Percy Thrillington

The labels had money in the 70s, they could sign many artists and give them time to develop. Nowadays if your first single isnt a hit you're probably dropped, artists arent given the time to develop and that cant help diversity can it.

I think its a widely agreed upon opinion that popular music has never been in as bad a shape as its in now, to say there is more diverstiy now that in the 70s...well thats just plain silly isnt it.

Mojo

You're talking about two different things. Commercial, major label, chart music and diversity in music overall. Thanks to the internet I think there is more diversity in music now as it's easier for a band to get their music heard, no matter what it is that they do and regardless of whether or not their music is ever going to be mainstream or radio-friendly.

__________________

Last.FM | Echoes and Dust

Janszoon

Why is it silly? Recording and releasing music is infinitely more accessible to the average band now than it was in the 70s. Combine that with the way in which the internet has helped expose people to a broader range of music from all across the globe and you wind up with more bands combining more disparate styles into a much broader spectrum of musical output. Compare that to the 70s, an era which you yourself admit was dominated by the limited stable of artists on a handful of large record labels, and it becomes clear that the era of greatest diversity is now not then.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

Percy Thrillington

@ mojo and Janz.

Ive taken on board both of your points, and to a large degree youre right, there is however a loop hole in both of your theories if you dont mind me saying. Record sales! If music today is more accesible and there is so much more of it and it is more diverse then why arent people buying it like they used to? Is it because of free illegal downloads or is it because the masses just dont like it as much as they used to, in my opinion its a bit of both.

It is easier nowadays to record your music and get it heard by people thats true, but just because you think youre a musician and you think your band is great doesnt mean they are does it. They do say the cream always rises but that theory has pretty much been proved wrong over the last decade hasnt it, most musicians i know couldnt motivate themselves to sit in front of a computer and plug their myspace or facebook etc etc. I also know musicians that have no talent whatsoever that work on there websites and have a lot of friends online etc and get alot of plays, but never anywhere other than their website. Unfortunately for the real talents they still need discovering and they masses of talentless musicians/artists are just muddling everything up.

I believe there is a young Bob Dylan or a young McCartney sat in his bedroom somewhere undiscovered, humans cant have lost the art of writing and playing can they? But it does appear that way doesnt it. I believe the standard of songwriting and musicianship has gone down heavily over the last decade, only because the real talents havent and arnt been discovered. The internet has its downsides aswell, just like everything does.

Mojo

Why define anything by record sales? It isn't always down to whether you are talented enough to sell records, some styles of music simply are not ever going to be accepted by a mainstream audience. That's just the way it is.

Also if a band knows what it is they want to do, what direction they want to take and are happy with their output then who cares? There will be a market for whatever kind of music you decide to play, there just might not be much money in it.

However if you want to make as much money as possible then play what everyone else is playing. Play what is currently popular and making money. It might mean there is a lack of diversity in commercial, charting music but there is money to be made there.

If you dont see much diversity in music then you are listening to what others are playing for you. You are listening to commercially accepted music through mediums like the radio or television. Theres nothing wrong with that but if you want to see and hear the diversity in music today then you have to go and look for it yourself.

__________________

Last.FM | Echoes and Dust

Percy Thrillington

Its not about making millions, its about having enough to record your music and get out and play it to an audience. Its not about the charts or selling millions either, but like any other business if you have no income/turnover you have no business.

If a band want to have a career in music they have to be able to create income thats just a fact and its always been that way. If selling more doesnt mean better then by the same token having more music avaliable to you via the internet doesnt mean better does it? You cant have yer cake and eat it.

Mojo

But it does mean that there is more music available to you. I'm not referring to kids who play covers of Led Zeppelin songs poorly on their guitars in their bedrooms and upload them to myspace and youtube or anything like that. In that sense, there is a lot of terrible music out there for you to listen to, yes.

I mean bands. I mean bands who are signed to labels, look to get their music heard and use the internet as a tool to offer their band a greater exposure, to acquire new fans in a much easier way and yes of course, thanks to illegal downloads this bands albums will all be made available to anyone who wants to hear them free of charge. Whether this is right or wrong is irrelevant at this turn doesn't matter, all that matters is that it is easier for someone like me to look up a kind of music I am in the mood for and find bands who, without the internet, I would never know anything about.

We were only talking about diversity here. I can't see an argument that music was more diverse in the 60's or 70's here. What were your options for discovering music then? Radio? Buying concert tickets? There are so many more ways for a band to get their music heard now and so for the bands that play a style of music that is ultimately going to be accepted by just a small corner of the overall market, they have options available to them to keep going which simply were not there in the 70's.

__________________

Last.FM | Echoes and Dust

Janszoon

I think the obvious answer is that you are using an outdated metric to measure people's enjoyment of music. People still enjoy it as much as always, it's just that the method of experiencing it has changed.

Sure, there's a lot of crap out there. There was a lot of crap out there in the 70s as well. At least now you have more options.

No, it doesn't appear that way to me. I don't think songwriting has gone downhill in any way, shape or form in the past ten years. That's my point.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

Janszoon

Not to mention that, in terms of stylistic diversity, simple logic would dictate that there's more now than in the 70s, since basically all forms of music that were around in the 70s still exist today while many new forms have been created since.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

Percy Thrillington

I think the main difference would be that bands in the 60s and 70s had to go out and play gigs instead of the internet. These bands came though didnt they, the internet isnt a life saving tool when it comes to getting your music heard, at some point you need to develop an audience that will pay money to see you or to buy your album in order to carry on making music professionally.

Getting 1,000 plays a day online doesnt pay the studio does it, if they had to pay to listen how many plays would they get then? Doesnt matter if you want to conquer the world or just have a career in music to a small audience either way you have to create an income or you cant do it. Talent is the key, and talent is a rare commodity it needs to be found and given time to develop and the audience naturally grows with it giving you an income.

I have yet to see any cast iron evidence that the internet has improved the music industry for the talented, which in turn means its improved for the listener aswell.