A credible opinion

[billg1]

in todays ASCAP email there was a letter in response to an article which posed the question of whether music was actually getting worse. This is from a person who has already acheived what many of us aspire to become.

Dear Paul,

I think you make a great point. There's a massive glut of amateur artists and songwriters swirling in a swill of mediocrity. In that mass there are the usual percentage (per generation) of absolute geniuses in the (usually 20 year) process of development into their full strength. A young Jimmy Webb, Carole King, a young Prince...etc. Like the poor creatures gasping for oxygen in the gulf I fear many are lost in the waves. Yes, you will find some that simply rise to the top like John Mayer and others who are in their full power. But, as a 35 year veteran in the music business as an artist, producer, songwriter, and now CEO of my own independent record company, I personally know of MANY struggling barely-making-ends-meet young geniuses that are working at Pizza perfect and NOT able to fully develop or survive in today's downloading wild wild west music biz. And we as a culture will pay a high price ourselves as we'll miss many of this generation great songs and recordings in the absence of enough support for the creators.


Yes....some will write and perform anyway because we have to if we're born to. But I benefitted and grew a lot as a musician and writer as a result of being able to do this full time.


I am one of the writers of "This Kiss" which was a huge hit for Faith Hill in 1999. My third of that song helped put my son through college. Today it would barely do 1/4 of that even if it had TWICE the amount of airplay and sales. Why? Because websites offer it for free while they pocket the income from the adversising dollars they make on their sites. And there's a generation of young people who've been brainwashed to think it's only hurting the big bad record companies. Well it hurts the songwriters the most. Then after that it hurts the artists....and every person from engineers to producers.


One day I am hopeful it will get sorted. But at the moment many bright talented developing artists and writes are missing their window of opportunity to make a living doing what they were born to do. They'll do it part time and make some money for the web gate keepers. But you won't get "Wichita Lineman" or "What The World Needs Now" or "You've Got A Friend" out of that arrangement.



Beth Nielsen Chapman

bethnielsenchapman.com

[bassman]

Great article.

Personally speaking I am very positive about the future of art. While artists may not sell the amount of albums Michael Jackson
used to sell there are things possible for smaller artists that weren't 10 years ago and while songwriters may not be able to retire after a top 10 they can still earn money which is a great deal better than say 100 years ago.

[billg1]

I don't think the opinion in that article had anything to do with selling as many records as say "Thriller" . . . the opinion was that it's more difficult for a songwriter/artist to make a living now and that being able to make a living is crucial in the full development of a songwiter/artist and that music is suffering as a result. Twenty years ago most of all my musician/artist friends made a living from their "art" in some way or another and everyone was very productive . . . I can't think of any right now, most work one or two day jobs and devote their extra time (which isn't much) to music.

There are a lot more of what appear to be "opportunities" now than even ten years ago but none of them really result in increased income, even for smaller artist. It may seem hopeful to the part-timer that "needs" to believe in the opportunities ("one day I won't have to sling these pizzas!) but the truth is there are countless artists, bands, etc. whom used to survive on their "art" who are now working day gigs, that's just a fact. Part of this of course has a lot to do with the bad economic situation but a lot of it is because the whole "long tail" idea was plain wrong. I think (i could be wrong) that the folks who really promote this are the ones who had never earned a living strictly from their art, those that have usually have quite a different opinion. If you don't believe those who are where you aspire to be who are you gonna believe?

Also, there are authors that did pretty well for themselves 100 yrs. ago so I'm not so sure your statement is correct, but even so . . . shouldn't we expect for things to be better than 100 yrs ago? or even 30 for that matter?

I think in all matters (not just music) we expect things to get better.

[bassman]

I can't really think of anything to add but I'll have a think about what you said.

Best

[Len911]

If the article was originally about how music is getting worse, I don't think it is. With fewer choices it seems only natural that people would be less overwhelmed and more inclined to appreciate what choices they are given. Music is still in the ear of the beholder. So was the song "This Kiss" genius or the swill of mediocrity? I like the emotion in Faith singing this kiss, this kiss, but I like it better perhaps if I didn't have to compare it against so many other songs. The lyrics to the whole song don't really say anything in a new or in a different way, in fact if you just read the lyrics there isn't anything really at all special, fairly mediocre imo. Could an artist have worked at Pizza Perfect and written this song, or had the emotive riff of this kiss, this kiss, in their head? I believe so. If credibility is simply bottom-line, then obviously artists shouldn't be working at Pizza Perfect and maybe should be working in a sales job promoting their music while maintaining their part time relationship with music. Eventually the more music that becomes available the more the music will revert to the mean, I mean after all, the more genius musicians there are, the less likelihood the description genius will be used.

[mazz]

It seems to me that what she is saying is that if, due to music becoming basically a way to drive ad revenues for websites that charge nothing for the songs, there is less money being generated by more music ("a massive glut of amateur artists and songwriters swirling in a swill of mediocrity"). What that may boil down to is that the overall quality of music may diminish because fewer people can afford to work on their craft full time. At the very least, consumers will more and more have to navigate the waters of mediocrity.

I predict that there will eventually have to be some sort of filtering mechanism offered to consumers of music to help them cut through the gigantic mass of crap that is currently out there, whereby the filter will be something with lots of marketing clout that can get a musician's music out to a wide audience because this entity will have lots of money to spend doing so. Of course the gateway to this business entity would entail a musician being a great performer, a great writer (or have access to great material written by great writers) and the production will have to be top notch as well. The artist would probably have to do their part by touring, giving interviews, etc.

Sounds like a revolutionary concept called "a record company".

The only thing is, this mythical "record company" may have a hard time finding these folks for a while until the generation that insists that music is free wakes up and realizes that "you get what you pay for" in music quality. This time lag while people are actually paying for music may allow these new artists the time and money to ply and hone their craft full time and develop into artists that someone would actually want to listen to and watch perform.

Things are still shaking out, but is it really a good thing that anyone with a laptop can crank out something that may or may not resemble "music" and actually be able to "release" it out to the world with the click of a mouse? (To me that equates to: I should be allowed to compete in the Tour de France just because I own a bicycle and ride it to the grocery store 2 days a week! Cool!!)

Or are we as a society content with celebrating mediocrity? I hope not!

[Len911]

What would be great is if there were more online radio stations that had disc jockey's that would sift through it all. I think that would be the real beauty of the internet. I believe there are a few dj's who actually do that and have loyal followings. I would love to find a dj with the same tastes as I have.

[remmet]

What would be great is if there were more online radio stations that had disc jockey's that would sift through it all. I think that would be the real beauty of the internet. I believe there are a few dj's who actually do that and have loyal followings. I would love to find a dj with the same tastes as I have.

I wouldn't even mind a dj with a much different taste in music than my own. I might discover some gems I never would have known about on my own. I think what's more important is that knowledgeable dj's be given a chance to make their own programming choices rather than being handed a play list from the corporate marketing/accounting departments.

R

[mojobone]

What would be great is if there were more online radio stations that had disc jockey's that would sift through it all. I think that would be the real beauty of the internet. I believe there are a few dj's who actually do that and have loyal followings. I would love to find a dj with the same tastes as I have.

I wouldn't even mind a dj with a much different taste in music than my own. I might discover some gems I never would have known about on my own. I think what's more important is that knowledgeable dj's be given a chance to make their own programming choices rather than being handed a play list from the corporate marketing/accounting departments.

R

There's an app for that. (either way) As far as radio's concerned, big-money syndicated terrestrial put the bean counters in charge, and are losing big. I find that encouraging. (also eerily similar to what happens to record companies that put bean counters in charge-if you don't have a passion for music, this biz ain't for you)

I believe that creativity and talent will win out. While it's certainly plausible that lack of support money and record company 'nurturing' have had and will likely continue to have a negative effect, there's never been any shortage of genius-level talent, not now and not ever. (for at least the whole history of recorded music, and probably way further back than that) We're in a period of great chaos and change; something great nearly always comes out of that, and nearly always, a lot of people get hurt in the short term.

The less credible idea is that things should always get better; history shows they don't, (not always; perhaps you've heard of the Dark Ages?) and to expect such is hubris; nothing gets better 'til we go out there and make it better.



Maybe a little off-topic, but it appears we could use some better PROs, just as a 'for instance': http://musiclibraryreport.com/music-mis ... ollection/

[Len911]

"Maybe a little off-topic, but it appears we could use some better PROs, just as a 'for instance': http://musiclibraryreport.com/music-mis ... ollection/"
That site is very interesting, someone posted something from there a few days ago, and I ended up browsing the bulk of it.

I watched a Frank Zappa interview with his take on record companies and how they went askew that was quite interesting. It's a shame Frank is gone, he would not have been just a credible opinion, but the gospel imo!