Is Music A Dying Art...

[The Amazing Rando 0]

What with the recent Ashlee Simpson debacle, I began to really think about the culture that is popular music. It seems to me that, in and of itself, music is becoming less an art and a form of expression and more a way to make money. Sure, the music business has always been about money, but at least there was a decent product placed behind it, especially in the mainstream.

 

From the 50s to even the early-to-mid 80s, singer songwriters dominated (and I don't mean as simple solo acts either). Just a small list of the popular bands/artists of the era shows you quite the range of talent. Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, The Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, The Beatles, James Taylor, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones...so many others. You could look at them and feel the emotion in what they were playing. I don't see much of that today at all.

 

In the late 70s and into the 80s, "Corporate Rock" started to dominate with bands like Boston and Journey leading the front. Sure, there was still the same sort of emotion there, but with a corporation staring down at you in the age where making money began to really become a focal point, it wasn't about the music so much as it was selling it to the public. This only became a bigger issue once MTV and others came along.

 

Bands like Fleetwood Mac, The Rolling Stones, The Eagles, and others still exist today, but rely heavily on the fans of the past to make any kind of CD sales. (Note: I'm talking about the general mainstream audience, not some of the more eclectic music fans that really appreciate the past even though they might not have been around for the original releases). Corporations are now looking for whatever hot new thing they can find and hoping to god they have some sort of sound that they can fuck with in a computer to make it sound decent and then sell it after throwing it all over MTV and VH1 for a few weeks.

 

It's absolutely pathetic.

 

I am nearly convinced that if a band like Journey appeared today that they would have to sell their souls to make any kind of decent move in record sales (see: Creed). For one thing, and the Video Music Era taught us this, is that some of those older bands didn't exactly care about what they looked like. Listening to "Hotel California" and then looking at the video for "Boys of Summer" shows two very different sides of the same man in Don Henley. Sure, BOS was during his solo career, but he wrote or helped write both of them. You can't picture the sunglass-wearing Henley in the video singing "Hotel California". It doesn't seem to fit right.

 

Before music videos, bands didn't need to be beautiful and their fans (for the most part) did not really care. Part of it may have been the drugs, but I actually believe that if the Beatles came around today and tried to release the White Album...they wouldn't have gotten any exposure no matter how much talent they have. By today's standards, they aren't even at the level of the Hanson Brothers in terms of what a record company is looking for. In this era, I believe they would have ended up as "cult favorites", releasing CDs that for the most part go undetected by mainstream culture, but to those that hear it...it's amazing.

 

Actually, scratch that, I'm not sure many people in this day and age would even find them to be amazing had they never existed in the first place. Sad, huh?

 

 

 

So basically, I put forth the notion that the ART of songwriting and music is almost dead and buried in the mainstream media and culture, where now the art is less about the music and more about the packaging and the sales figures. It's a big reason why year after year so many people are turning to the more niched genre and the underground...lowering record sales and hopefully showing those in power in the music world that it isn't about the p2p file sharing and it isn't about computers...it's about the music itself.

 

One day they will learn. Or at least, I hope so.

 

 

~ Rando.

[EricMM 0]

eh you could be right...

 

but on the other hand, you're naming what, a couple of bands for the last forty years? There were many MANY hacky crappy artists with no souls back then.

 

Granted, the music "industry" was owned by musicians at least somewhat back then, while today it's entirely corporate, it's not THAT much worse.

 

There's still fine music, just usually not on big labels.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

Oh, I don understand the "hacky crappy artists", but i was looking more at the long term stuff. Thanks to the last decade, I can still see those bands from the 60/70s being played while alot of stuff that is seen as "hit music" now won't even be mentioned except to say "hey, I love the 00s!!" on VH1.

 

Sure, there was alot of crap and alot of one-hit wonders...there was disco and new wave and all of that. But shit, I'd rather hear New Wave than Teen Pop any day.

 

I'm only 21, so I don't know alot about the lesser known music of that era, but that's another point... Those songs still live on today and still have meaning. "Landslide" is an iconic piece of music and probably will be forever...I doubt anyone will ever be saying that about "Bye Bye Bye" or even remember it in 10 years.

 

Personally, I see music as a window through generations, and it is easy to see that. The 60s had peace and love as it's key themes, and it was what you heard...the 70s had disco and the beginnings of the new wave revolution. The 80s begat the video music era in the US and it sadly seems to be all downhill from there. Looking on television and looking at the media, the key themes seem to be "buy my stuff" and "look how much money I have".

 

Eric, you are write...there is TONS of fine music out there today...but sadly it doesn't have much of a chance of being heard where it needs to be. The Corporate Era destroyed music as an art in the mainstream culture. (Hence the title of the thread). The art is still there...but mainstream it is not.

[Slayer 0]

Zappa called the decline of the music industry back when the snowball was just beginning to roll downhill (see: l"Tinseltown Rebellion", written in 1981)

 

Assorted random thoughts:

 

1. Much as I would like to see it, the SNL incident probably won't make a dent in Ashlee's career. The record company will make some excuse and say "Shut up and buy her CD"

 

2. I remember while working for Best Buy that the Best Buy Radio (which really wasn't "radio", just 3 CDs on rotation) before each song would have some guy promo-ing the upcoming song, and what would make me equal parts laugh and be sick was when he promo-ed every new band as some fresh hybrid of genres, when it was just the same old shit. Examples would be him saying "This band plays a fresh mix of punk, rock, metal and hardcore" and it would be some horrible "We wish we were Blink-182" B-level punk song.

 

3. And speaking of hybrids, I finally heard the crossover-attempt-to-end-all-crossover-attempts the other day when my g/f played the Nelly/Tim McGraw (at first I couldn't even tell it was Nelly since he wasn't altering his voice through a mixer, but that's another story) song "Over and Over Again", which is appropriate since the song plays the same monotonous melody over and over again. It takes the good things about both genres and tosses them out the window.

[Guest El Satanico]

It's not really a new thing...the mainstream has always had crap. Sometimes the mainstream has more good than bad and sometimes it has more bad than good.

 

We just happen to be in a more bad than good period. However, mainsteam radio is in the ground and awaiting to be buried.

 

In 20 years, people will forget the bad of the current period and remember the good. Then they will ask why can't current music be as good as it was in the early 2000's.

[Guest The Shadow Behind You]

People forget that we were feeling the same as we do now as we did in the 80's. It's just that 25 years later, we know what stuff were good and are able to mock the real crap.

 

In 2024 they will do the same, they will look at the Ashlee Simpson/Blink/Linkin Park stuff like we look at the jokes of the 80's today. Good Music will perserve.

 

Personally I believe music is just as good if not better, I say it's better because the truely talent aren't selling themselfs to the mainstream, Thanks to the internet truly talented musicians are more likely to be heard and won't be forced to compromise themselfs.

 

I don't think the mainstream has really changed all that much, just a different thing is over right now. In 2007, it'll be something completely different and we'll hate that as much as we hate Good Charlotte.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

Sadly, in 2007...it'll probably still be Good Charlotte.

 

This leads to another discussion point... what is the GOOD of the today? What will be remembered in 20 years as "great music" and what will be severely mocked and forgotten?

[razazteca 0]

Transcontinental Records or whatever is the name of the Lou Pearlman company will be remembered as the one who made pointless premanufactured music sung by models which brainwashed the public that songs with titles of the same word listed 3 times can sell millions. The other man who got rich off of the general publics love for tv reality karoke contests, Simon, took the pop band formula and exploited it to make millions out of glorified Las Vegas lounge acts all the while shitting on the people who did not fit his style.

[5_moves_of_doom 0]

I'd have to agree here. Not only is it becoming corporate, but also the number of people who do it is decreasing at a relatively steady pace. Art used to be a very popular mainstream (or what they had of a mainstream culture decades and centuries ago) thing, and now it's to the point where just a pretty distinct cult of people still devote themselves to painting and art. It's becoming that way with musicians, too. Only a small cult of people (small compared to what it used to be, at least) are truly interested in listening to/playing music. I guess sometimes it doesn't seem that way because seemingly every other guy is buying a guitar to get the girls, but when you take everything into account you can definitely see it heading that way. At my highschool, I'd say about 10% of the students own more than a dozen CD's. I mean, wow. Everyone just has their ipod and casually listens to each band's singles every once in a while.

 

And of course, the money issue is big too. Everything on MTV is marketing something. Sometimes they'll mention something offbeat and not-mainstream in an attempt to get some "indie cred" or something, but overall it's just Usher's crib on the screen 24/7. It's really quite sad. At least there's some hope here and there. The mainstream doesn't ignore all good bands -- Modest Mouse, Franz Ferdinand, Interpol, the White Stripes, etc. all get attention the old fashioned way -- a catchy riff and some damn good music, but as I said, that's just the ray of hope in Pandora's box. Hopefully there's some sort of apocalypse of music and everything starts all over again. That's all we can hope for.

[Guest The Shadow Behind You]

Sadly, in 2007...it'll probably still be Good Charlotte.

 

This leads to another discussion point... what is the GOOD of the today? What will be remembered in 20 years as "great music" and what will be severely mocked and forgotten?

It's hard to say because some music becomes greatly appreciated after the fact and not while it's out.

[Guest The Shadow Behind You]

Another factor, I believe in 10 years we will be also asking ourselves "What was with that whole garage band indy sound that we thought we liked". We'll shake our heads for calling The "The Bands" great such as White Stripes, Strokes, Vines and all those countless imitators.

 

Just like we go "what was with us and the whole gangsta rap era" and "what the hell was wrong with during the disco craze"

[The Amazing Rando 0]

At my highschool, I'd say about 10% of the students own more than a dozen CD's. I mean, wow. Everyone just has their ipod and casually listens to each band's singles every once in a while.

Fucking wow indeed. I mean, I don't have an IPOD, but if i did it would have alot more than just singles on it. Shit, the best stuff on the album is usually never released as a single. For reference I point to Stairway to Heaven. Overrated a bit, but never a single and still a great track.

 

12 songs on an album and all of them took the same time and heart to put there, so you do the nice thing and listen to ONE OR TWO?! I hate teenagers. At least, I hate THOSE KINDS of teenagers. TNT, you need to grab them by the throat and tell them to listen to the whole damn album, that way maybe they can figure out they like something without having MTV tell them it's good.

[5_moves_of_doom 0]

I guess there's two facts here that we can kind of just combine.

 

1.) Mainstream music right now is terrible.

2.) Thanks to the internet the truly talented don't need to be mainstream to be heard.

 

So right now, and for the last four years, I think it could be (optimistically) stated that Mainstream has no good bands in it anymore because they don't *need* to sell out really anymore. Though this is a very faulty statement, it is true in some cases. I guess. I don't know. It's almost midnight.

 

But still, I guess mainstream music has always been crap, but it does seem like things are going ever-so-slightly downhill from before. I would have to say that probably 70% of the decline of music can be blamed on MTV too, sadly. I mean, it's hard to believe that TRL and Cribs *aren't* responsible for this.

 

Eh, wow, I'm tired. I'll comment again when anything I say can make sense.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

The answer to Rando's terribly frightened question is an overwhelming "no." The mainstream is always full of mediocre music, but ultimately that doesn't matter at all. I think 2004 has been one of the best years for music in recent memory, and I'm not too concerned with how the mainstream perceives it. MTV is obviously in a sad state, but whatever. With few exceptions, the music that we think of as great has never sold as many copies as it's deserved.

 

More importantly, it takes the mainstream time to catch up with the things it misses. Some of the most wonderful bands of the past certainly weren't mainstream in their heyday. I'm thinking most specifically of the Velvet Underground, who were never even close to mainstream success from 67-70, but are now widely regarded as one of the greatest bands in history.

 

People will dig up the great stuff from our era and realize how great it is down the road. Music isn't anything close to a dying art, and thank god that we no longer have the Eagles or James Taylor tearing up the charts with some blase pap. Nor should anyone want to buy a new Fleetwood Mac or Rolling Stones album; they ran out of ideas years ago. The only person recording in the 70s that still does it absolutely right is Tom Waits, and he's never been huge. No problem for me.

[1234-5678 0]

A band like Creed had that Doors aspect, "The band you love to hate", just without the talent to back it up. Plus, Stapp wanted to be Morrison so bad anyways that he went to the same school in Florida. But, oh well.

 

I think the only hope "pop/radio" music had left, died when Hanson came around. "MMM Bop" is literally the worst thing I've ever seen/heard. Their very awful existence inspired me to start writing again though, so maybe they did some good.

 

The death rattle came when the boy band shit came back...........and actually worked! It's like Chris Rock said. "We've seen this shit before! New Kids On The Block! We know how this is going to end!", in reference to N Sync and Backstreet Boys. Problem is, it didn't end like NKOTB. Timberlake still has a career as an MJ wannabe, and shit, PEOPLE STILL BOUGHT BSB/NSYNC RECORDS! That alone should tell you that musical taste, and appreciation for songwriting is fuckin dead.

 

I'll rant more tomorrow..............

[NoCalMike 0]

I don't blame Teeny Bopper music, or Lou Perlman or Justin Timberlake etc.....Teeny bopper music will ALWAYS APPEAL to young kids who don't know any better. I mean that it is who that is directed towards, the same way right now mainstream angry rock music is marketed towards teenage males who don't know any better. Can you blame a 12 year old girl for not knowing that NSync music is trash? Or a 16 year old guy that can't get laid, that Korn or Limp Bizkit is some of the worst assaults on the "rock genre" in 10 years?

 

The real travesty of the music industry IMO, is how today's music is really all based on THE SINGLE. If you can get a team together, make a catchy song, then get the right piece of ass to lip synch it. It makes millions for everyone. I mean I am 24 years old, and I think MY PEERS should know better then to turn on FM radio and just totally buy into WHATEVER is fed to them. However you won't catch me blaming kids and teenagers, who in all fairness shouldn't know better.

[Red Baron 0]

The sad thing about today's Mainstream music is that what's current right now, will be old-fashion the following year. Rarely have we seen a Mainstream band still have Mainstream success over 5 years.

 

1991-1994 Was grunge, gansta rap.

 

94-97: Post grunge, 2 Pac, Biggie, Bad hip-hop, top 40 light rock, Punk

 

97-98: Techno, boy bands.

 

98-2001: Teeny Bop, Nu-metal, pop-punk, boy bands, bling-bling rap.

 

2002-2004: Emo, Garage Rock, Bling Rap, Bad Solo artists, and the "retro style.

[razazteca 0]

The real travesty of the music industry IMO, is how today's music is really all based on THE SINGLE

It's really based on THE VIDEO

 

2002-2004: Emo, Garage Rock, CRUNK Rap, Bad Solo artists, and the "retro style.

The bling-bling has been replace with Lil Jon. Also in 1991-1994 add in Club/House music and in 97-98 replace Techno with Electronica as the buzzword for bands like Prodigy & Chemical Brothers.

[Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye 0]

You know, if you guys would just go and listen to Vikinglr Veldi, Hvis Lyset Tar Oss, Anthems To The Welkin At Dusk, Diabolical Fullmoon Mysticism, Arise, Dechristianize, Pierced From Within etc etc etc etc, then suddenly concerns about the decline of popular music will become a very distant worry..

[AndrewTS 0]

"Corporations are now looking for whatever hot new thing they can find and hoping to god they have some sort of sound that they can fuck with in a computer to make it sound decent and then sell it after throwing it all over MTV and VH1 for a few weeks.

 

It's absolutely pathetic."

 

MTV and VH1 don't even really play music anymore. I blame Clear Channel more than them.

 

The mainstream music scene is shittier than it has ever been. At least the 80's had some great bands that were close to mainstream and much of the pop was ridiculously bad and the so-called "artists" faded away.

 

Who the hell even called them "artists" until recently? We called them bands, musicians, etc. It seems that once that term became popularized it was done as a joke and just placed on "performers" who don't write, play, or sing their music (or if they actually do, they don't do it live).

[TheBigSwigg 0]

I think the sign that music is lost as an art form is the Kidz Bop series. nothing like hearing a choir of kids singing Britney Spears and Evanescence.

 

Honestly, music started going downhill when the major labels became corporate holdings. It wasn't a quick decline, but when you have major labels under one corporate umbrella, where's the competition? Where's the diversity? Theoretically, you have the ability to focus each of those labels on a different genre, but once something hits big, that's out the window.

[Special K 0]

Tons of great artists were not appreciated in their time. Hendrix and The Doors were never huge in their time, IIRC. (Not that I'm a huge fan of the doors.) Lots of 'classic' rock wasn't big time.

 

Kids will always grow up and start evolving their own musical tastes with time.

 

What's sad are the 18-year-olds that still listen to N'Sync and the like.

[The Czech Republic 0]

12 songs on an album and all of them took the same time and heart to put there

Not necessarily true in recent years. A lot of tracks are just filler, either intentionally half-assed or uninspired, or just come off that way.

[mister foozel 0]

1. Much as I would like to see it, the SNL incident probably won't make a dent in Ashlee's career. The record company will make some excuse and say "Shut up and buy her CD"

what the fuck was up with her stupid fcukin leprechaun dance? or whatever the fuck that was?

 

just that should make anyone NOT want to but anything from her

 

but of course, 12 year old girls don't watch SNL, so what are people with music taste supposed to do?

 

im starting to realize that music isn't being pushed towards me any more, but it IS sad when I have to go and find, and look hard, for good music these days

 

i hate pretty much everything on the radio, and rap these days is not like it used to be either, its becoming very corporate too

 

i also rarely buy a recent cd any more

[1234-5678 0]

Tons of great artists were not appreciated in their time. Hendrix and The Doors were never huge in their time, IIRC. (Not that I'm a huge fan of the doors.) Lots of 'classic' rock wasn't big time.

The Doors were the first American band to have six gold albums in a row, and also had a few #1 singles, so I would say they were popular. Hendrix was more of freakshow, because of his antics onstage and coming back from England and all that. I don't know how well his records sold though.

 

A lot of "legendary" bands had great record sales. Zeppelin always debuted at #1, GNR sold a ridiculous amount of "Appetite" albums, and the "Use Your Illusion" albums sold faster then any in history at that point.

 

2Pac always sold well, Pearl Jam at the beginning, etc. etc. The top ten albums/singles on Billboard aren't always the worst shit ever. Just most of the time.

[Slayer 0]

The record company will make some excuse

And the excuse is... "computer glitch"

 

Good one

[Guest Coffey]

The problem is that music is a form of expressing ones self. You can't really express yourself when someone is telling what type of music to sing and how to act and shit. That's why a lot of the good music is hard to find. It's like finding a needle in a haystack. Especially if the music is on TV or the radio. If it's an artists first album, and it's getting a lot of radio/airplay...stick around to see if they make a second album. Usually the second album won't sound ANYTHING like the first album because after good record sales from the initial album they have more freedom within their label.

 

Sad but true.

 

Just as an example, look at Pink. Granted I don't think she's really good either way, but when she first hit the scene, she was portrayed as...well, almost hip-hop. She was shown prancing and singing around a bunch of black people in her videos. Then what happened? She up and became random pop-rock.

 

That's just from the videos though. I didn't buy her albums, so who knows what the rest of her songs in those eras were like.

 

The point is, for someone to "make it" they're going to have to have that radio friendly BS somewhere on the album. The "single" is usually the worst song on any given album. So, you have to take the good with the bad. Bands/Artists want to hit a bigger demographic, so they go out of their way to have that "hit." They're probably thinking "whatever gets more people to listen." When what really happens is you get some goofs that just loop the shitty single and miss all the actual music.

 

There are some lights in the darkness though. Look at Alicia Keys. She definitely has talent. She still writes all of her own shit too. That's more than a lot of bands in this day and age can say.

[Murmuring Beast 0]

With regards to music being based on image or look, this has always been the case.

 

Using the only example I know: whilst the Beatles sold records by the millions because of their great music, they also had a great look - they wore smart suits in the beginning and were generally well guided and protected by people like George Martin and Brian Epstein.

 

The Beach Boys on the other hand looked like total fools wearing sailor shirts well into the 60s and had no real direction in the image department and they weren't nearly as successful as the Beatles in the early days - they looked like dorks and the teenage girls were prepared to spend money on the cuter group.

[snuffbox 0]

Off the top of my head...

 

Damien Rice

Bright Eyes

Ani DiFranco

Jack Johnson

White Stripes

Modest Mouse

String Cheese Incident

Umphreys McGee

Franz Ferdinand

Snow Patrol

The Hives

Death Cab For Cutie

A Perfect Circle

Saul Williams

Duna Hill

 

This generation isnt so bad...you just have to ignore the radio.

[NoCalMike 0]

I think someone in this thread had a good point, that a lot of the better quality bands/artists at the time go unknown or panned by critics who are basically trying to push the Top 40 market, and it is usually at least 10-20 years later when people revisit the music and realize it was good shit. Look at Black Sabbath at the time, they were panned, and basically ignored outside of their small circle of following, and now look at their popularity, even though they don't make music anymore.

 

Another problem with Clear Channel and today's music scene is that Clear Channel is only interested in music that will appeal to the masses. If your sound is too skewed into one genre, they won't back you and won't give you airtime. That is why more and more you start hearing every song on every station. Hell My mom had on an adult contemporary station and the Backstreet Boys were on it........WTF?