5 ms·

I think something can be valuable and abundant, what you really mean is what makes the value capturable. If truly good songs were cheap to create then people m

I think something can be valuable and abundant, what you really mean is what makes the value capturable. If truly good songs were cheap to create then people making good songs won't be able to charge as much as they do, but consumers will arguable experience more value through an abundance of good songs.

pbhjpbhj 3y ago
>consumers will arguable experience more value through an abundance of good songs.// It is people's shared experiences of a song that makes a song most valuable (it's not the only value, of course). Having more songs means less shared experiences, more is less. Imagine going to a club where the DJ can play any of a million songs but only one person knows that song; compared to them playing a setlist of floor-filling bangers ...
- ethbr1 3y ago
  The herd vs merit distinction is interesting, and I think they both have value. Maybe differently to different people, but non-zero. Imagine a handful of objectively "good" songs. Play them for a crowd where nobody knows them. Or, in a more humorous example, imagine the Beatles played tracks only from their second album, while touring for their first album. Would audiences be disappointed? I struggle to imagine an overly negative reaction. People love hearing songs they love, but they also fell in love with those songs for a reason. Well executed music is well-executed music.
  - pbhjpbhj 3y ago
    Yes, agreed, music has a particular value to a person (I was going too say 'intrinsic' but it is personal) as well. But shared love of music, or shared experiences of music transcends this value IMO; and is largely orthogonal. "That song we danced to", "what we sang at the campfire", crab dance for LTT watchers, 'easy for ENZ' for CSGO players, a national anthem to a nationalist, ... the music matters a little but it's only really a rallying point for shared experiences.
- OfSanguineFire 3y ago
  "It is people's shared experiences of a song that makes a song most valuable" You are definitely right that abundance leads to a decline in shared experiences. I’m the only person I know who listens to the music that I do, but of course I treasure that music. But beyond my anecdotal experience, from sites like Last.fm it appears that listeners really began to fragment by the 2010s; with so much on offer now, people don’t necessarily listen to the same music as even their closest peers. DJs, too, have spoken about the decline of the well-known banger when they are being flooded with hundreds of new tracks every week. Moreover, computer mixing today means those tracks might get so cut up by DJs (e.g. taking a bass line from one track and a synth line from another) that they become well-nigh unrecognizable to even the savviest trainspotters.

pbhjpbhj 3y ago

>consumers will arguable experience more value through an abundance of good songs.// It is people's shared experiences of a song that makes a song most valuable (it's not the only value, of course). Having more songs means less shared experiences, more is less. Imagine going to a club where the DJ can play any of a million songs but only one person knows that song; compared to them playing a setlist of floor-filling bangers ...

ethbr1 3y ago
The herd vs merit distinction is interesting, and I think they both have value. Maybe differently to different people, but non-zero. Imagine a handful of objectively "good" songs. Play them for a crowd where nobody knows them. Or, in a more humorous example, imagine the Beatles played tracks only from their second album, while touring for their first album. Would audiences be disappointed? I struggle to imagine an overly negative reaction. People love hearing songs they love, but they also fell in love with those songs for a reason. Well executed music is well-executed music.
- pbhjpbhj 3y ago
  Yes, agreed, music has a particular value to a person (I was going too say 'intrinsic' but it is personal) as well. But shared love of music, or shared experiences of music transcends this value IMO; and is largely orthogonal. "That song we danced to", "what we sang at the campfire", crab dance for LTT watchers, 'easy for ENZ' for CSGO players, a national anthem to a nationalist, ... the music matters a little but it's only really a rallying point for shared experiences.
OfSanguineFire 3y ago
"It is people's shared experiences of a song that makes a song most valuable" You are definitely right that abundance leads to a decline in shared experiences. I’m the only person I know who listens to the music that I do, but of course I treasure that music. But beyond my anecdotal experience, from sites like Last.fm it appears that listeners really began to fragment by the 2010s; with so much on offer now, people don’t necessarily listen to the same music as even their closest peers. DJs, too, have spoken about the decline of the well-known banger when they are being flooded with hundreds of new tracks every week. Moreover, computer mixing today means those tracks might get so cut up by DJs (e.g. taking a bass line from one track and a synth line from another) that they become well-nigh unrecognizable to even the savviest trainspotters.