An Excellent New Read: "A Brief History Of Why Artists Are No Longer Making A Living..."

Or maybe it just didn't ring true...... 

Not sure MTV was he boogey man. Several excellent bands, in my opinion, thrived during those years. REM, Dire Straits, U2.

I'm also not sure I agree with the premise that artists can't make a living. I don't think anything has changed substantially in that regard in centuries. It takes tons of talent but it also takes being in the right place at the right time with the right people to do anything with that talent. Some make it some don't.

I've been following a glam/pop band from England for about a year. They've been at it in their current configuration for about 5 or 6 years.  They've been on late night TV, they've opened for big bands in big arenas. And still, most people have never heard of them. And yet, as far as I can tell they are making money and a fair amount of it. Even in the age of streaming, ear buds and three second attention spans they are making it. And according to them it isn't just the writing and playing and talent. That's all there but they will tell you its about hard work and perseverance. I saw them last October and I'll see them again in May. And all you have to do is look at their tour schedule and you'll see a big part of their formula for success. Work, work, work, work. I don't know how they do it.

I think another critical aspect about them is that they get along with each others, they don't seem overtly into drugs and despite the swagger of the lead singer they don't seem to take themselves too seriously.

That's how they're making it.

I got about halfway through it.

Just finished the second half. And not to be obstinate for the sake of being obstinate it did not change my opinion. He sets specific time periods as being good or great, he posits that analog is superior to digital, etc without supporting those claims. He also suggests that things are somehow bad now. I disagree. Some things are bad. But some things are great. In general I see lots of new and talented artists out there making music I like, touring and making a good living at it. 

I'll go back if I have time.

But, asking someone to read an article that the author of the article himself admits is "long" is one thing. Expecting us to read the whole thing even when the premise and initial supporting opinion seems flawed is another thing. All okay.

Yet, I don't think there should be an expectation that the conversation is necessarily invalid if we disagree with the cited article or even some of its premises.

If he sews it up all neatly in the second half of the article then my bad. But his bad too. Getting to the point is as important as making one.

@ivan_nosnibor : What you are describing seems to me the same as it has been for the last 40 years. Bands were given money up front, but they had to earn it back and they were forced to tour in order to do that. So I don't see the touring grind as anything new. It comes with the territory. And for smaller bands the touring is where the money is.

In the British band I mentioned above they had the opposite experience. They could not generate interest at home or on the continent. So they came to the US. Toured like crazy and built up a fan base. They are based in L.A. now. Their success here has allowed them to return to Europe recently with great success.

As far as being able to see lots of bands on tour, well, this is a new thing for me. Used to go to concerts when I was young but nothing in the last 20 years or so. Now I'm going again and there is no shortage of bands to see live. Virtually all of the bands I want to see who aren't major pop names come to venues in my area with some regularity.

Maybe the exceptions prove the rule as laid out in the article. But as a fan I don't see it. I see lots of new and exciting acts making great music, touring where I can easily see them and making a good living at it too. 

@simao : " Actually, the author DOES support that analog is superior to digital- and that digital had to recreate itself through added warmth, etc."

That does not establish superiority. It establishes flexibility to meet tastes and marketability, which is its own form of superiority. I also don't buy the premise. I was there in the thick of the CD 'revolution'. While we often heard and read about the coldness and sterility of digital sound, all of the typical consumers around me loved it. I can't speak for serious audiophiles in general of that era (I was a minor audiophile at the time) but I had an uncle who reviewed music for major classical labels. I still remember his large listening room the whole rear wall of which was vinyl behind his Mac/Klipsch gear. I went back to his house a few years later and the whole wall was CDs.

Go see The Struts. $20. One of the best shows I've seen. Going to see them twice in May. A real rock show.

However, looked into Gary Clark, Jr and Leon Bridges as well. Around $100 and neither one of them are household names. I'd pay that, but not more.

@orpheus10 :  "First and foremost, this forum should stick to all things concerning turntable set up, or similar subject, because people here have no idea of what's going on outside of their on little "ballywick" meaning the big world outside of audio."

I hope that was meant in humor. First, there are plenty of folks here who know the music industry intimately. Second, you have no idea what other people's experiences have been.

"Has anyone noticed that almost all of the major cities in this country that were thriving metropolises not long ago are now urban slums." 

Not true. That is a regional problem. Cities throughout the southeast are growing at unprecedented (and sometimes alarming) rates and the local music scenes just keep getting better and better both in terms of creativity and success but also fan access.

@simao : I get it. We have a tendency to look back at other times and possibly glorify them more than we should. I'm bad about that myself. And I would assert that as in all things, certain time periods are often truly better in some respect or another. And I do, in general, see western culture and society in a state of decline in many respects.

But I don't see success in music as any different from success in professional sports, literature, movie and TV, motor racing, etc. The fact is that extraordinarily few of the people who try it are going to make it big and very very few are going to make a good living at it. That is the nature of talent for hire.

I've read the stories of many many bands that got big, all the way back to the 60's. It has never been easy or fair. The best talent doesn't always get the gig. And I think that suggesting that it was somehow easier back then than now is a bridge too far.

But, as orpheus suggests, I'm not in the business and have no experience with the economy (rolls eyes)....so what do I know?

Just what I see.

@orpheus10 : Let me clarify. You said the following.


"First and foremost, this forum should stick to all things concerning turntable set up, or similar subject, because people here have no idea of what's going on outside of their on little "ballywick" meaning the big world outside of audio."

I said that is unsupportable since there are people here who do have experience in the music industry AND that you have no idea what other member's experiences are. Economic or otherwise.

You also said:

""Has anyone noticed that almost all of the major cities in this country that were thriving metropolises not long ago are now urban slums."  

To support it you link to a video about 10 cities. Ten. That's not all of the major cities. It isn't even "almost all" of the major cities. And for each one of those ten that are in decline I can show you two that are thriving. My point was that you generalized a problem to include "almost all" of the major cities and it is simply incorrect. I never said there was no urban decay, but it is not a problem everywhere.

@voiceofvinyl:

"The post-war generation took pride in their interests. Audio, and photography, as well as others like woodworking, fly-fishing etc.., were part technical pursuits that people aspired to master. This is simply no longer true for the majority of the public."   

Like the article itself, and a number of other replies here, I think this too represents looking back at the good old days through rose colored glasses. The truth is that none of the things you mentioned were ever part of high level technical pursuits for "the majority of the public". They aren't now and they weren't then.

And the truth of the matter is that in terms of numbers alone there are way more people doing things like advanced amateur photography than at any time in history. The public taste for quick snapshots may have worsened and the value the _general_ public has for professional or fine art photography may not be what it once was per capita but it is thriving. I am deep into amateur and fine art photography and the number of people out there doing amazing high level work including large format fine art printing is simply amazing.

As with the article I think it is too easy to confuse what the majority of the world thinks and does with the level of success and expertise that still exists and thrives.

It is also too easy to see things through a local lens and I might be just as guilty as @orpheus10  in this matter. He sees, in his purview, a loss of music venues and night clubs. In my purview I see a boom. The music scene in this region is thriving and vital, the quality of music in many cases is excellent and young people are embracing it.

The music industry has _always_ been hard to break into. There is nothing new about that.

This is just a single article about one band but it seems to refute the premise of the original article on which this thread was based......except that the band sought after a more traditional Stax style SQ:

https://theindustryobserver.thebrag.com/the-teskey-brothers-a-diy-success-story/

If you haven't heard this band.......you should.

@orpheus10 :

Ivan, I'm just thankful that you are one of the few around here that's looking at anything outside of our little "ballywick".

I'm getting kind of sick of hearing this. You have no idea who we are or what our collective life experience is. Which makes your assumption an arrogant and totally unsupportable stereotype. The irony is that you are accusing an entire group of people of being sheltered and ignorant while doing so from a position of sheltered ignorance.

@2channel8, you say:

"I worry about how the dwindling income of artists may affect the availability of good music." 

I don't think anyone, including the author of the article in question has established in any way whatsoever that the income of artists is dwindling. I'm not even sure there is a way to measure that. 

That's why I reacted negatively to the article to begin with....the whole premise is flawed. He starts with an assumption that he doesn't even try to prove and then spends the rest of the article telling us why it happened.

The huge irony is that this article comes as more and more people are discovering more and more new artists that they'd never heard of and NEVER WOULD HAVE without digital streaming.