Entertainment For Lively Minds
Andy Gill's Rant
Mr Gill appears to have only just realised that making money is part of making music. Undoubtedly the traditional corporate structure is in a mess but its woes start and end in the way the industry built an unsustainable business model and in that respect it's not unlike many other models of capitalism today. Its business model has failed because it lacked resilience, its USP was having control of our access to music and it messed that one up.
If it's lost control of its primary assets because of the Internet then simply on a business level I've little sympathy for the industry. They had the master-tapes of the music made by their artists and therefore they were in the best possible position to manage how it was distributed on the Net when that means of distribution arrived. That they dithered, fumbled, blocked and pontificated to only find the horse had bolted is their own fault. They had the keys to the kingdom but chose to watch the peasants revolt, jump the walls and pick the locks.
Mr. Gill is right to criticise the industry's ongoing hand-wringing and monetising, it's a factor of its own self-denial and inability to confront its subjugated position, but to then say "pop culture appears to be frozen in stasis" as a result of the corporate industry's catatonia is surely wide of the mark. Pop culture is thriving despite the industry's navel-gazing and business plans based on scrabbling after an ever decreasing income. But it requires the listener to actually re-evaluate what you think pop music or pop culture represents and to re-engage in a different way. It's no longer the coming together of the nation at 7pm on a Thursday night on BBC1 or tuning in to John Peel at 10pm , it's now pockets of cottage industries many of which are still not marked up on a map and scattered about in a much more diverse and diverting market-place.
Too often those of a certain age look at pop culture today as something to be measured against a yardstick of nostalgia and past glories. Sorry, but that's just playing by the rules of the same corporate bunch chasing that ever decreasing income. It's just part of the downward spiral of the old business model. Pop is disposable, culture isn't. But harking on about the past is the only thing that presses the two together like a flower in a dusty old history book.
I empathise with Mr Gill's frustration at the way pop music is packaged and homogenised by the music industry and the media. X-Factor, extravagant box-sets and the "Sound of 2012" are manifestations of an industry in which music is no longer part of a creative spirit nurtured in a music company but is part of a global media corporation, a soulless warehouse of impotent activity played out over a single conveyor belt where control of distribution and constant shouts for your attention are more important than the music itself, where "heritage" is now a genre (wtf?) and where the manifesto of "art for art's sake" will only ever live on as a track on a future 10CC box-set retrospective with umpteen out-takes of "Donna" across 10 CDs and a limited edition version with a tin of minestrone labelled 'Life'. Served up with parmesan cheese.
That is why I give thanks to the Internet, rather than the ageist rant of cynicism, because as a medium it allows me to find the music I want when the mainstream refuses point blank to play it or draw my attention to it. I don't have to shrug my shoulders and give up on new music and retreat into a time capsule huddling the songs of my youth whilst bemoaning the state of today's pop culture. Yes, pop music's capacity to revolutionise has been marginalised by the triumph of mainstream marketing but if, like Mr Gill, you continue to hanker for the days when music arrived weeks after you wanted to play it on your turntable you're simply not looking hard enough or in the right places for the next revolution. Get a new map or better still forget the map and just explore unshackled by rose-tinted memories stuck in the pages of history.
Mr Gill's assumption that ease of access equates to ease of dismissal and "dumping" is unfounded. Why should great music discovered on the Internet a day after it was recorded be any less significant to a listener than a record that in the past took weeks to arrive in your local record shop? Why does instant access deny us the luxury of "drowning oneself" in music?
The magic of music, the thing Mr. Gill craves and believes has been lost, is bottled in the recording and not in the way it's distributed or packaged. If Mr Gill believes he can't find magic any more then he's simply allowed himself to be convinced that the mainstream media controls pop culture and that the way music is marketed is more important than how we respond to it. That's letting the people who lost the keys to the kingdom make sure you sink on the Titanic with them.
- More from Ahh_Bisto.
- Login or register to post comments
-
Not sure
The idea of a scene developing is a process that once gave time for great things to develop. The point of the article was partly that the latest thing going viral kind of kills it off before it gets started. Also the sense of a shared culture means something and if it's all gone stale and retro, as Andy comments, it's kind of dying. Lots of niche areas that are fragmented and devolved to the point where they are barely known to most represents a sort of culture that's barely there. Stuff needs to develop and grow by word of mouth before eventually reaching the mainstream, if it doesn't happen like that then I do think something's been lost. And it is possible that you can observe a real decline without necessarily being mistaken and deserving of dismissal as hopelessly nostalgic and ageist. Look at the case of Lana Del Rey - all hyped up and over in one afternoon more or less. That interesting new music coming from some bedsit might be worth exploring but not sure if it's enough if it's not going to go much beyond it's limited reach.
There is a decline
but I don't believe the decline is purely because pop music has lost its "magic" which seemed to be the over-riding conclusion of the piece. I think it's the traditional business model that is declining and it's dragging perceptions of modern pop music down with it: flogging a dead horse so to speak.
If a 15 year old today has never had to wait for weeks to get access to a song because it's there on the Internet why should I deny that their experience has "magic" simply because they didn't have to jump through hoops like me to get their hands on the song.
I also think this is a peculiarly British perception of pop music. I wouldn't be surprised if the revolution - whatever that is - comes from outside these isles.
New business model
Has a lot to offer and can be a good experience but has left us with a fairly crappy music scene. I guess we have to live with it and hope for a major upset.
Interesting
I like the "Mr" Gill bits. Makes it sound like you're presenting evidence for the prosecution in a court case.
Old fashioned
etiquette. I've never met him so he's Mr. Gill. I was pitching for a debate so that's where the tone of the counter-argument comes from. I thought it was a provocative piece of writing and I was provoked. Loved it really despite not agreeing with its conclusions.
Where do I find this rant ?
Please.
As I find myself in agreement with 90% of your rebutal of it.
I have a sneaking suspicion though that some of todays "top acts" look at the lifestyle of Led Zep, for example, with a little longing.
Music has been democratised - I can find bands I like from anywhere in the world - but the down side is that all these bands will struggle to get above playing folk clubs and bar rooms. In the past some of them would have achieved "stardom". Whether that is actually a loss or not I'm not really sure.
It's in the
latest edition of Word.
Watch out for that petard, slick
You'd have known that, slick, if you didn't think the magazine wasn't worth buying... ;)
Haven't had an opportunity to flick through it yet
but haven't heard a lot good about the GaGa issue so far, doubt I'll buy for 1 page, but like I said, I'll flick through and judge.
The Jackie Leven article might be enough to swing it though.
The trouble is
On the internet there is an unlimited supply of music (all of it free) if you know where to look. Some of it may be magical, but if you know you can download as many albums or singles a week as you wish, there is always a desire to hear something new, so the new stuff may not be played as much as in the past. When you had to wait for a new album, you played what you already had, as good money had been invested in it. Now there is always something new you can lay your hands on immediately, and that is without all the out-takes and bootlegs of your favourite bands that are also available (and podcasts).
It makes my head (and ears) hurt.
The space age - mostly great, not always good.
Nice work Gravyman!
There is no shortage of good music being made, but I think for now we're not going to get another 'Punk' or another 'Hip Hop' any time soon.
The web has accelerated the flow of information such that the next 'punk' wouldn't have time to evolve and get a head of steam going 'underground' before it was all over Youtube, the media caught on, turned it into something unhip or filched its ideas for advertising something naff, and then the hipsters move on to the next thing.
It's also removed a key element that possibly fuelled Rock and Roll, Punk and Rave. Bored teenagers. What it has given them is incredibly cheap access to creative tools, to potentially craft unimagined new sound worlds and incredible new grooves. However, in my experience of music making, having access to lots of music making toys isn't always a good thing, working within limitations and pushing a knackered old synth or a guitar with two strings missing to its limit on the other hand is often where the real creativity comes from, or the happy accident where something interesting emerges.
The other key thing is that today's music fans have pretty much limitless access to listen to anything they want, and they do! That perhaps spells the end of those tribal scenes like punk or Rave where kids align themselves with one type of music. Who wants to just listen to nothing but Northern Soul when you can listen to anything you like, now.
The fact is, why would we want this new musical movement to emerge? I'd probably be told old to appreciate it, and frankly it would just seem downright odd. I think at the moment the kids are still very much in the sweet shop and the giddy excitement of the limitless possibilities of the web hasn't settled down. Maybe when the web really matures, people will knuckle down and start figuring out what to do next, and build something substantial.
For now, what we have is a totally chaotic music scene, completely fractured, but stuck it ain't. Its moving alright, just in about 3 billion directions at once. If you can't find any new music you like, I quite agree, you're not looking in the right place or maybe just log off the web, go out, find a venue and see who's playing live..thats the best way.
Not stuck
That was a key argument I disagreed with. It is chaotic and there is no longer a defined method for making, marketing and buying music. Each stage of the process has numerous choices in how to fulfil the requirements of that stage. That's why the industry big players are struggling, it's impossible to be all things to all people. For me, if you want to start to build a more cohesive pop culture that can cast a wider net the biggest hole that needs filling is A&R, that's where the investment should be made. But as we know that takes time, people and talent and the marketing bods, bean counters and shareholders want instant returns on product, not people. That's another reason why the industry is like many other markets in today's version of capitalism.
Another reason I couldn't accept the idea that the "magic" of music has been lost because it's so accessible is that my love of music was instigated and nurtured by my parents' record collection. I could just choose any record and put it on whenever I wanted.
The old model
limited (or throttled) access to quality recording facilities in the main.
With the acceleration of technology, digital recording equipment resides on thousands of PCs, MACs and laptops.
The advantage is the ability to synthesise (in the old and new sense) a piece relatively quickly and cheaply. Also, artists who might have been considered 'difficult', uncommercial or unfashionable can still have their say - and find a ready audience.
The downside is that with the financial imperatives of large (and probably unwieldy) infrastructures, quality control goes out of the window.
There's more music(and maybe creativity) to sample, but we also have too many individuals and bands who are not ready for exposure.
I may be old-fashioned in my belief that there is no substitute for 'paying your dues', but the lack of an editor and the belief that everyone's oeuvre is worthy of consideration has resulted in a deluge of mainly disappointing and derivative pap.
Or to put it another way, we have to wade through a lot of dross before we find a few gems.
I think what you are saying is
every listener is now required to be their own Talent Scout rather than having the record company do it on your behalf.
Or - we're all John Peel now, and everyday there's a hundred more demos to listen to.
And it's a lot of work.
Yes but also
Even talented individuals take time to develop and reach a reasonable standard of performance.
The concept of performance is a bit skewed when you can put a tune together one note or phrase at a time, but it's all about performance and what will both capture your imagination and retain your interest.
Kids just want to have fun
I find it interesting to watch how my teenage kids relate to popular culture. There's an assumption here that music is "it", but for my two boys it goes much wider than that. They obsess about new games and memes, podcasts, comedians and videos the same way I did about new singles in 1977. They have instant access to a whole array of music and are just not fixated on genres, labels or eras in the way I was in the 70s and 80s. In some ways they are hyper-local in their enthusiasms for music and performance, in a way I never could be in Leeds, because we had little or no way to celebrate our local scene. But in other ways they are trans-global in their cultural cues, instantly picking up on what their friends respond to from the US, UK etc. And at the same time they don't/can't differentiate between what's current and music that is 30-40 years old. They love watching 70s and 80s music clips on Youtube and treat them as if they have just been released by Lana del Ray.