3 ms·

There's a danger in simply looking at the immediate audience. The Velvet Underground is an example of a band who, although they never became very popular, were

by zck 17y ago

There's a danger in simply looking at the immediate audience. The Velvet Underground is an example of a band who, although they never became very popular, were quite influential. Having an influential, respected reporter on staff might not pay off for years, but it may become worth it over the long run.

unalone 17y ago
Better than the Velvet Underground as an example: Look at Zappa, whose album Freak Out! provided the technological impetus for the Beatles to record Sgt. Pepper's, which then got all the attention for its tech experiments. Zappa was never as acclaimed as the people that followed him, but constantly pushed music forward and brought a lot of new ideas with him. By any metric other than influence, which can't be tracked, he was not a particularly successful musician. He wasn't even critically acclaimed at first, because people thought atonal rock would kill music forever. Metrics are good for some things. Other things cannot and never will be measured.
- zck 17y ago
  That's true, and I'm kind of disappointed in myself for not thinking of Zappa. I do think the Velvet Underground might be a better example, because you have to explain less -- people know they're influential.
  - unalone 17y ago
    Zappa came to mind largely because I'm still not happy with how he's treated by the music media. Here's a guy who changed the face of rock, inspired the greatest band of all time as much as the Beach Boys did (though they get mention), and was a huge figure both in jazz and modern classical music, possibly the best guitar soloist of all time, and makes a label that launches the likes of Captain Beefheart and Tom Waits, and he only gets mention as a "freak" outsider by most sources. The outsider culture in music infuriates me, because the most cutting-edge musicians get less than lip service almost everywhere. Trying to find the cutting edge is still ridiculously hard today: Looking for new music, I have a damned hard time doing it, because the attention is never on what's new. Ahem. Rant over. Velvet Underground is certainly another terrific example.

by zck 17y ago

unalone 17y ago

Better than the Velvet Underground as an example: Look at Zappa, whose album Freak Out! provided the technological impetus for the Beatles to record Sgt. Pepper's, which then got all the attention for its tech experiments. Zappa was never as acclaimed as the people that followed him, but constantly pushed music forward and brought a lot of new ideas with him. By any metric other than influence, which can't be tracked, he was not a particularly successful musician. He wasn't even critically acclaimed at first, because people thought atonal rock would kill music forever. Metrics are good for some things. Other things cannot and never will be measured.

zck 17y ago
That's true, and I'm kind of disappointed in myself for not thinking of Zappa. I do think the Velvet Underground might be a better example, because you have to explain less -- people know they're influential.
- unalone 17y ago
  Zappa came to mind largely because I'm still not happy with how he's treated by the music media. Here's a guy who changed the face of rock, inspired the greatest band of all time as much as the Beach Boys did (though they get mention), and was a huge figure both in jazz and modern classical music, possibly the best guitar soloist of all time, and makes a label that launches the likes of Captain Beefheart and Tom Waits, and he only gets mention as a "freak" outsider by most sources. The outsider culture in music infuriates me, because the most cutting-edge musicians get less than lip service almost everywhere. Trying to find the cutting edge is still ridiculously hard today: Looking for new music, I have a damned hard time doing it, because the attention is never on what's new. Ahem. Rant over. Velvet Underground is certainly another terrific example.