Has social media destroyed music?

Boom_Bap · 18-02-2016 02:12PM

Social Media is another outlet for musicans/labels to deliver music, it used to be radio and tv. Some people may be too young to know that the M in MTV stands for music as it rarely plays music.
Social media is being used aggressively as any musician who wants to earn money needs to seel records. Keeping links to the iTunes page on social media keeps clicks going in that direction instead of illegal downloads.

Ice Maiden · 18-02-2016 03:32PM

NIMAN wrote: »

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.

I think the volume of crappy music in the charts has increased though (and the reverse). It's not an age thing, as I've thought it since I was 13. People like The Beatles and David Bowie and The Jam used to be chart/pop music. You simply would not find that calibre of music in the charts now.

NIMAN · 18-02-2016 03:35PM

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I think the volume of crappy music in the charts has increased though (and the reverse). It's not an age thing, as I've thought it since I was 13. People like The Beatles and David Bowie and The Jam used to be chart/pop music. You simply would not find that calibre of music in the charts now.

But my point is that not everyone likes The Beatles, The Jam or David Bowie. To some, that music is awful.

Hammer89 · 18-02-2016 03:57PM

Anyone who thinks modern-day music is gone down the toilet clearly hasn't heard Shake it Off, which genuinly one of my favourite songs ever. If they have and still think it's doomed, they're just being a bit hipster-ish. Up until 2011 or so, Lady Gaga could've sang over a beat comprised of Jihadi John rants and pussy farts, and it'd still be an absolute choon. She and her team had the midas touch for a while there.

Basically, modern-day music breeds an obscene amount of snobbery in my opinion. "Man f*ck Justin Bieber. Let's take it back to the 1920s and listen to Chubby Checker." Let's not, because he's sh*t.

18-02-2016 04:24PM

No not at all, its made music more democratic and had take away a lot of the mystic surrounding making music if anything.

parttime · 18-02-2016 04:33PM

The Honey Monster wrote: »

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.

Can I subscribe to your newsletter or blog or something?
Love this" spaz faced ultra cùnts"
Excellent rant, could'nt agree more.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 18-02-2016 05:18PM

Always felt the industry got into trouble once physical sales went into massive decline in the early part of the century. I think proper bands found it harder to get a break when the smaller labels began disappearing.

Rothko · 18-02-2016 05:21PM

Hammer89 wrote: »

Anyone who thinks modern-day music is gone down the toilet clearly hasn't heard Shake it Off, which genuinly one of my favourite songs ever. If they have and still think it's doomed, they're just being a bit hipster-ish. Up until 2011 or so, Lady Gaga could've sang over a beat comprised of Jihadi John rants and pussy farts, and it'd still be an absolute choon. She and her team had the midas touch for a while there.

Basically, modern-day music breeds an obscene amount of snobbery in my opinion. "Man f*ck Justin Bieber. Let's take it back to the 1920s and listen to Chubby Checker." Let's not, because he's sh*t.

Or perhaps they have a different opinion. Just like you do about Chubby Checker.

riclad · 18-02-2016 05:48PM

There,s lots of great singers out there ,they may not be the next taylor swift.
New singers can put up songs on youtube ,soundcloud etc
theres a wide range of music on the web,
before if you had no record deal or no one to push your music on radio
you had no chance of making a living .
Now you can go on social media ,and get support from fans on patreon without going near a big record company .
its not justin beiber theres loads of singers like grimes ,lana del rey ,fka twigs , all sorts of singers that mix different genres .
Theres more to music than beyonce ,katy perry or bieber .
Many groups were ripped off in the 80,s and the 90,s cos you had to get a record contract in order to sell any cds, or make a living.
Look on pitchfork.com or rolling stone.com or stereogum,com if you want
to see a wider range of music .

IF you listen to music in the top 40 you may be have a limited view of what,s out there .

18-02-2016 05:56PM

Saw this on FB and thought it was quite relevant to the discussion :

http://i.imgur.com/hXtsWSP

Lights On · 18-02-2016 06:23PM

Fieldog wrote: »

Saw this on FB and thought it was quite relevant to the discussion :

http://i.imgur.com/hXtsWSP

People still buy music, Adele selling 15 million albums in less than 6 months is the most extreme example of that. Sure sales have dropped off, streaming is the biggest reason for that imo, not that people don't want to pay, it's just that they'd rather use a Netflix type model where they pay a fee to get all they want.

But the rise in vinyl sales shows people moving back to records, though how long it will last is anybody's guess, so it's still being paid for. Just not every album is going platinum nowadays, which is a good thing really because if you take a look at some of the albums that were selling a million plus copies back in the day, a lot of them were utter garbage(and a lot doing it today still are!)

Not really a fair comparison either to be honest. Why not have a picture of Arcade Fire, Sufjan Stevens & FKA twigs at the bottom?

Rothko · 18-02-2016 06:24PM

riclad wrote: »

There,s lots of great singers out there ,they may not be the next taylor swift.
New singers can put up songs on youtube ,soundcloud etc
theres a wide range of music on the web,
before if you had no record deal or no one to push your music on radio
you had no chance of making a living .
Now you can go on social media ,and get support from fans on patreon without going near a big record company .
its not justin beiber theres loads of singers like grimes ,lana del rey ,fka twigs , all sorts of singers that mix different genres .
Theres more to music than beyonce ,katy perry or bieber .
Many groups were ripped off in the 80,s and the 90,s cos you had to get a record contract in order to sell any cds, or make a living.
Look on pitchfork.com or rolling stone.com or stereogum,com if you want
to see a wider range of music .

IF you listen to music in the top 40 you may be have a limited view of what,s out there .

Agree with most of what you say but I wouldn't recommend Rolling Stone to anyone if they want to find new music.

Fieldog wrote: »

Saw this on FB and thought it was quite relevant to the discussion :

http://i.imgur.com/hXtsWSP

Says a lot when the person can't even spell paid right. Anyway back then you also had crap like the Osmonds and Pat Boone.

Rothko · 18-02-2016 06:24PM

Lights On wrote: »

Not really a fair comparison either to be honest. Why not have a picture of Arcade Fire, Sufjan Stevens & FKA twigs at the bottom?

Because the person who created the image has probably never heard any of them

ScumLord · 18-02-2016 06:39PM

Music is an art form, like painting, that's run its course. The synthesiser was the last new development in music and it was the death nail, there are no new sounds left. From now on its just a case of using what's already been done to make a slight variation within the boundaries of copyright. Music is just being standardised into helpful categories so that the industry can sell an identity to people and plenty of people seem happy enough to stick to their assigned musical genre, thinking that makes them unique when all it does is limit their ability to enjoy anything that hasn't been spoon feed to them.

entropi · 18-02-2016 06:47PM

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.

Sadly, the majority of times the stuff people get to hear is the vapid, soulless crap that you hear on radio and music stations on TV which people accept as the norm, when it's really just mass produced filler to create $$ for the record companies. The good stuff needs to be searched for, still needs word of mouth to pass around and be heard. People will always follow what their favourite artists are doing anyway.

bnt · 18-02-2016 07:15PM

The subject says "music", but the OP says "the music industry". Two different things entirely. Plenty of great music is being made outside the "music industry", who are getting so desperate they want a chunk of what you make from live gigs, in the so-called 360 deal.

colossus-x · 18-02-2016 07:18PM

Contemporary pop music is about how low you can get your booty to the ground and shake it without falling over.

EuropeanSon · 18-02-2016 07:25PM

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I think the volume of crappy music in the charts has increased though (and the reverse). It's not an age thing, as I've thought it since I was 13. People like The Beatles and David Bowie and The Jam used to be chart/pop music. You simply would not find that calibre of music in the charts now.

You need to have a listen to the last few Kanye albums.

Custardpi · 18-02-2016 07:36PM

As I've said previously on this thread I don't think that anyone should be in doubt that there has been crappy music in all generations, probably roughly in the same proportions. Chances are that while Bach was composing The Brandenburg Concertos he would have passed a few bierstubs from which emitted the Germanic folk equivalent of One Direction. Equally, every era will have skilled musicians who are dedicated to their art & who can produce music to a high standard.

However, I would maintain that for any artform to rise above mere high standards & achieve a level of greatness which will stand the test of time (something which only happens periodically in my opinion) two main factors need to be present - an industry or interested benefactors who have large amounts of spare cash & a willingness to both take risks with the artform while at the same time build something timeless with it. The latter factor is often closely related to the first.

An era in which an artform has parsimonious purse string holders & where disposability & instant gratification are valued above all else will find it difficult to achieve greatness by contrast. There is a reason why some of the greatest art of human history was produced during the Italian Rennaissance. It's the same reason why we're currently living through what I firmly believe will be looked on as a golden age of television (or whatever television eventually evolves into). An industry/society prepared to risk the necessary funds to create the likes of the Sistine Chapel ceiling or Breaking Bad, creators with a desire to both experiment & produce something worthy of permanence & of course an audience receptive & patient enough to make those ideas a success. Of course, in both cases it was impossible for the artists involved to truly know how their work would be regarded in the years/centuries after they were gone. We probably need a distance of at least a couple of decades to pronounce any way definitively on the painting, music, tv, film etc of a particular era.

So what does that mean for music in the current era? Well for one thing there is a hell of a lot less money floating around than there used to be. Bands which are lucky enough to secure record deals have some sort of financial cushion but it's usually not that much & they'll generally have to tour relentlessly, not to mention flog tons of merchandise to make a decent living. If you self-publish then the same will apply only to a far greater extent. There is both far less time & certainly far less industry tolerance for professional musicians to piss about in the studio on the company's dime in the hopes that something marvelous will result. This is unfortunate as this process, while often extremely wasteful has produced some of the greatest music of the past century - The Beach Boys' Pet Sounds probably being one of the best known examples.

Agricola · 18-02-2016 07:54PM

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I think the volume of crappy music in the charts has increased though (and the reverse). It's not an age thing, as I've thought it since I was 13. People like The Beatles and David Bowie and The Jam used to be chart/pop music. You simply would not find that calibre of music in the charts now.

Agree, Bowie was a great example. Time was he was mainstream pop and very successful at it. Mainstream music used to have actual "artists" for want of a better word, who often had something to say.
It seems to me its a perfect storm of the internet, (death of physical media and collapse of revenues) social media, a young generation of "musicians" who have only ever known prosperity and have nothing to sing about, and simon cowell's x-factor promoting fame for fame's sake despite actual talent

No doubt there are people on the fringes making good music but the point is unless you actually go seek it out, you won't know. Where once mainstream music had a lot of quality, it is now filled with a lot of absolute rubbish. It isn't as simple as "You're old now, deal with it!"

strelok · 18-02-2016 07:56PM

Agricola wrote: »

No doubt there are people on the fringes making good music but the point is unless you actually go seek it out, you won't know. Where once mainstream music had a lot of quality, it is now filled with a lot of absolute rubbish. It isn't as simple as "You're old now, deal with it!"

it absolutely is as simple as "You're old now, deal with it!"

Custardpi · 18-02-2016 07:59PM

strelok wrote: »

it absolutely is as simple as "You're old now, deal with it!"

No it isn't. People who trot out that line about music or any other artform are being just as intellectually lazy as the "gah, everything was better in my day son" crowd.

Lights On · 18-02-2016 08:11PM

bnt wrote: »

The subject says "music", but the OP says "the music industry". Two different things entirely. Plenty of great music is being made outside the "music industry", who are getting so desperate they want a chunk of what you make from live gigs, in the so-called 360 deal.

Thankfully most artists have wised up about deals like this, because unless you're already touring the world and selling out stadiums you'll get very little from it. But you'll still get new bands and artists so desperate to sign a deal they'll put their name on whatever you put in front of them.

The traditional major label is dying out, very slowly, but it's the next thing that'll be on the way out. It makes a lot more sense now for people to set up their own label and do it DIY, or go to a smaller label who have already been set up and have similar artists doing the same thing. I find that I'm buying a lot more vinyl directly from the artists themselves via bandcamp who just put the money up themselves and make it back from sales.

Billy86 · 18-02-2016 08:15PM

The Honey Monster wrote: »

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.

As much of an unanimously agreed upon insufferable twat as he is, if you're going to use Kanye West as an example of music getting worse... you're not putting forward a very solid argument.

Custardpi · 18-02-2016 08:19PM

In fairness though Kanye, while certainly not terrible is massively overrated. To hear his cheerleaders talk you'd think the guy was Miles Davis, Tupac, Pink Floyd & The Beatles all rolled into one.

PARlance · 18-02-2016 08:20PM

Broad statement, but we're far too comfortable as a society for good music to flourish. Pop has been present for a long time but it has dominated for some time now and that reflects society in the Western World.

There's very little to rebel against, angst, the need for societal change etc tend to breed new music, new forms of music.

We haven't had a Berlin Wall in a while. Even if we did, people would probably be more interested in the battery life in the next iPhone.

Comfort creates laziness and I think we've had a decade or so of lazy music. I wouldn't blame social media per se.

Maybe I'm just getting old, but it seems like it's just a case of rinse and repeat for some time now. I certainly haven't had the chance to put on my grump old hat and say "this new form of music all the young ones are listening to is shocking isn't it"... there's nothing new, it's all very bland.

Billy86 · 18-02-2016 08:28PM

Custardpi wrote: »

In fairness though Kanye, while certainly not terrible is massively overrated. To hear his cheerleaders talk you'd think the guy was Miles Davis, Tupac, Pink Floyd & The Beatles all rolled into one.

I guess I'm just lucky that I don't bump into them often at all

! I could probably count the people I know that don't detest him on one hand. But (almost) none of them would deny he is incredibly talented and puts out a lot of great stuff.

Custardpi · 18-02-2016 08:40PM

Billy86 wrote: »

I guess I'm just lucky that I don't bump into them often at all ! I could probably count the people I know that don't detest him on one hand. But (almost) none of them would deny he is incredibly talented and puts out a lot of great stuff.

I'd classify that as cheerleading tbh. Again, while I certainly don't think he's terrible sound wise & reckon that at least some of the criticism which his music gets is probably due to his awful personality I'd also hold that by far his greatest talent is that of self promotion, which dwarfs his musical abilities, present though the latter may be.

DareGod · 18-02-2016 08:47PM

The Honey Monster wrote: »

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.

Why don't you blame social media, though? The explosion of social media into our lives has exactly coincided with the explosion of terrible music. Don't you think that the self-obsessed, memory-of-a-braindead-goldfish culture that social media has pushed on us is significantly to blame for people getting "stupider" ?

DareGod · 18-02-2016 08:49PM

Lights On wrote: »

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.

That would describe me, yes. I don't actively look for music to listen to. I tend to go with what's in front of me. I suppose my point is that 10 or 15 years ago, what was in front of me had substance and heart, and now it doesn't at all.

Has social media destroyed music?

Comments