This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
FUCK TAYLOR GODDAMN SWIFT! Zeena Schreck, take your daughter home already!I don't think attention spans or "tiktok" are to blame, that's for sure. I think what he said about Spotify is dead-on - now people can just choose to only listen to the handful of things they like and never be exposed to anything else. Ironically, giving people way more choice allowed them to listen to way less stuff, since they can easily shut out anything they haven't heard before. Not to mention there's now zero correlation between listening to a band and the band making money, unlike back when album sales were a thing. So, it's kind of a vicious cycle, where people are not listening to new music unless it's forced down their throats by the mainstream (ex Taylor Swift or whoever else the corporate overlords decide to put on ads), and new music is discouraged cause there's no money in it unless you have huge corporate backing.
I will say that Tiktok and the like are actually responsible for a lot of zoomers being exposed to older songs, cause they are about the only venue where they'll get random music thrown at them. I am frequently surprised when they recognize some random old song - it's almost always "I saw it on tiktok/instagram" (ex Wonderwall, Hello, etc).
I think the fact it's way harder to make a living as a musician now and basically can't profit off album releases is "necessarily wrong," but other than that, yeah. I know bands kept me social in high school but if I'd had the tech so easily accessible I absolutely would have been bedroom 1 man computer band guy.I don't think the issue is that younger folks aren't making music, they're just not making live instrument driven rock music as much, per capita. So where as kids used to want to play guitar or drums they now want work with keys and synths and virtual orchestration and composition.
Nothing necessarily wrong with that.
I think the fact it's way harder to make a living as a musician now and basically can't profit off album releases is "necessarily wrong," but other than that, yeah. I know bands kept me social in high school but if I'd had the tech so easily accessible I absolutely would have been bedroom 1 man computer band guy.
I don't think I'm convinced this is true. It might even be the opposite. It's easy to imagine it was easier before because nobody is familiar with the failure cases. History only remembers the successes, but it's not like we had an abundance of famous musicians then and not now.I think the fact it's way harder to make a living as a musician now
It's a symptom of seeing how my brother's been "making money." He gets some money from venues (less than 10 years ago for sure, they just keep squeezing artists under the guise of "FREE PROMOTION!!"), he gets streams and is on apple music/spotify, but the total he's made from spotify/apple music is probably about a dollar over the last 15 years. Like, selling ONE ALBUM at ONE SHOW is already outdoing everything he's ever gotten from Spotify. And since no one buys cds anymore besides people with old cars or old people, that revenue stream is slashed considerably compared to pre-spotify. Sure, he wouldn't have been rich, but I'd wager he's selling at least 80% fewer albums than he would have had he been doing the same thing pre-streaming takeover.
It's just that like...it's not that there are "new revenue streams," it's that there are FEWER revenue streams for releasing actual original music so now you just make less money and have to focus on those because the other ones were taken away. Unless you're talking about Patreon or something. He did successfully do crowdfunding for a few of his albums, because now that record labels don't give people money to make albums and instead CHARGE money, that is what you have to do.
If you're a jazz artist you're not selling T-shirts, unless you're Ambrose Akinmusire and can capitalize on a Jay Z quote. That's just not the audience. Jazz artists survived on live shows, record deals, and album sales, and now one is drying up in most regions and the others are pretty much dead. Youtube lessons (as Ted suggested is easier to make money from than albums used to) are like, an entirely different skillset and have nothing to do with anyone's compositions and also leave the rest of the band behind. Not to mention with the enshittification of Youtube that's getting harder and harder to make money from. I would imagine the people that are actually profiting from youtube lessons and making a living from it are almost as few as the number of rock bands formed post 2010 that your average joe can name.
My father was in a jazz fusion group in the 70s/80s and they were given something obscene like $30,000 dollars (in that day's money) by WB to just record an album (more than once!). That would NEVER happen today.
Right, of course not. Originally I was just saying that guitar stores struggling is all a symptom of the same slow slide into oblivion. They didn't all close overnight and I'm sure some will struggle on in some form indefinitely. We're just a long way from what it was like from about the 60s through the early 00s.
Those recording budgets weren’t cases of the artist being given the money, it was a loan that had to be paid back from the artist’s royalties from album sales. And if it wasn’t paid back, the debt would carry over to the next album. And the label owned the recording, not the artist so had the only say as to whether/when/how or was released or not.It's just that like...it's not that there are "new revenue streams," it's that there are FEWER revenue streams for releasing actual original music so now you just make less money and have to focus on those because the other ones were taken away. Unless you're talking about Patreon or something. He did successfully do crowdfunding for a few of his albums, because now that record labels don't give people money to make albums and instead CHARGE money, that is what you have to do.
If you're a jazz artist you're not selling T-shirts, unless you're Ambrose Akinmusire and can capitalize on a Jay Z quote. That's just not the audience. Jazz artists survived on live shows, record deals, and album sales, and now one is drying up in most regions and the others are pretty much dead. Youtube lessons (as Ted suggested is easier to make money from than albums used to) are like, an entirely different skillset and have nothing to do with anyone's compositions and also leave the rest of the band behind. Not to mention with the enshittification of Youtube that's getting harder and harder to make money from. I would imagine the people that are actually profiting from youtube lessons and making a living from it are almost as few as the number of rock bands formed post 2010 that your average joe can name.
My father was in a jazz fusion group in the 70s/80s and they were given something obscene like $30,000 dollars (in that day's money) by WB to just record an album (more than once!). That would NEVER happen today.
While I'm sure that was the case with many record contracts (I've seen many, many stories from rock bands describing exactly that, especially in the 90s and on) it wasn't the case with all of them, including my dad's band, so I dunno. Probably cause with instrumental groups they didn't really care if the members went off and did other projects since it wasn't like they were "names" unless they were Miles Davis or something.Those recording budgets weren’t cases of the artist being given the money, it was a loan that had to be paid back from the artist’s royalties from album sales. And if it wasn’t paid back, the debt would carry over to the next album.
The artist was also signed to (trapped into) a multi-album record contract where they couldn’t release anything without the label’s permission, including something as simple as a guest appearance on another artist’s track.
So while it may have had some up sides, it definitely had down sides, too.
Okay, old timer. I agree with your implicitly expressed sentiment that she is a genuine annoyance in the form of a blatantly manufactured industry shill artist produced entirely through "daddy's money"; however, I think it's about time you calm yourself down for the day. We've got your applesauce waiting for you next to your rocking chair.FUCK TAYLOR GODDAMN SWIFT!
I'd actually argue that it is both easier and more difficult to make a living as a musician nowadays.I don't think I'm convinced this is true. It might even be the opposite. It's easy to imagine it was easier before because nobody is familiar with the failure cases. History only remembers the successes, but it's not like we had an abundance of famous musicians then and not now.
On the other hand, the avenues to learn, produce, etc., are abundant now. A failed musician used to have to just hang up their instrument and "go get a real job", but now you can diversify and give lessons and start a youtube channel and do reviews and write and record and self-publish at home without needing access to expensive facilities, and marketing materials and the business side are handled by fiver and gig jobs and AI meaning you don't need a company or a team or the support of some famous producer, you just need some pocket money, a bit of time, and the ambition to do it.
Labels do not simply give musicians money. Labels give out loans.It's just that like...it's not that there are "new revenue streams," it's that there are FEWER revenue streams for releasing actual original music so now you just make less money and have to focus on those because the other ones were taken away. Unless you're talking about Patreon or something. He did successfully do crowdfunding for a few of his albums, because now that record labels don't give people money to make albums and instead CHARGE money, that is what you have to do.
Sam Ash's website looks like it is still stuck in the mid-to-late 2000s.Sam Ash was hilariously behind the times when it came to online sales/marketing. I kept forgetting they existed online at all. Don't think I've bought more than one thing from them in 25+ years of playing, and it was probably from a Reverb listing.
It'd sure be funny if I was your age or younger. LmfaoOkay, old timer. I agree with your implicitly expressed sentiment that she is a genuine annoyance in the form of a blatantly manufactured industry shill artist produced entirely through "daddy's money"; however, I think it's about time you calm yourself down for the day. We've got your applesauce waiting for you next to your rocking chair.
But you’re not. So, it’s not funny.It'd sure be funny if I was your age or younger. Lmfao
How old are you then?But you’re not. So, it’s not funny.
The only thing that is funny is your choice of rhetoric when contrasted against your age, given that you have your birthday explicitly visible on your profile.