Long Windedness Ahoy!
Recent Forbes article has some...interesting conclusions made in it. It requires an account to signup and read, but it's free and you can get 2 copies of Forbes magazine if you want...plus a mailing list for wine. Those rich people at Forbes know their wine, after all!
First off, I love how this guy regales us with tales of the 'good ole days' on how he was able to attach his sucker to, well, you name it. Russell Simmons? Check. Rick Rubin? Check. Chuck D? Check. Adam Horowitz? Check. All this name dropping, yet we get very little explanation as to what the fuck it was he was doing. A road manager? Yeah, we're off to a wobbly start here, as he doesn't so much pound his own chest and show why he knows what is going on, but shows that he's capable of associating with people who actually have that creative intuition to actually find talent and create shit. But okay, that's fine. You can always learn something and develop and refine latent talents.
However, this history lesson undermines just what is wrong with this entire article. On talking about the difficulty of getting rap music promoted back in the 80s, Lyor talks on how "Other stations played rap, but KDAY was the first to play it 24/7. Once we had KDAY, we super-served them." That is, when faced with a faucet of the industry that has a lot of potential available with it, Def Jam records effectively kissed the sherries and did everything they could to court the favor of what was effectively a new radio format (rap radio).
Can anyone possibly see in what direction I might be going in here?
Anyway, distorted fiction aside (no mention of Run DMC's performance on Live Aid, same deal for Run's collaboration with Aerosmith, the rise of West Coast rap, or Public Enemy and their influence on the early rap scene. And that's just the tip of the iceberg that this cracker knows about. I'm sure there is more, but hip hop has never really been my bag), Lyor showcases everything that is wrong with the music industry these days. To wit,
"The mainstream promotional network is highly evolved and firmly established; its foundation predates the wide use of the Internet by many years.
The challenge, of course, is to not let rituals, standards and customs make the networks stale and ultimately ineffective."
It doesn't matter a good goddamned what has already been established, Lyor. It doesn't matter at all, as a matter of fact. The whole point of this article is Lyor attempting to appear that the major labels are in the know, and that they are utilizing the Internets for the right purposes, all the while demonstrating the cautious optimism that businesspeople like himself should be doing with something New and Weird. "The web is a limitation," Lyor points out. Arguing that sites such as YouTube and MySpace can be distorted by a dedicated group of followers. He then goes on to argue that the real solution and the real way of discovering talent is to see that group live.
Excuse me while I say what a horrible crock of shit that is.
We are supposed to believe that an artist or a band is really talented if we've seen them live? Newsflash, Lyor, live performances aren't always useful. There are some groups, some of them who have a rather storied legacy who were absolute shit live, be they a group like the Sex Pistols or someone like Ashlee Simpson or Avril Lavigne. There are some groups whose music just isn't enjoyable in a live setting. Sparklehorse, a UK group that has garnered the attention of folks like Thom Yorke of Radiohead, rarely perform live concerts, mostly due to the history of the group...and this is a group that rose to prominence before the Internet became the behemoth that it is nowadays.
Finding good music is about going out, making contact with people and listening. It's about going to a dive, getting your shoes stepped on, drinks spilled on you, jostling for a view and loving it. That's all part of the live experience, and there's no substitute for it--not just for the audience, but for the musicians, whose creativity fuels the industry.
While this is true, you can't apply this literally to the situation. If you do, you wind up screwing yourself. Finding good music isn't just about going out and slumming it. There's no fucking indie cred that you get because you were spending some time in some shithole bar with watered down drinks and shitty acoustics. I believe in live music, but in this day and age, trying to handicap oneself to the traditional methods of discovering music is exactly why the major labels are getting their asses kicked on a routine basis by a growing number of independent and minor labels. Globally at that, I might add.
Look at it this way. In this day and age, people have far more flexibility available to them to seek out and devour new kinds of music. The Internet is filled to the brim with riches for those who seek them out, be they on hard-to-find FTP servers, websites like YouTube, networks like OiNK or Limewire. But it's not just the Internet. Satellite radio provides you with an unbelievable amount of programming that was unheard of even 10-15 years ago. Cable packages nowadays come jam packed with music options if you choose to pursue them. Where there used to be one real choice for a national music video station, Muchmusic or MTV, you now have VH1, Fuse, MTV2 or 3 or whatever is the one that plays videos from time to time, Muchloud, Muchvibe, Muchmoremusic. The biggest reason why you had your Nirvanas and your Green Days and your N.W.A.s and your Depeche Modes and your Elvis Presleys and your Beatles was because the transfer of information amongst the audience occurred at a glacial rate compared to the rate of exchange that goes on nowadays.
The big labels could get away with doing this sort of thing because the vast number of people out there had a hard time of obtaining information for themselves. Now, that power has shifted somewhat, and it is the audience who wields the power. The labels are no longer able to force a product on us, no matter how hard they try. Their role has gone less from that of a salesperson to that of an advisor or a consultant. Let me see if I can try and explain what I mean.
Ask any British audiophile who grew up listening to the BBC and I can almost guarantee that John Peel's name will be mentioned. John Peel, bless his soul, is a perfect example of the type of person that defies Lyor's idiotic editorial. He was someone who went out there, dug through record shops, solicited opinions from people he knew and, yes, checked out artists live and in the flesh. But that was only a part of what he did. Peel served as a musical guide for us, he was part archaeologist, part romantic, part adventurer and part translator. He was able to cut through things and discover the really good stuff that was out there for our consideration.
In this day and age, where people have so much choice available to them, the music industry needs people like that. They need people who are able to see through the bullshit, like the crap that's going on MySpace and YouTube. They need people who can determine whether or not a band has 'it'. They don't need people who stand around in a circle jerk commiserating on times gone by, bitching and moaning about why they are losing so much money. It's because you are still insisting on clinging to the same, tired and old business models that exist. You cannot market a band like you used to in the old days. You cannot rely on CDs (the main piece of 'currency' that Lyor mentioned in his article) to further your sales anymore. You cannot turn bands into a brand. People don't want to buy a fucking My Chemical Romance action figure, and those that do are most likely going to be embarrassed they spent their money on something as ridiculous as that 3-5 years down the road. That doesn't promote a lot of longevity with your artists and, more importantly, it takes the label and artist away from what it is they should be fucking doing: making music for people to enjoy.
Coming up tomorrow, or maybe the day after: A closer look at why declining major label revenue really doesn't have a whole fucking lot to do with P2P trading.
First off, I love how this guy regales us with tales of the 'good ole days' on how he was able to attach his sucker to, well, you name it. Russell Simmons? Check. Rick Rubin? Check. Chuck D? Check. Adam Horowitz? Check. All this name dropping, yet we get very little explanation as to what the fuck it was he was doing. A road manager? Yeah, we're off to a wobbly start here, as he doesn't so much pound his own chest and show why he knows what is going on, but shows that he's capable of associating with people who actually have that creative intuition to actually find talent and create shit. But okay, that's fine. You can always learn something and develop and refine latent talents.
However, this history lesson undermines just what is wrong with this entire article. On talking about the difficulty of getting rap music promoted back in the 80s, Lyor talks on how "Other stations played rap, but KDAY was the first to play it 24/7. Once we had KDAY, we super-served them." That is, when faced with a faucet of the industry that has a lot of potential available with it, Def Jam records effectively kissed the sherries and did everything they could to court the favor of what was effectively a new radio format (rap radio).
Can anyone possibly see in what direction I might be going in here?
Anyway, distorted fiction aside (no mention of Run DMC's performance on Live Aid, same deal for Run's collaboration with Aerosmith, the rise of West Coast rap, or Public Enemy and their influence on the early rap scene. And that's just the tip of the iceberg that this cracker knows about. I'm sure there is more, but hip hop has never really been my bag), Lyor showcases everything that is wrong with the music industry these days. To wit,
"The mainstream promotional network is highly evolved and firmly established; its foundation predates the wide use of the Internet by many years.
The challenge, of course, is to not let rituals, standards and customs make the networks stale and ultimately ineffective."
It doesn't matter a good goddamned what has already been established, Lyor. It doesn't matter at all, as a matter of fact. The whole point of this article is Lyor attempting to appear that the major labels are in the know, and that they are utilizing the Internets for the right purposes, all the while demonstrating the cautious optimism that businesspeople like himself should be doing with something New and Weird. "The web is a limitation," Lyor points out. Arguing that sites such as YouTube and MySpace can be distorted by a dedicated group of followers. He then goes on to argue that the real solution and the real way of discovering talent is to see that group live.
Excuse me while I say what a horrible crock of shit that is.
We are supposed to believe that an artist or a band is really talented if we've seen them live? Newsflash, Lyor, live performances aren't always useful. There are some groups, some of them who have a rather storied legacy who were absolute shit live, be they a group like the Sex Pistols or someone like Ashlee Simpson or Avril Lavigne. There are some groups whose music just isn't enjoyable in a live setting. Sparklehorse, a UK group that has garnered the attention of folks like Thom Yorke of Radiohead, rarely perform live concerts, mostly due to the history of the group...and this is a group that rose to prominence before the Internet became the behemoth that it is nowadays.
Finding good music is about going out, making contact with people and listening. It's about going to a dive, getting your shoes stepped on, drinks spilled on you, jostling for a view and loving it. That's all part of the live experience, and there's no substitute for it--not just for the audience, but for the musicians, whose creativity fuels the industry.
While this is true, you can't apply this literally to the situation. If you do, you wind up screwing yourself. Finding good music isn't just about going out and slumming it. There's no fucking indie cred that you get because you were spending some time in some shithole bar with watered down drinks and shitty acoustics. I believe in live music, but in this day and age, trying to handicap oneself to the traditional methods of discovering music is exactly why the major labels are getting their asses kicked on a routine basis by a growing number of independent and minor labels. Globally at that, I might add.
Look at it this way. In this day and age, people have far more flexibility available to them to seek out and devour new kinds of music. The Internet is filled to the brim with riches for those who seek them out, be they on hard-to-find FTP servers, websites like YouTube, networks like OiNK or Limewire. But it's not just the Internet. Satellite radio provides you with an unbelievable amount of programming that was unheard of even 10-15 years ago. Cable packages nowadays come jam packed with music options if you choose to pursue them. Where there used to be one real choice for a national music video station, Muchmusic or MTV, you now have VH1, Fuse, MTV2 or 3 or whatever is the one that plays videos from time to time, Muchloud, Muchvibe, Muchmoremusic. The biggest reason why you had your Nirvanas and your Green Days and your N.W.A.s and your Depeche Modes and your Elvis Presleys and your Beatles was because the transfer of information amongst the audience occurred at a glacial rate compared to the rate of exchange that goes on nowadays.
The big labels could get away with doing this sort of thing because the vast number of people out there had a hard time of obtaining information for themselves. Now, that power has shifted somewhat, and it is the audience who wields the power. The labels are no longer able to force a product on us, no matter how hard they try. Their role has gone less from that of a salesperson to that of an advisor or a consultant. Let me see if I can try and explain what I mean.
Ask any British audiophile who grew up listening to the BBC and I can almost guarantee that John Peel's name will be mentioned. John Peel, bless his soul, is a perfect example of the type of person that defies Lyor's idiotic editorial. He was someone who went out there, dug through record shops, solicited opinions from people he knew and, yes, checked out artists live and in the flesh. But that was only a part of what he did. Peel served as a musical guide for us, he was part archaeologist, part romantic, part adventurer and part translator. He was able to cut through things and discover the really good stuff that was out there for our consideration.
In this day and age, where people have so much choice available to them, the music industry needs people like that. They need people who are able to see through the bullshit, like the crap that's going on MySpace and YouTube. They need people who can determine whether or not a band has 'it'. They don't need people who stand around in a circle jerk commiserating on times gone by, bitching and moaning about why they are losing so much money. It's because you are still insisting on clinging to the same, tired and old business models that exist. You cannot market a band like you used to in the old days. You cannot rely on CDs (the main piece of 'currency' that Lyor mentioned in his article) to further your sales anymore. You cannot turn bands into a brand. People don't want to buy a fucking My Chemical Romance action figure, and those that do are most likely going to be embarrassed they spent their money on something as ridiculous as that 3-5 years down the road. That doesn't promote a lot of longevity with your artists and, more importantly, it takes the label and artist away from what it is they should be fucking doing: making music for people to enjoy.
Coming up tomorrow, or maybe the day after: A closer look at why declining major label revenue really doesn't have a whole fucking lot to do with P2P trading.