Internet Killed The Video Star

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous [BG]' started by philzbass, Feb 18, 2006.

  1. I was just wondering what kind of responses this could get.

    The other day I was having a conversation about the fact that there doesn't seem to be any bands out today that will be around in 20 years. I mean there doesn't seem to be too much originality these days and I can't see any of these bands becoming the next Rolling Stones. Can anyone name a newer band that might become legendary?

    Anyway, a friend brought up the fact that now that everybody can just get whatever they want off the internet, bands don't seem to be able to hit the heights that they used to. I found this to be an interesting concept. Yeah, bands do seem to be held down a bit now, compaired to the bands of the 80's or even 90's. I don't see any Motley Crues poping up anywhere or any Nirvana's.

  2. LajoieT

    LajoieT I won't let your shadow be my shade...

    Oct 7, 2003
    Western Massachusetts
    It's all hindsight. You don't know what's going to be a classic untill it does. Led Zeppelin got it's name because someone who saw them in the early days said they would go over like a lead balloon. I can't even begin to count all the bands that were billed as the next big thing or instant classics that you never heard from again. Meanwhile people like John Mayer, just to name one that is starting to show a rising star, begin to show as blips on the map and quietly become long lasting sucesses.

    I think the bigger issue is the over-segmenting of music which limits the overall potential of popularity. Instead of just country, blues, rock, now we have hip-hop, gangsta, crossover, prog, neo-prog, neo-classical-prog, gothic-prog, prog-light, prog-dark, prog-dry, cafeene-free-diet-prog, etc. so instead of EVERYBODY listening to the same batch of music, there are people who are the biggest thing in their little sub-genre that 90% of the people have never even heard of before.
  3. AxtoOx


    Nov 12, 2005
    Duncan, Okla.
    Breaking Benjamin? Clutch? Who knows. You can't really tell until they have some staying power.
    I first saw Motley Crue and thought they were a KISS take off and never thought they would amount to anything. I thought the whole Grunge thing was neat, but the only survivors are Grohl, Cantrell, and Cornell.
    I thought Alanis Morisett was the next Carole King, but she fizzled.
    We'll know in 10 years, my record collection has had many 1 timers in it I thought were great.
    BTW, check out these kids.
  4. AxtoOx


    Nov 12, 2005
    Duncan, Okla.
    Keith Moon from the Who, they were touring as "The New Yardbirds" at the time. Opening for Vanilla Fudge. Remember them?
  5. LajoieT

    LajoieT I won't let your shadow be my shade...

    Oct 7, 2003
    Western Massachusetts
    Yea, didn't figure the details were important. You mean Vanilla Fudge isn't a classic, I keep Psychadelic Sunday in my truck at all times...

    BTW, another take from me on the topic has to do with the thread title, a reference to the Buggles "Video Killed the Radio Star", Radio is still big, and today, probably more relavent in the music biz than video channels. I listen to the radio every day, and I can't remember the last time I watched a music video channel, but I am sure that whenever that was, I wasn't watching music videos.
  6. ras1983


    Dec 28, 2004
    Sydney, Australia
    First, i want to address the internet angle:
    the reason bands/performers are being hit by the internet is because they aren't respecting its power on the public. for example, imagine that your favourite band started releasing every one of its future songs FOR FREE on the internet. that's right, you could log on to their website and download their new album for free.

    Now, you may be asking how they would make money. ADVERTISEMENTS. All the free p2p programs have adverts in them that pay them royalties and advertising fees. The music industry could do the same thing, but they have ignored this business model so far. It will also be theoretically possible to nearly halt production of CD's and reduce costs immensely in this way, since people will be downloading the songs onto their PC's, ipods or PSPs.

    As far as a lack of long term talent, its the music industrie's fault. Record companies would rather pay (very little in comparison) for a one-hit wonder such as an 'idol' winner who will sell a couple of million records than to pay a top line band big dollars to keep releasing records. The problem is that money is increasingly becoming the final decision maker.

    Also, music originality is at an all time low, generally speaking. many songs are rehashes, or samples or just plain suck. :rollno:
  7. I think the problem with bands releasing their music on the net is sound quality. It sound nowhere near as good as it would on CD.

    Money has always been the final decision maker in the music industry.

    But i do agree about the lack of originality. But you have to wonder how much more can e pioneered that people will like. Not many people are into prog. Theres alot of cool ideas and such going on there, but the majority of people in the world listen to commercial radio, with commercial songs. You have to remember, the amount of non-muso's compared to how many muso's there are.... we are far out weighed. If you notice, people who just listen to music, and people who create it, look for entirely different things in songs. We can appreciate the little things that are going on. Most people just listen to something because its catchy, whereas we can hear tricky time signatures, technical riffs/technique, etc.

    my $0.02

  8. I started this thread because I thought there would be some interesting feedback.And there's been really great responses so far.

    I think the fact that someone pointed out that Motley Crue seemed like a spin off of Kiss is really funny (cuz it's true). But everything is some kind of spin off. I think originality just comes from taking different influences and adding your own twists and turns. Nothing is really original, it's all taken from somwhere.

    Heres something to think about: with the internet making it possible for people to get their hands on everything (legal or not) it seems that record labels are less willing to take risks. Bands aren't sighned for their originality, they're sighned to make money. So, you always see the same formula being used because they know it works.

    A friend brought up the fact that it seems like it's easier for smaller bands to get things moving now because of the internet advertising but it's harder for big bands to hit levels that they used to. This is why I said: "Internet Killed The Video Star".

    Thanx and keep em coming!!
  9. Skeletomania


    Oct 25, 2005
    hong kong
    I would blame both MTV and specialty websites. MTV have an image of what people should listen to and associate with. It's kind of like the "cool kid" factor. Music industry wants to make music that caters to MTV. That's where the money is and it's the best advertising partnership they'll ever get. People of the Zeppelin days aren't 20 anymore. They've already established their taste in music and music industry can't change that. There's no money to be make in those area because general music population have shifted to hip-hop. On the other hand, the internet is too vast and big. You can put a website up and no one will ever know it's existence. Furthermore, the internet have it's own sub culture like myspace. Smaller bands that wants to make a name tends to gravitate to these sites with large number of visitors. Kids of Myspace like MTV have their own scene and people they associate to. All in all, music is no longer soley about music. There's the scene which these music are attach on to. For it be the myspace scene with the clothings they wear, the hairstyle they fashion, or the MTV scene with the spring break, 24 inch bling-bling rims, and the abnoxiously loud speakers on their car. Unless your band comforms to the taste of what's "hot" at the moment, soon or later you'll fade away or never make it big.

  10. seriously, I dont like what you said at all...

    do any of you guys listen to indie music? music that is made to make music? not to "make it big" or "just have fun" or "fit in on myspace"-LOL music that is made for the sole sake of listening... Not doing what everyone else wants you to do (even though an indie record could be like that, but not on purpose)... I mean, Im not worried about bands hanging on for 20 years... Ive got their CD, its on mycomputer, I own it for 20 years... its just that simple... sure, having a band that thrives for 20 years is a diffrent story (and something to attain)- I only know of a couple bands that did this... one of which being Joy Division, they started back before/during the 80's, went through some ups and downs, and just last year they relased a new album (under a name called New Order... which was taken on in 83 i believe)

    I think theres alot more people out there than you think... Im almost positive i could list off a few bands that none of you might know, that have quite a following, and will for years to come...

    I am in a band that has a myspace page... no, we dont do it in a vain attempt to "hit it big, or because we like "the clothing and hairstyles"... we actually do it to

    A. Hook up shows with other bands,
    B. Host mp3's-not all of them mind you...
    C. See what our fanbase looks like and
    D. Advertize shows and Merch.

    Does it sound like were trying to hit it big or be "in"?

    I think the answer is no... you can think what you want... Its just something that is easy to use, and can help promote your band. not make you hip...

    BTW... I dont think anyone just sits around on myspace and looks for bands... they could... but its kinda like browsing through people on myspace... a Giant waste of time....

    The only band I can see being recognised in the next 15 or 20 years is Radiohead... Seriously, Their "OK Computer" album was voted best album... EVER... a couple years ago in england... It was released in 97.... making it almost 10... and the bands first major album was made in 93... They just last year released a new album, and toured to the US for one of the first times in years, and let me put it this way... I clouldnt get a ticket...

    anyway... i have to write a story now
  11. When I first this thread, I remember thinking either Radiohead or Coldplay will make the distance - and perhaps U2 will still be rocking out in 2020.
  12. I apologize if this was already addressed, but it is obvious what is going on today in the record business: record companies do not want bands to get absolutely huge (The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, etc) because they will not be able to control them, and eventually these bands will be out of the contract and gone forever. Both The Beatles and Led Zeppelin formed their own record labels at a time in their career when they could have sold a million copies of cars honking their horns (Led Zeppelin formed Swan Song in 1976; The Beatles formed Apple in the late 1960s, the White album was an Apple record).
    With that said very few bands are going to be given the chance to even reach the levels of success previous masters of the trade have been given. It is also worth noting that these groups we hold in such high regard came out at a time when rock was new and anything seemed possible. What seems new or innovative about heavy, blues based rock today (the first four led zeppelin albums)?
  13. Interesting.................Hip-Hops doing that now.