Pelican Parts Forums - Rick Beato brings up an interesting point about musical eras....

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - Rick Beato brings up an interesting point about musical eras.... (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/1171655-rick-beato-brings-up-interesting-point-about-musical-eras.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyl (Post 12377839)

I don’t know what today’s music is, really, but can only report what I am told by my 20-something kids. There are absolutely songs and artists that sweep the country - at least, the country of young people who are into popular music. At any given moment, there is a “song of the summer” that everyone - again and I won’t repeat this anymore,”everyone” means “every young person who is into popular music” - knows and is listening to. The song of the moment and the artist of the moment changes, more rapidly than it used to perhaps, but there seems to be a general style and type that stays strong for longer cycles. Like, my daughter will make me listen to [inset name here] and all her friends are also listening to, or at least have listened to, the same artist.

So it is not wholly fragmented.

Of course, not everyone is literally listening to the same song. Maybe that was the case at the height of Elvis or the Beatles, but soon after that popular music started to split apart. By 1970, the people into Hendrix were different from the people into Yes or the Moody Blues or Steely Dan or Credence, or country, or soul, or whatever.

In the 80s we had MTV, which maybe dragged the threads back together. Instead of dozens of radio stations, there was one MTV. And since a lot of us came of age in the 80s, that might be our frame. Sure, at one point whoever was dominating MTV was dominating music . . . or were they? There were hugely popular bands not part of the MTV pop world.

I might question if popular music is that much more fragmented today than in the 60s, 70s etc. Someone could study this: just calculate the concentration of record sales or radio plays by artist, and compare to the concentration of streaming plays by artist today.

I’m speaking of this like it’s a theoretical thing, admittedly, because around 1980 I got sucked into jazz and for the next twenty-plus years, unless you were a Mega pop star like Michael Jackson, I didn’t know much about you. You know how I defined “everyone”? I became “everyone else”. When my friends were at concerts listening to who-the-f that was, I was crawling jazz clubs listening to Pharoah Sanders.

Agreed, things have changed, sure, but things aren't THAT different. There are popular songs.

Due to the availability of more stuff, there is more diversity, but I think that's been happening for a long time. Cassettes (availability of cassettes and the gear to play them, then CDs, and then digital) probably had a big impact compared to the early days when probably only a few folks had record players and most folks relied on radio, and then record players got cheaper (still not cheap, I suspect), etc.... Technology has become more and more available for a LOOONG time.

I love the way things are now. I've always liked and listened to all sort of music. Now it's easier than ever. I've "discovered" a lot of music and artists that I would probably have never discovered if things were still like they were in the 70s or 80s.

Quote:

Originally Posted by javadog (Post 12376819)

There's a lot of truth to what he says.

Frankly, I think there is very little good music being made these days. Not much that will be remembered in 20 years. part of it is that the business model has changed. I don't think much of the talent level, now, either.

Movies? Largely the same. Different business model now.

I suspect grumpy old men thought the same thing in the 50s and 60s and 70s etc....

I think that there have been folks with an innate talent for sound/music since the dawn of man, and it the same today as it ever was. The sounds may change over time, and the instruments definitely change. I suspect that in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, etc... there have always been thousands of garage bands, most of them probably not great, but enjoying themselves, and then a few top notch bands and a few top notch individual performers, the best of the best. Some may never get their lucky break, but a few do. Maybe that's the big difference these days, is that when some do, they may not get pushed out by the companies and radio stations like they once were.

Well, I guess Like Barry Corbin said to Tommy Lee Jones in No Country;

"You cain't stop what's comin'.
It ain't waitin' on you.
That's vanity"

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldE (Post 12377912)

If I understand correctly, Rick is saying we were basically force fed what the labels wanted to market. Now we are free range music consumers.
This might be a return to local acts doing their thing. It's a transition. Who knows?

Best
Les

t

I think the industry offered what they wanted to sell us. If it didn’t sell they went on to something else. They were always testing the market. There was a lot of resistance to what became MoTown until white kids started buying the records .
I was lucky to live near a liberal arts college that attracted rich kids from all over the country. Go into a state school dorm (where I went) and there would be a $500 stereo next to a stack of Beetles and Stones albums. Go into an Antioch dorm and there would be a Mickey Mouse record player and a pile of Lead Belly, Miles Davis, and Etta James records. I got exposed to a lot of music at Antioch, but I still liked mainstream rock and roll best.

Thanks Herr for putting up this thread- why???? :D
My wife and I were out of town this weekend, and this thread led to an interesting dinner conversation. My wife works as an accountant for a company that manages stuff (t-shirts/etc.) for bands in this new age.

I asked her about today vs. long ago. Wish I had a camera rolling. For 40 minutes she lit up about all these bands she represents. None we've ever heard of. None She'd even heard of before working there either.

Basically, without the corporate funding, they can do whatever they want, no need for formulaic themes to get a record label to take them. They produce what they want, when they want, with limited reimbursement. She stated the income occurs once the word of mouth (sharing) spreads. The money comes from touring and merchandise.

She handles the merchandise. She stated some of the bands she represents gets 70k per show and a bunch for merch, which she does the books for. Even her favorite musician, a Josh Ritter, works somewhat under this model. He does fine.

More than the music info, it was a great time with my wife in a candlelight dinner in 18th century colonial Williamsburg.

It reminds me of some of the artist played here on PPOT- Rene Del Cid et al. She plays with Josh Turner, who all of them play the heck out of classic stuff very true to form. Turner, in particular, plays classics like Nick Drake to the point where he smears vasoline on his guitar strings to deaden them to a 60's vibe. That ain't mainstream at all. And he makes a living at it. Amazing.

My wife even started throwing out names like James McMurtry and such. I remember an article about him in guitar magazine years ago when he was hanging out with John Cougar. In the article, James shared some lyrics about his hometown. John Cougar told him to ditch the hometown references and keep the words applicable to something "everyone" could relate to. The references James made were too specific for everyday people according to John.

Suddenly everything made sense, and for the last 20+ years I haven't been able to listen to a Mellencamp song, or even a Tom Petty song (who I really like) without hearing that "everyone" inclusion. Bo Burnham even refers to this as "pandering" music in reference to country. - and he's got a great video of his own on that. :)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y7im5LT09a0?si=C8gzDxsaptUcXkNd" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

edit.... Thank god James ditched Mellencamp's advice:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AWEJPqJtZsk?si=RKUBx1K507if5Y8N" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Thanks again for the thread!