the local club-goers--the ones who hung to make the scene, regardless of how buzzy a given night's entertainment might have been--they might be going the way of the CD.
It is one of the great whiny sadnesses of my life that none of my musical adventures has ever been able to attract "fans." Shows depend on turning friends out; if you're lucky, the people who came for the band after you will beef up the audience while they wait for you. I imagine there once was this Eden where you could get booked in a club and if the people who went to the club liked you you could come back and play for them again. But today it is a mystery to me how to play in front of people who don't already know me personally.
(It's possible that there really is a mutually supportive scene and that if I hung out at clubs more, there would be other the people who also hung out at clubs and supported my efforts. It's also possible that if my bands were better we would attract fans. But now that I'm past the point where I can get more than two or three friends to come out at a time, I suspect I'll never know.)
I have heard the refrain that musicians should be able to make a middle-class income and should be provided with health insurance. But really? I mean, so should migrant workers toiling in Oregon's fruit farms.
Interesting that it's considered more fanciful to unionize the musicians than the migrant workers. There was a time when pop music was played live in clubs that hired union musicians. It would take some organizing -- more, apparently, than Courtney Love was able to muster -- and rock musicians are definitely on the herding cats side of the scale, but there's no essential reason it couldn't happen.
The question then becomes where is the extraction of surplus value taking place.
This kind of thinking seemed very common in the interview: "Musicians don't need to reach everyone; we just need to reach our audience." Cf. the earlier comment that the Wilco model—like that of latter-day Dylan, or the Dead—is increasing interaction with an existing audience rather than gaining new adherents.
I think that's pretty depressing, but I'm not sure how best to articulate why. Partly, I suppose, because it seems like throwing in the towel vis a vis agitating on behalf of one's music, or even the idea that tastes can be altered, much less should be altered: there's just our audience, and that audience is composed of the people who happen to like what we do, and that's it. Cultivate your audience, feh.
That's interesting. The promise of the long tail is that the audience exists for every niche -- it replaces a dynamic model of the audience with a diverse but static one.
It would take some organizing -- more, apparently, than Courtney Love was able to muster....
Axiomatic, really.
Interesting that it's considered more fanciful to unionize the musicians than the migrant workers. There was a time when pop music was played live in clubs that hired union musicians.
I think there's another side to that comment as well -- something closer to, "of people being screwed over by the current system, musicians aren't at the top of the list."
But I think your comment is a good one, that there isn't a strong sense of solidarity among musicians as a group at the moment -- in a union sense at least.
Cf. the earlier comment that the Wilco model--like that of latter-day Dylan, or the Dead--is increasing interaction with an existing audience rather than gaining new adherents.
To be fair, the kick-off for the discussion was a discussion of Wilco. Also relevant, "as the Pricenomics blog has noted, [Phish] is an act with zero hit songs but a quarter billion dollars in ticket sales."
But, also, if it turns out that your business is selling T-shirts, rather than selling music, I would think that requires a more dedicated fanbase. People own recordings by a much larger number of musicians than they do t-shirts.
If Hanes were a band, that wouldn't be true.
And if your grandmother had wheels, she'd be a trolley cart.
You're making assumptions about the number and placement of the wheels that you haven't fully specified.
I think you can infer their likely character from my conclusion.
One of my grandmothers had no flat facets to her at all, any way up.
The arcade fire got no soul, says sasha baron frere jones.
Following 6, I think the margin on a typical t-shirt is a lot higher than on a ticket (at least the fraction the musicians receive.) You can shift a tee for ~$20 and put $15 straight into your pocket. A ticket might around the same amount but I doubt the musicians see more than $5.
I think live music is competing against a larger number of alternatives. The XBox probably has a higher average fun factor than a gig, though I think gigs have higher variance. In other words: the average band can be pretty tedious, but good bands are really really good.
Information wants to be free, and that's good for everybody but the people who want to sell it. I'm not much of a music fan any more, but it seems to me that this is a golden age for people who are.
I think of band t-shirts as being like NPR coffee mugs. You spend the money to support the work being provided, and you get a little nic-nac in return. It's not that the logo t-shirt is more valuable than the music. It's just a thank-you gift.
But, also, if it turns out that your business is selling T-shirts, rather than selling music, I would think that requires a more dedicated fanbase.
I think of band t-shirts as being like NPR coffee mugs. You spend the money to support the work being provided, and you get a little nic-nac in return.
Very true. I have t-shirts for only two bands, both of which are either friends or friends of friends.
Incidentally, I created a kickstarter account last year, and have ended up finding it really interesting. I've backed a slightly random set of (mostly) small projects and it definitely feels like part of what one pays for (or, alternately, part of what one gets in return for backing) is the updates and window onto the creative process.
The projects that I feel best about are the ones in which the creators are really actively posting about the project.
I'm aware, of course, that this requires time and a specific personality which may or may not compete for attention with the project itself. It's not a neutral dynamic, but it is really interesting.
Up to a point.
That's pretty fun, and I hadn't heard that before.
nic-nac
What do you have against the letter k?
this is a golden age for people who are.
The choices start to wear after a while. I have very definitely started to limit myself. There was a time my explorations of music felt progressive, cosmopolitan, eclectic, growth-enhancing. My exploration of literature felt the same. But there is just too much, and I didn't grow. I was just splintering.
Which is about the "modern," isn't it, and a movement to the post-modern or a devolution. I don't see the "long tail" but more a network or a web. Go meso-, go 3d. It will work in weird, incomprehensible ways that we won't be able to understand in the time we have left. Like Sixto Rodriguez in South Africa, or Shriekback making the bucks on the reunion tour.
Some will go for local bands, some national, some j-pop, some east european monasteries, some brazilian, some a mix or a tentacle reached out from a base of the others.
This is why I am interested in otaku, database culture, lists of lists, all very superficial, but what will be necessary to navigate the hyperglobe. Not maps but palimpsets and signs.
If I were a songwriter or a band...maybe become very very allusive. To your love song add references to Bessie Smith, the Sepoy Massacre, Victoria Falls. The spiders scrabble, add your band to subject lists, people find you from a few nodes away. Too obvious or mainstream references, 9/11 Breaking Bad, will bury you in a mass.
What does local mean anymore.
Too obvious or mainstream references, 9/11 Breaking Bad, . . .
The only funny item on this list of suggestions for what Prince might do if he joined twitter is:
6. Do brief "Breaking Bad" recaps ("WALT ONLY THE TRUTH CAN HELP U / STAY PURPLE")
when nobody makes any money anymore at anything, it'll all sort out.
I've spent the last half hour listening to covers of "Jolene", and I think the Dolly Parton 45 played at 33 rpm is my favorite.
re: 27
That's odd. I just saw that tweeted by someone, and was listening to it just a second ago. It does sound pretty great. There's a slowed down version of 9-to-5, too, that sounds surprisingly funky.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dfZvpPyoBw
Searching for that, I found this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZhGM_oebiE
and it's remarkable how normal-tuning/tempo Parton sounds like a doo-wop falsetto singer.
28: those are extraordinary and terrific.
In fact it's difficult to believe that it's slowed down; there's only a few bits (percussion) that sound a bit weird.
The pitch change is only around a fifth [musical fifth, not 20%]. So it's not really as huge a shift as all that. Less than a full octave.