These facts aren't terribly disappointing. Like that response said, it's two different eras of music distribution. In the same vein, I have sold more CDs than Beethoven...although he has had more bands cover his music than me.
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Heh, I do. I'm in bands with people who are 12-18 years younger than me, and I'm always the one pushing them to do the latest Sean Paul single, more Shakira, and less "music guitarists like".
Didn't we cover this a month or so ago???
You do realize this is not the "bass humor" forum, right?in a consumer culture, a main rule is that if a product is designed for mass consumption in a market, it must adhere to the schematics of similar market-available products (with small variations in the formula, creating its veneer of 'uniqueness')...
it must speak to something inherent in the consumer (the need to be "part of", the need to be seen as successful, etc)...
and it can't pose an aesthetic threat or disconnect on any level.
without straying into better or worse (however easy that would be), it seems that todays pop-music choices are designed and created largely in marketing think tanks, with inception and end-game mapped out with surgical precision, while ALL the old-school music mentioned in the OPs original article reference came about as the result of organic growth in real time by each artist, over the span of their careers.
pklima said:I'd love to think that artistic bands sit around scheming and trying to think of ways to make themselves seem more intelligent than other bands, and that it's all a grand conspiracy of pretentiousness and status-seeking. I can't convince myself of that, though.

First of all: if these "statistics" are based on facts, how can the music industry claim to be dying...? Doesn't go well together imo.
If you take into account that today a lot of record companies buy hundreds of thousands of copies of their own records just to make it to a good spot in the charts for more popularity, then it might make sense again. I don't know if that was a common procedure 30+ years ago too though...
#10 confirms what I've always thought about Marley and reggae: those who claim to be fans really aren't at all and just claim to be to fit in with what they think their peer group likes. They hear it on radio and on That One Stoner Guy's album when he throws yet another party, and they know it has something to do with smoking weed... and that's it.
Imagine my disgust at walking into a jam night at a bar and seeing reggae being played by young 'trustafarians' and fronted by one who is totally ginger with a beard and red dreads all balled up in an African-coloered tam singing about Jah and Rastafari. I'm guessing his people probably didn't have to deal with the same sort of enslavement that called for memorializing with dreads, nor did he appear to have any African 'rootz' in his lineage whatsoever. He probably doesn't know that the sacramental reefer was a gift from Jah to alleviate the pain of the whips. It was waaay more awkward than Vanilla Ice, especially while watching the drummer struggle with a 1-Drop.
Maybe because youre not from the States this doesnt seem to make sense to you, but it is the reality.