18 ms·
Before the twentieth century, and even today in some parts of the world, music wasn't something you buy. It was something you participate in. Before the invent
by beloch 13y ago
Before the twentieth century, and even today in some parts of the world, music wasn't something you buy. It was something you participate in. Before the invention of the phonograph, people would bring instruments to parties and play music themselves. It took time for this tradition to die out. Even in the 40's movie theaters frequently showed sing-a-long shorts! While recorded music has brought first-rate professional performances to the masses, it has robbed untold millions of musical expression. How many of us learned to play some instrument or another as children, but never bothered to keep playing because we didn't like the music we were taught to play and didn't think we could ever play well enough to be worth listening to? Odds are most people reading this are much less musically accomplished than their great-great grandparents were.
For a substantial portion of the twentieth century, technological limitations made recording and distribution expensive. You could make a lot more money by promoting a star and making everyone want a small number of records than you could by recording everything under the sun! Some of those stars were just gifted amateurs who had mass appeal the moment they walked in from the wilds. Those were rare enough that we soon learned how to manufacture stars, and the methods have reached a level of sophistication where musical talent isn't even necessary anymore (see autotuning).
The internet has practically eliminated the costs and difficulty of distribution. The moment you record something, you can send it to the other side of the planet almost instantaneously to as many people who are interested in it exist. Recording still takes some knowledge, but the equipment required to do professional quality recording is now easily accessible to hobbyists. Natural prodigies are still showing up now and then, and stopping them from recording great music would be more challenging than allowing them to do so! It's the manufactured star system that's collapsing. It costs a lot to do research on what should appeal to teenagers in a few years, hire professional writers to design songs matching your research results, hire somebody who looks good in a latex bikini to record those songs, shoot videos, etc., and finally have a team of professional audio engineers digitally massage her horrid caterwaulings into something that doesn't sound horrible when blasted through iPod earbuds at top volume.
Manufactured music superstars are a dying breed, and good riddance. My playlist is devoid of them and full of gifted amateurs, and I couldn't be happier with the change! The global musical monoculture is ending and a diverse, global party is replacing it. We are working towards the point where music can be created by anyone, anywhere, to be shared with everyone, everywhere. Perhaps, as we listen to superstars less and to ordinary people more, the pressure to play like a superstar or not play at all will drop away and we'll reclaim the tradition of participatory music that we've been robbed of. Perhaps, one day, people will start bringing their instruments to parties again!
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- jonnathanson 13y ago"Manufactured music superstars are a dying breed, and good riddance." By all current indications, this is simply not true. Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber, et al., are still the biggest names in the world. Van Halen (!), by all accounts a musical relic of the 1980s, made over $20M on tour in 2012. [1] Katy Perry is the #1 performer on the iTunes charts right now, followed closely by Robin Thicke. [2] In fact, something paradoxical may be happening in today's music business: the digital ecosystem might be concentrating sales and fame among a smaller handful of winners, at the expense of everyone else. Part of this is the competition effect described in the article. Because everyone can be a musician now, and because there's so much more music out there -- and so many more ways to discover it -- the primary challenge for any musician seeking to earn a living is to figure out how to get discovered. The landscape is noisier than ever, figuratively and literally. How does one stand out? Skill doesn't seem to be the determinative factor. Instead, it's marketing dollars. The big labels, as much as everyone hates them, are still kingmakers. They still have the money to buy a hit. They still have the distribution partnerships to make something chart, or to book someone on a major tour. For everyone outside their system, getting noticed is certainly possible, and probably more possible than ever. But the room is pretty damned crowded, and everyone's playing an instrument. This may change in the long run, but the change is most likely going to involve the replacement of old kingmakers with new kingmakers: i.e., Universal Music or Sony BMG will cede some power to Apple and Amazon. Regardless, the power-law distribution is still very much in effect. I'm as hopeful as anyone for a true revolution in music, and for the "dying" out of the "manufactured music superstars." Believe me, I wish I lived in a world where Katy Perry and Miley Cyrus weren't bigger than Jesus. But they're doing just fine, and they will for many years to come. Even if we stop paying for music. (They make a killing on tour; the record sales are nice, but almost incidental). [1] Source: http://www.billboard.com/articles/list/1549704/musics-top-40-money-makers-2013 http://www.billboard.com/articles/list/1549704/musics-top-40... [2] http://www.apple.com/itunes/charts/songs/ http://www.apple.com/itunes/charts/songs/
- pessimizer 13y ago