist you didn't know, you may want to seek that artist out. But even this has changed over the past 5 years.