Has social media destroyed music?

DareGod · 18-02-2016 02:18AM #1

Lately, the music industry seems to be focused primarily on getting hits on social media.

Whichever popstar or performer can create the most fuss on Twitter/Instagram/Facebook, get the most comments, the most shares, the most likes, earn the most mentions on celebrity news websites as a result of being involved drama of some sort, is the person who seems to sell the most downloads on iTunes, regardless of whether the music is truly any good or is bringing any real joy to anyone.

It's repulsive and pathetic. But it brings in the revenue, and so it's now a highly used business model.

But what about the music?

I miss the days when artists used to create an album, promote the music, tour it, and the music had to be good. Fans would buy the record and it would touch them, it would speak to their soul, it hit a nerve with them and they truly appreciated the art of it.

There was none of this vapid social media "Likes"-whoring nonsense involved. Or, at least, to not anywhere near the extent that there is today.

People listened to an album from start to finish, and while listening to it, you could feel the quality and the effort, the heart and the soul, that went into creating it. The music scene these days is practically devoid of all those things.

These days it's all about creating a fuss online, getting social media mentions and hits, and having a fast-selling 3-minute song on iTunes. Suck a load of w*nk and I'm personally sick to the back teeth of it.

Thoughts?

Ice Maiden · 18-02-2016 02:21AM

Crappy pop music has always been around - it's just that in my opinion social media helps to amplify it.
There is still plenty of great music out there - which social media, or at least the internet, helps people source much more easily now.

Junkyard Tom · 18-02-2016 02:26AM

One man's crappy pop music is another.. man's.... freedom fighter?

Dammit, you know what I mean.

super_furry · 18-02-2016 02:28AM

It's always been about having a fast selling three minutes song.

chrissb8 · 18-02-2016 02:32AM

If anything it has helped. Earliest point in case: Arctic Monkeys 1st album released on MySpace. Not saying they wouldn't have gotten big but releasing an album online for free helped alot. Alot of good musicians before hand weren't heard off the whim of record labels or other "experts" who didn't like them. Alot more crap but alot more choice. Positives outweighs the bad. Good music is still good music flashy quirky video or big marketing campaign it always comes down to the music. Strip away everything it's all about the music.

Custardpi · 18-02-2016 02:35AM

super_furry wrote: »

It's always been about having a fast selling three minutes song.

Not always. For a few brief years it was also about having a guitar solo the length of an acid trip.

On another note I wonder how various late musicians would have dealt with social media. I reckon John Lennon's Instragram would be full of lame "inspirational" type photos while Sid Vicious's Twitter feed would mostly consist of expletive filled rants & public spats between him & Nancy.

lertsnim · 18-02-2016 05:17AM

The ****e music is easily avoidable.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 18-02-2016 05:26AM

D'ya know who's insufferable?

Beyoncé. That's who. And that mega gowl Kanye West. And Lady Gaga...and Pink... I'm no hipster but 90% of pop music is actually terrible. I don't blame social media, it's just people are getting stupider...we have a generation of people growing up idolising the kardashians and those spaz faced ultra cùnts on Geordie shore and the like. The world is getting stupider and they have to be spoon fed their music that could honestly be composed by a three year old and sung better than your transition year choir teacher.

Lights On · 18-02-2016 06:43AM

This might not be in your case OP, but I've found for the most part that the people who complain about music these days are the same people who don't actively look for any to listen to and still just base their opinion on what the radio is playing or what gets the most hits on YouTube, Facebook etc.

There's more good music being produced these days than there has been for a very long time, and thanks to social media, blogs & forums it's a whole lot more accessible than it would have been pre Internet where you'd have to read magazine or get told about it from someone you knew.

18-02-2016 07:42AM

Social media has vastly improved the music I listen to.

Growing up, I was in a class with other kids who listened to Guns n Roses, Prince, U2, Whitney Houston...we had no great diversity, it was all driven by the charts and radio playing what was in the charts. At University, it seemed like everyone liked grunge, indie...again nothing I particularly liked, and really driven by NME etc.

But now, on social media, I have friends who like what I like, IDM, electronica, ambient. I look back on the days when we only had the 20 or 30 songs on 2FM or Atlantic 252's playlist and shudder. I spent whole months having to listen to Oh Mary, Celebrate, Sweet Child O Mine, I Wanna Dance With Somebody etc. etc...it was depressing.

Nodin · 18-02-2016 07:53AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Social media has vastly improved the music I listen to.

Growing up, I was in a class with other kids who listened to Guns n Roses, Prince, U2, Whitney Houston...we had no great diversity, it was all driven by the charts and radio playing what was in the charts. At University, it seemed like everyone liked grunge, indie...again nothing I particularly liked, and really driven by NME etc.

But now, on social media, I have friends who like what I like, IDM, electronica, ambient. I look back on the days when we only had the 20 or 30 songs on 2FM or Atlantic 252's playlist and shudder. I spent whole months having to listen to Oh Mary, Celebrate, Sweet Child O Mine, I Wanna Dance With Somebody etc. etc...it was depressing.

The never ending playlist of doom.

Kev W · 18-02-2016 07:53AM

"I remember when it used to be just about the music, now it's all about trying to sell those ugly black things, what are they called? Records I think."

Music on the whole is no better or worse. You just got older and it stopped being aimed at you.

kfallon · 18-02-2016 09:10AM

Deleted User wrote: »

the 20 or 30 songs on 2FM or Atlantic 252's playlist and shudder.

Soul Asylum - Runaway Train
Bryan Adams - Whatever I do
Wet Wet Wet - Love is all Around
East 17 - Alright
Richard Marx - Hazard

If I ever hear any of those songs replayed I immediately think of Atlantic 252!!! Still, at least the DJ's didn't talk much but they spent ages talking about how they never talked :rolleyes:

Anyone remember Satellite Jukebox on TV? Especially when it was the 'durty' videos they played, boobs & music, a perfect combo :pac:

sabat · 18-02-2016 10:56AM

It's certainly brought about the end of one of popular music's most important features-idiosyncratic regional scenes developing in semi-isolation from the mainstream which allowed fresh styles space to flourish. When's the last time you heard of a new genre with the name of a city attached to or associated with it? I'm talking about Chicago House, Philly Soul, Madchester, Sheffield Electronica, grunge from Seattle etc.

ancapailldorcha · 18-02-2016 11:52AM

Sadly this is just the result of narcissism enabled be social media. Likes, retweets and favourites are just ways to shove what you're peddling down peoples' throats and the indications are they can't get enough of it so it is a trend which will sadly continue until the next evolution of social media.

osarusan · 18-02-2016 11:56AM

Music videos and MTV probably did more damage in terms of talentless but beautiful 'musicians' getting exposure.

Social media helps with the all out sales pitch/assault on young music listeners though.

Kev W · 18-02-2016 11:58AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Sadly this is just the result of narcissism enabled be social media. Likes, retweets and favourites are just ways to shove what you're peddling down peoples' throats and the indications are they can't get enough of it so it is a trend which will sadly continue until the next evolution of social media.

If you think retweets and likes constitute shoving anything down peoples throats then you either don't understand how social media works or don't understand the term "shoved down peoples throats".

RichardoKhan · 18-02-2016 12:00PM

Pop will eat itself..........& I dont mean the band.....

NIMAN · 18-02-2016 12:37PM

I stopped slagging off 'other' music a long time ago. (by other I mean stuff I don't like).

Music is subjective. Like films, cars etc. What you like doesn't make it great or the best. It makes it your taste, others will think its rubbish, you will think their's is rubbish.

People don't listen to 'other' music to spite you, but because they like it.

We all get old and think the youngsters music is rubbish. Our parents did it to us, now we are doing it to the generation behind. They will do it to the next etc etc.

Custardpi · 18-02-2016 12:41PM

Lights On wrote: »

There's more good music being produced these days than there has been for a very long time, and thanks to social media, blogs & forums it's a whole lot more accessible than it would have been pre Internet where you'd have to read magazine or get told about it from someone you knew.

I'm skeptical about this claim to be honest. Certainly there's more music being produced these days - anyone with a laptop & a vague idea of software can try their hand at being the next Skilrex or whoever. It's undeniable too that there's a greater range of music available to curious listeners than ever before - I've personally gotten into a ton of stuff through the internet that I probably wouldn't have heard through the radio, even allowing for the likes of Dave Fanning, Mike Maloney, An Taobh Tuathaill etc.

However, does the greater amount of music & its greater availability automatically translate into good music being produced today? While I'd agree that there can be a tendency (often greatly exaggerated) among some people to label anything from their youth as representing artistic greatness & to label more modern music as by the numbers dross I think there can also be those who fall into the opposite trap i.e. giving newer music more praise than it deserves by comparison by what went before while dismissing any naysayers as fuddy duddies who just need to get with it & recognise how good the Emperor's new tunes sound.

The idea that the quality of music essentially remains constant & that people just get old has never really been one that convinced me as it's too simplistic & fails to consider the possibility that artistic expression can have periods of greatness & also periods where things become tired & stale, regardless of the quantity of artists around.

I'd listen to a pretty wide range of music going from the late 40s to present day stuff & also a small amount of classical music & I've come to the belief that the heyday of the longplay vinyl record i.e. from the late 50s/early 60s to the oil crisis of the mid 70s represented an artistic high point in human history in terms of the music which was produced with a well funded industry's backing & a medium which allowed for a deeper exploration of sonic ideas (listeners only had to come out of their reveries once every 20 minutes or so rather than every 5 or whatever the length of a 45 or 78 would be) which if the artist was lucky enough to be in the employ of a decent company would contain well recorded sound & be made of quality material. Albums like "The Court Of The Crimson King" & "Piper At The Gates Of Dawn" could really only have been produced during this period.

I don't praise that era because it was the time of my youth - it wasn't - but rather because I've listened & compared it to other time periods including this one & I honestly believe it comes out on top in terms of artistic achievement, even allowing for the amount of ****e music around at the time (which is something I do believe remains pretty constant).

Ultimately however I think it can be hard to judge objectively the quality of music from a period while still living in that time. Often art needs to be listened to, forgotten about, rediscovered & reevaluated before being recognised as the quality work which it is - a process which the distance of years, decades or even centuries can help e.g. virtually no one was interested in the Velvet Underground's first album when it was released - they're now regarded as one of the great groups of their time.

It's possible that in years & eras to come music that today is regarded as not worthy of notice or positively awful will come to merit reappraisal & be lauded by our descendants as the artistic masterpieces we were too busy or tone deaf to notice. Who knows, perhaps some of the prestigious music schools of 2116 will contain a chair of Justin Bieber Studies.

GLaDOS · 18-02-2016 01:11PM

Lots of good music being made that I enjoy but I have weird taste in music.

NIMAN · 18-02-2016 01:14PM

There was good music in the 60s, there was bad music in the 60s
There was good music in the 70s, there was bad music in the 70s
There was good music in the 80s, there was bad music in the 80s
There was good music in the 90s, there was bad music in the 90s
There was good music in the 00s, there was bad music in the 00s
.
.
.
.
.
.

Rothko · 18-02-2016 01:14PM

No, not at all.

Ice Maiden · 18-02-2016 01:21PM

I know there has always been crap chart music but The X Factor and the like have generated even more.

I also don't agree musical quality is always subjective. Dickens was a better writer than the one who wrote Fifty Shades Of Grey, even if plenty of people prefer the latter to the works of Dickens.

valoren · 18-02-2016 01:22PM

NIMAN wrote: »

There was good music in the 60s, there was bad music in the 60s
There was good music in the 70s, there was bad music in the 70s
There was good music in the 80s, there was bad music in the 80s
There was good music in the 90s, there was bad music in the 90s
There was good music in the 00s, there was bad music in the 00s
.
.
.
.
.
.

This.

It's a selective bias thing.

In 20 years, retro music channels will be playing the likes Adele 'Hello' and not generic crap like Ellie Goulding 'On my mind'.
And people will think, gee, the music in the noughteens was epic! Music today is shiite.

jiltloop · 18-02-2016 01:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Social media has vastly improved the music I listen to.

Growing up, I was in a class with other kids who listened to Guns n Roses, Prince, U2, Whitney Houston...we had no great diversity, it was all driven by the charts and radio playing what was in the charts. At University, it seemed like everyone liked grunge, indie...again nothing I particularly liked, and really driven by NME etc.

But now, on social media, I have friends who like what I like, IDM, electronica, ambient. I look back on the days when we only had the 20 or 30 songs on 2FM or Atlantic 252's playlist and shudder. I spent whole months having to listen to Oh Mary, Celebrate, Sweet Child O Mine, I Wanna Dance With Somebody etc. etc...it was depressing.

I was in the same boat as you until I discovered pirate radio stations and blank cassette tapes! That's how I discovered the world of electronic music. It was hard work but very rewarding. You'd hear a bit of a song but miss the name of the song or artist and spend weeks trying to find out who it was. No Shazam back then!

Mr. CooL ICE · 18-02-2016 01:25PM

Can't relate OP. Only time any of those ones pop up on my facebook timeline is when someone likes some stupid buzzfeed or her.ie article. I just ignore and scroll down.

On the other hand, social media has helped underground bands. Take Party Cannon, a death metal band from Scotland who have gone viral a few times at this stage because their logo is incredibly silly. They just happen to be a hard working band, but the social media exposure definitely helps.

jiltloop · 18-02-2016 01:28PM

RichardoKhan wrote: »

Pop will eat itself..........& I dont mean the band.....

Nah, pop will never eat itself because there's a never ending supply of vacuous people who like trends more than music.

Pop will always eat good underground music and regurgitate it until the stolen sounds are a parody of themselves and wait for the next underground movement so it can repeat the process.

Aongus Von Heisenberg · 18-02-2016 01:38PM

I don't think Social Media has destroyed music: it may just amplify the annoyance of the musical mainstream becoming debased as you get the rubbish beamed straight onto your social media feed.

I think the musical mainstream became debased a little before social media, maybe around 1995-2005.

If you watch Reeling in the Years good music that did well in the charts is present all through the decades then at some point around the late 1990's chart music becomes manufactured rubbish and quality is banished to the fringes, with occasional admirable exceptions.

I remember on Top 30 hits in the mid 90's you could see excellent Rock, Dance and Hip-Hop all getting fairly high in the charts whereas since then sales have become overwhelmingly dominated by pop and pop-ified versions of the other genres (eg Avicii for electronic music, Chart R&B appropriating the stylings of Hip-Hop, bland guitar music from guys who look like they're in a boy band). Even Pop, a genre that once included Bowie FFS,is now synonymous with risible tat.

If anything Social Media pushes back against this trend somewhat as you can hunt down good music with a bit of effort, it's just harder to avoid the moronic cacaphony that has occupied the mainstream.

jungleman · 18-02-2016 01:40PM

Kind of agree with OP a *little* bit. Some music videos have way more production than the actual songs themselves.

I remember when the music video for Californication was the best thing ever. At least it had a cracking song to back it up.

Any songs, or "artists" (I hate when morons like Miley Cyrus describe themselves as artists) who rely on social media to sell their crap is the kind of stuff I wouldn't listen to anyway.

For me, I just have to dig a little bit deeper to find cool new stuff. Recently I've found Burning Hearts, Helicopter Helicopter, Susanne Sundfor, and Aqualung. They're amazing musicians, all with a fairly low social media profile. Ya just gotta keep digging, you'll find the good stuff eventually. Kind of like a jam doughnut. Get to the jam.

NIMAN · 18-02-2016 01:41PM

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I know there has always been crap chart music but The X Factor and the like have generated even more.

Before X-Factor it was Stock, Aitken and Waterman getting the abuse for crap music.

Before that we had TV talent shows too.

There will always be something to blame.

Has social media destroyed music?

Comments