Hi
Rolling this discussion over from a critique thread… starting with a quote on my post in response to a post about the rights and wrongs of writing simple songs for a young audience with poor attention span and broad appeal:
and yet, there is increasing pressure from listeners crying out for substance.
I don’t intend a branch discussion in this thread, though I do think it a very, very useful discussion… just not in great detail in MP’s thread. I might start a new thread elsewhere.
Meanwhile, I would say that the listening habits of kids is less important than it once was. The active listening demographic has shifted over the years. Sure, for certain markets kids still dominate, but how kids listen has changed. It isn’t as simple as simple language, straightforward messaging, KISS. Kids are less genre defined, less genre restricted. They have broader listening habits than their forebears, with activity driven listening and activity driven diversity being much more important than it once was.
The demographic has also changed regarding age. There are many more engaged listeners in older age groups than there once was, and older listers are also much more likely to buy versus stream. Subscriptions and playlists have also hugely transformed listening habits and the various delivery platforms continue to shape discovery.
You get the points. I do agree with much of what you say for certain markets Ben, but tapping in to trends is more nuanced than it once was and access to more market niches is much better than it once was. Money is still there to be made however how you make it has considerably changed… and it too is more nuanced and is genre/age dependent. We have access to many more vehicles than we once did. We just need to be aware of them and build suitable ways to engage them.
As you say, money is not the only reason and for many no reason at all. For many it is listener numbers on the surface but connection and engagement underneath…. ie reaching and connecting. What works for each target audience is pretty specific BUT as ever, you can follow trends or set trends or something in between.
I posted a link the other day to a current viral video that speaks directly to the growing demand for more meat on the bone for songs. It’s a 9 minute piece all about mental health…. “Hi Ren”. A talented and challenging unsigned UK artist. A breath of fresh air.
Point is, different labels and publishers and production companies look for different potential products… and they don’t necessarily cater for all demand either. New appetites and rediscovered old ones are found all the time. That’s a role independents have always explored and catered for. Far more trends have been created and developed by grass roots indie than have been manufactured by labels. True, labels are great at jumping on a bandwagon and the driving that bandwagon into the ground by aggressively pursuing “easy and predictable”, but the new ground is broken by the indies.
I won’t drone on more other than to say, we each position ourselves towards our various audiences, intentionally or unintentionally. As a songwriter (less so an artist) we get to write cross genre and broad appeal right through to very niche. We cater accordingly.
It still remains true that we can make a good living from 10k real fans (if money making is a goal) and you can make a decent living from considerably less. Much depends on the loyalty we build and how prolific we are. As a Songwriter that isn’t an artist we are one step away from the action. For me, writing for specific artists and their audiences is a very effective way ahead, but it isn’t your only option. If you write according to lowest common denominator ( most common, best liked etc) music is bang in the middle of the road, feels more restrictive and is often unchallenging and less original. Getting the balance right is a bit harder, I think.
Crack on with the debate