Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger
I don't think it's a coincidence that the decline happened totally in parallel to the emergence of the big 4 labels.
In the 60s & 70s it was more of a level playing field. There were no such thing as indie labels because there was no monopoly to be independent from. There were literally hundreds of labels looking to have hit singles & albums. As time went on monopolies were formed labels got bigger & started buying out smaller ones , taking over radio playlists with MTV speeding up the process until we get to how things are now with 4 huge companies dominating virtually everything & loads of small labels who can't even get a sniff in.
|
Yeah, good point. I suppose that would seem to be the most viable explanation. With music increasingly becoming an industry and a massive commercial enterprise, the labels, rather than artists, began to dictate what music ought to sound like. So then, I guess it became more about finding winning formulas and sticking with them than creating something new and interesting, progression, development and experimentation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Wayfarer
Yeah, and? Who cares?
|
Um, if you're not interested in the discussion, why are you coming in? If you are picking at that wording in particular, then the point was simply that bands of real substance and innovation, with a vision of their own, were hugely successful on a commercial level. But they tend not to be today. Forget about the "critically recognized" part, it was just to illustrate the point in fewer words.
Threaded Mode