Oli Slik - The Limit's the Sky
New music doesn't all suck, does it?
- Thread starter Bill S
- Start date
Bill S
Thread Killer
I liked them even B4 they were on Letterman. Check out that Youtube vid - they blew Dave away. Herring also has some good solo stuff out.
idf.bts
Well-Known Member
As with any era, its a mixed bad, and our era has numerous different characteristics we've never seen before.
There is a lot of new music that is awful, and its a lot of artists now to sift thru for ones that have merit. There are more one album wonders as its easier to produce an album, so more are produced with no long term motivation or historical multi album deal.
The music that is good is often mixed with unnecessarily edgy songs and we are overtly dominated now by the "track" mentality rather than what we have come to like as continuous music/album experience. Continuous music has morphed into this service thing.
For good or bad, the wide audience seems to be adopting this "all the music we choose for you, served to you" mentality. Only good or bad dependent on the intentions of the people behind these newfound systems. My initial observation is that their intentions are bad.
My observation of the music industry across my entire life has the same conclusion. The music industry is just an industry filled with less than ethical people and still today with the same aloof and easily taken advantage of musicians. So nothing has changed.
"New music doesn't all suck doesn't it" is another way of saying nothing has really improved in the music industry. We're still moving air with paper pulp on the playback side, and still using the casting couch on the industry side. We add the newfound data mining element where we are the product teased in with "free" music. People should know better about free, especially with unethical industries.
There is a lot of new music that is awful, and its a lot of artists now to sift thru for ones that have merit. There are more one album wonders as its easier to produce an album, so more are produced with no long term motivation or historical multi album deal.
The music that is good is often mixed with unnecessarily edgy songs and we are overtly dominated now by the "track" mentality rather than what we have come to like as continuous music/album experience. Continuous music has morphed into this service thing.
For good or bad, the wide audience seems to be adopting this "all the music we choose for you, served to you" mentality. Only good or bad dependent on the intentions of the people behind these newfound systems. My initial observation is that their intentions are bad.
My observation of the music industry across my entire life has the same conclusion. The music industry is just an industry filled with less than ethical people and still today with the same aloof and easily taken advantage of musicians. So nothing has changed.
"New music doesn't all suck doesn't it" is another way of saying nothing has really improved in the music industry. We're still moving air with paper pulp on the playback side, and still using the casting couch on the industry side. We add the newfound data mining element where we are the product teased in with "free" music. People should know better about free, especially with unethical industries.
loopstick
Lunatic Member
I totally disagree with the previously posted theory. The evil Music Industry has been bypassed. Island Hopped, if you please. Stranded and irrelevant. These kids from the Boston area got a tour in Europe while they were still in High School. Because of the internet. Touring Europe before perhaps any one of them had been west of the Mississippi ...
.
Bill S
Thread Killer
This was always the case, no? Back in the day you sifted the record store. Now you sift the world wide web. A bigger ocean but there is still good, great and bad, depending on one's taste. Tech and algorithms make it not so daunting
John Petrucci - Terminal Velocity
This
RunOutGroove
Addicted Member
I think that the difference is that the major labels back some time ago were more likely to give acts what they considered to be "development deals" so that a band that an AR person really liked but wasn't exactly a blockbuster out of the gate might have still been given a 3 album deal. That way the artist had the luxury of being creative and having some backing in order to slowly develop their sound and to build an audience for what they do. These days it seems that the big labels are mostly just banking on acts that seem like they might be blockbuster sellers right out of the gate. Radio these days isn't run by taste maker type folks the way that it used to be (or at least some of it used to be) and is instead organized by focus groups and algorithms, which means that only the most generic, middle of the road stuff tends to get played. Artists then who really want to be creative and follow their muse are left to put out their stuff on smaller labels that don't get as much support or distribution or they are self releasing their music.
Sure, there is the other side of it where with the internet it's easier to promote something through independent channels, but I still don't think that the end result is the same. I feel like these days there's far more of a stratification between more pre-fab pop stuff that is aimed at the masses and more thoughtful, creative type music. I have to wonder if some of my favorite artists, ones who became very popular, but only after a few albums in would have stayed together in this climate or if they wouldn't have been able to afford to keep going and eventually produce the music that they did..?
Last edited:
idf.bts
Well-Known Member
The king is dead. All hail the king.
Music industry... replaced with the big data industry? Which is benign. Never had an evil thought. Filled up with the most ethical people money can buy.
The word music industry doesn't even matter anymore. The corporate world is quickly morphing into every one of them having a data image of you that you have no control of. The manifestation of the alter ego...
loopstick
Lunatic Member
It's pretty organic. Based on gigging. What got disrupted was the media / distribution side. The suits no longer control it. MTV blew things up in the 1980s (bye bye Classic Rock). College / Alternative radio blew things up in the 1990s (bye bye hair bands). And the internet blew things up the the 2000s (bye bye gatekeepers). It's always driven by the young and resisted by the old.
i don't know what it is about ffdp but i just don't care for them.
the song they did with rob halford is good but i think that taylor swift could do a song with halford and i would like it. well...maybe not.
i should like them, they are heavy, they jam... but i dont.
wrong side of heaven i can tolerate but i'll skip most of their tunes as fast as i skip over anything from voivod.
i'm just old and grumpy and want **** to stay like it was in the 90s.
hnash53
Super Member
Can't know if you don't like it if you never listen to it
I think he's saying "one and done."
WillVT
Super Member
Yeah, I've seen that. I first saw them in a tiny club here in town. We were just feet away from his crazy dance moves. He really interacts with his audience. He'll look people right in the eyes. My buddy has an art studio right behind the club, and was just hanging around out back. Samuel got to talking with him and told him to come on in and enjoy the show. He's now a huge fan.
rock hadn't even started yet. bubblegum rock is not really rock and should not have the word in the name.
Rock & Roll started way before the dates you think it did!
rock and roll, also called rock 'n' roll or rock & roll, style of popular music that originated in the United States in the mid-1950s and that evolved by the mid-1960s into the more encompassing international style known as rock music, though the latter also continued to be known as rock and roll.i know when THEY and YOU say it started but that was barely rocking let alone rolling
It was later just called ROCK!i know when THEY and YOU say it started but that was barely rocking let alone rolling