Why Music Has Lost it’s Charms (Article)

I feel the current model potentially can yield a further “democratization” of music commerce.  I’m not sad to see the old model (get signed by a major label, hopefully become famous) die.  The improvement to the current model would be to more fairly compensate the artists that are on streaming platforms.

The doom-and-gloom take is more applicable to film, in my opinion.  It’s easier for artists to get their music “out there” these days.  Artists in film seem to be toast.  No one wants to fund interesting films.  There’s no corollary to modern music distribution in modern film that I can see.  Unless you are lucky to live somewhere where you can hound art house theaters or have access to modern independent films, you’re stuck with the contemporary drivel that passes for cinema.

They made music because they were paid to whether by church or as often nobility. For money, the definition of commercial. No one else could afford such frivolities to commission work. However, it was also consumed by the masses .. so popular and commercial though of what competition I can't speak. 

They made music because they were paid to whether by church or as often nobility. For money, the definition of commercial. No one else could afford such frivolities to commission work. However, it was also consumed by the masses .. so popular and commercial though of what competition I can’t speak.

You are beside the main point...

There ALWAYS existed commercial aspect to any activities in all centuries..It is a common place fact...

But my point was that commercial music consumerism is a late affair... It is born AFTER playback system of Charles Cros and Edison...

Popular music of the past is not commercial music in the modern sense of the word...

Popular dont equal commercial in music culture....

In the past music was an education toward spirit and religious matter or toward beauty and superior values... This word "beauty" is cancelled today....

This dont exist no more in commercial music...

Nowadays Bob Dylan is a popular poet for example not a commercial object first and last...

If you say to Dylan that he is  merely a commercial product , he will be insulted...

If you say that to some commercial artists they will be glad and will try to improve their packaging and they will ask you how to do it better....

Then saying that Vivaldi one hundred operas were "commercial" music is not true...

Popular yes... Commercial not....We cannot read the past projecting onto it retrospectively our own categories sorry...Historians wrote entire  books about this error only....

Forrest for the trees.

Commerical music now and then ... Has always been commercial (sellable) because it was what people wanted to listen to of what was available.

@tylermunns  Couldn't agree more! I've given up on major film releases. The best movies are now on various streaming services in the form of the mini series, you get some damn character development. I much prefer the classic movies/film on TCM, I guess people don't care about story lines anymore, action and escape from reality is what they seek. I don't care about the tenth remake of some lame movie which seems to be profit model for theatrical releases these days.

Contemporary music nothing like this, major studios don't control the music business like they did back in the bad old days. There is so much obscure never heard of artists out there via streaming services, how one couldn't find some wonderful music is beyond me