Talent Vs. Luck

[john]

An interesting discussion, though kind of comparing apples and oranges with fair points on each side... and perspective is certainly an important factor.

 

Kind of mixing the creativity or it's lack of, with business models and modern tech.

 

Musicality and appeal... well it is subjective in terms of quality, but as predictability and short term returns have become the main stay of the music industry, so did having formulaic artistes that were largely one individual (easier to control, less costly).  Music is experimental, but less so each iteration.. and the more experimental tend to be indie. Lyrically they are certainly less thought provoking, less challenge, more easily digestible... and music has done the same. It is not that it doesn't experiment, it does, more that each song takes less risk.

 

In a world of minimal investment, short term prospects and maximum returns, you can easily see that it has an effect on the music produced, even the artistes involved.

 

There are some awesome and daring artistes out there, but a smaller percentage.

 

As to streaming, sales, popularity... people go to record labels for good reason, and it isn't to get a smaller slice of a small pie. Virility can occur, but labels and talent shows know if they spend X to reach a critical mass, and they have A, B, & C in place they can more or less guarantee virality. Assuming the music is not challenging and easy to consume they more or less have a money creation machine. Making money is no guaranteed, but it is less of a risky prospect.

 

People get all kinds of quaint views on what goes on and why, and that really the artistes of their era were not caught in the same machine... the truth is they always were. The exact mechanisms vary according to the time and the tech. However, the modern streamlined business model era has far far more influence on music, while accompanied by far far more compliant artistes sold on a greedy dream with a carefully managed expectation... versus art for art's sake.

 

Our entire culture has changed, the cult of celebrity where it is acceptable to be famous for absolutely nothing. Money, money, money.

 

So there is a very real linkage, between how labels do business, the more general entertainments industry, and the price artistes are prepared to pay. There really is no myth and magic in the music industry, just managed expectation and expected outcomes.

 

All that said, I don't think experimentation started in 77 and ended in 87. Love it or hate it, albums like Ok Computer or Portishead and many others were after that watershed, albums like Dark Side Of The Moon, or Sgt Peppers were before.

 

What is true is the trend of less trained musicians or writers involved in direct music creation (as loops and bedroom producers became more popular). What is true is we live in a time where mediocrity is so celebrated that even "good" is elevated to the dizzy heights of greatness. Meanwhile many less compliant, talented artistes go unsupported and unnoticed. They are list in a morass of millions of those clamouring for fame with little is any discernible skill. Equally, many artistes (who once upon a time would have gone through a professional artiste development program) remain steadfast that the modern era offers nothing, and they have little to learn.

 

The music industry is just that. An industry. Our artistic notions have been largely ploughed under by an ever more ruthless industry. Of course there is room for creativity, but if you want to go mainstream, you better believe there is a price to be paid. Of course, if your tastes and interests happily coincide with the demands of the modern industry, you will hardly notice as your pockets are rifled.

 

Nonetheless... you can still navigate a path that suits you, or at least a series of compromises that gives you a result you can live with.

 

Talent or luck. It takes both. It always has. The exact balance? It always changes.

[GuesSs]

17 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

But you are talking about a few acts that this has happened with and then they have had a lucky break. It is probably easier for a hip-hop artist to get this kind of following given where they grow up and the scene in their area. Look at where Kendrick Lamar grew up and the people he knew and was surrounded by. That would have helped and influenced where he was going. So he would have had help. He certainly got the help of a local music company before he made it big. That is why so many artists grow from these areas, but a very small fraction of them will get any kind of followers. Why, because they need to have something about them to get ahead of the others, there are so many trying their hand at it as they have seen what can happen if you make it. But the fanbase comes initially from that scene and then builds. They have a network in place in a lot of these cities and they will help each other out, play records in their stores, on the local radio etc. Not everyone has that kind of networking, but the hip-hop community do, so it helps.

 

You could look at any artist who gets to a certain age will be pushed aside by the newbie coming through. Boy bands are like this, they are adored by all the little teen girls until they get too old and then the next one comes along and takes their place. It doesn't mean they are evolving or that they are better than what came before, because the music is almost always the same (except maybe some advancement on technology), as again it is a formula that they think works. But the reality is, you could put a boy band together with 5 really good looking guys, produce the song to make them sound like they can sing and play any old shit song and it will sell, why, because it is the look the kids are buying into, not the music. That is why when the kids grow up, they gravitate towards better, more thoughtful music (or they should!!).

 

But, you have actually hit the nail on the head, it is about branding and most hip-hop artists are about the brand, but that is what it is failing. When you start putting the brand above the music, then the music becomes secondary and the music should never be secondary.

Logic is white and black rapper from maryland who gained his following by releasing free projects online. The hip hop community in Maryland is like non existent. Mac Miller a white rapper from pittsburg ( also non existent hip hop scene) gained his following by releasing free projects online. Tyler the creator and odd futurue gained their following from the internet. Russ a new rnb singer gained his following from releasing songs on the internet. Bryson tiller another big rnb artist gained his following from the interent and he's from kentucky which isn't exactly a music mecca. Chance the rapper released a free mixtape online after getting suspended from high school and it gained a lot of attention and he blew up. Hopsin gained his following through the internet. Lil Dicky (best rap name ever) gained his following through the internet and he's from he suburbs of pennsylvania. I could go on and on lol.

 

The point is so many rappers and rnb singers are gained their fanbases through the internet. So yes if you're like kendrick and you live in a hip hop city like Compton then you have local support. But i can continue to name you rappers from cities that have a incredibly small hip hop following because they used the internet to their advantage. I keep trying to tell you anybody can do this themselves it doesn't matter if you live in new york or south dakota. It's all about your BRAND. Logic's first sold out show was in chicago even though he is from marlyand because with the internet he had fans all over. 

 

This is something any artist can do regardless of what genre they are apart of. EDM artist also do this very well. I get what the point you're making about boy bands but I could name plenty of rappers and singers that were relevant a decade ago that still are relevant now that haven't been replaced by someone doing the same thing. 

 

I think most consumers like having more than just the music. They like seeing their favorite artist go live on instagram and seeing what they're doing, they  like seeing their vlogs, they like the interviews, they like their social media antics. I think brand is just as important as the music because music releases so fast and there are so many artist putting out content that nobody is listening to albums and truly processing them anymore. Is it sad? sure but it's just how things are these days and you can either ride with the wave or get swept up

[Richard Tracey]

6 minutes ago, john said:

All that said, I don't think experimentation started in 77 and ended in 87. Love it or hate it, albums like Ok Computer or Portishead and many others were after that watershed, albums like Dark Side Of The Moon, or Sgt Peppers were before.

 

John, I was meaning that period of time was probably the most inventive for music, that's not to say that there wasn't inventive music before or after (Sgt Pepper's wrote the book on inventive albums), but that period (for me) had the most sustained period of experimentation and variety.

[GuesSs]

30 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

And this is what we were just discussing. This is wrong. It should never be about what the artist or music publishers/companies want, it should be about what the consumer wants.

 

Start treating the consumer fairly and as if they are the one that matters, then they will start treating you fairly.

 

I mentioned about the amount of crowdfunding that goes on. That is artists who are fed up with the music industry and looking to do it themselves. They offer something extra to their fans or people who want to buy into the new album. That is what people are wanting, it is something unique.

 

You are very blind to what is happening. What is going on is very bad for the music industry and leaves it stagnant. Why should something benefit a chosen few, to the detriment of others?

 

TIDAL will fail - why? because it is a vanity project by one of the biggest egos ever to grace hip-hop. It was purchased to make even more money for those artists and the buying public have seen through that and voted with their wallets staying in their pockets.

 

I think you need to have a look at other discussions on this forum where this topic has been covered many times about releasing your music independently, it is not as easy as you think to become as big as some of the artists you have been mentioning without assistance.

Why would artist not having to rely an record labels to push them be a bad thing? they can focus on their own core fanbase and keep all the money for themselves instead of having to split it.I'm not saying it's easy to become huge like these artist i'm just saying it's very possible. You do not need anyone's help to gain a fanbase. I think you are blind if you can't realize this. It doesn't leave the music industry stagnant. 20 years ago EDM was nothing but because of the internet it has become enormous espescially in other countries and has had a big influence on other genres of music because of the interent.

 

I agree it should be about what the consumer wants but at the end of the day these are business and they are here to make money. Quality of music means nothing it's all about branding and marketabliity. You can build a following for yourself doing the music you like to do that isn't mainstream it'll just take a little longer to catch on

[Richard Tracey]

3 minutes ago, GuesSs said:

Logic is white and black rapper from maryland who gained his following by releasing free projects online. The hip hop community in Maryland is like non existent. Mac Miller a white rapper from pittsburg ( also non existent hip hop scene) gained his following by releasing free projects online. Tyler the creator and odd futurue gained their following from the internet. Russ a new rnb singer gained his following from releasing songs on the internet. Bryson tiller another big rnb artist gained his following from the interent and he's from kentucky which isn't exactly a music mecca. Chance the rapper released a free mixtape online after getting suspended from high school and it gained a lot of attention and he blew up. Hopsin gained his following through the internet. Lil Dicky (best rap name ever) gained his following through the internet and he's from he suburbs of pennsylvania. I could go on and on lol.

 

The point is so many rappers and rnb singers are gained their fanbases through the internet. So yes if you're like kendrick and you live in a hip hop city like Compton then you have local support. But i can continue to name you rappers from cities that have a incredibly small hip hop following because they used the internet to their advantage. I keep trying to tell you anybody can do this themselves it doesn't matter if you live in new york or south dakota. It's all about your BRAND. Logic's first sold out show was in chicago even though he is from marlyand because with the internet he had fans all over. 

 

This is something any artist can do regardless of what genre they are apart of. EDM artist also do this very well. I get what the point you're making about boy bands but I could name plenty of rappers and singers that were relevant a decade ago that still are relevant now that haven't been replaced by someone doing the same thing. 

 

I think most consumers like having more than just the music. They like seeing their favorite artist go live on instagram and seeing what they're doing, they  like seeing their vlogs, they like the interviews, they like their social media antics. I think brand is just as important as the music because music releases so fast and there are so many artist putting out content that nobody is listening to albums and truly processing them anymore. Is it sad? sure but it's just how things are these days and you can either ride with the wave or get swept up

 

The ones you mentioned all followed the same process for getting themselves known - it is easier if you are targeting to a particular demographic and you have seen others succeed from similar ventures. Yes, the internet can be useful and I will more than likely use it to my benefit once I start to release my music, but that isn't what we were talking about. I think it is sad that a Brand becomes bigger than the music. I don't know if you have this saying in America, but we do here and it is in relation to a footballer at a big club, as soon as any of the fans think that footballer is getting too big for their boots they say "no footballer is bigger than the club". Now put that into context with the music. No artist should be bigger than their music. You shouldn't buy into an artist because of who they are, it should be about their music, as that is what should attract you to them in the first place.

 

Yes, it is nice when the artists are interacting with their fans, but it shouldn't get in the way of the music and it should never get to the stage when the music becomes secondary and you think, well it's not my best work, but hey, they will buy it cause it's my music. I know of so many artists who have thrown out a whole album once it was finished because they didn't think it was good enough to release to their fans. They thought it was okay, but not great. That is an artist thinking of the fans and not themselves. They are not thinking about the Brand, or they are but in a different way.

 

EDM is a strange one. It is electronic music, but is hated by a lot of electronic fans because of what it now stands for and they feel it is reduced the good work done by other EDM artists in the past.

[Richard Tracey]

1 minute ago, GuesSs said:

Why would artist not having to rely an record labels to push them be a bad thing? they can focus on their own core fanbase and keep all the money for themselves instead of having to split it.I'm not saying it's easy to become huge like these artist i'm just saying it's very possible. You do not need anyone's help to gain a fanbase. I think you are blind if you can't realize this. It doesn't leave the music industry stagnant. 20 years ago EDM was nothing but because of the internet it has become enormous espescially in other countries and has had a big influence on other genres of music because of the interent.

 

I agree it should be about what the consumer wants but at the end of the day these are business and they are here to make money. Quality of music means nothing it's all about branding and marketabliity. You can build a following for yourself doing the music you like to do that isn't mainstream it'll just take a little longer to catch on

 

EDM has been around since the late 70's - Visage were creating Electronic Dance Music to play in night clubs. It has evolved, unfortunately not for the best as we now have a lot of DJ's prancing around behind a desk playing a record and thinking they are gods.

 

Read John's post re trying to do it all yourself. The thought behind it is great and I will go that route myself, but I am under no illusion that anything is going to come from that (although I would love to be proven wrong).

 

One thing I am not when it comes to the music industry is blind. I have read so many articles over the years, listened to interviews with knowledgeable people and had may discussions, a few with well known artists who have commented on this same subject for a number of years.

 

"I have watched an Empire Fall and cried a tear for them all".

 

I wrote a song about this years ago. You are younger and haven't seen all the changes that others have. You have grown up with people pirating music and causing this issue in the first place and I have watched as record companies laughed about the internet and then ran around like headless chickens trying to pick up the pieces.

 

Your last comment about quality of music means nothing, makes me really sad. I think the quality of the music is everything.

 

Why do you think classical music has prevailed for hundreds of years? Is it the Brand, or is it the quality of the music?

[john]

There is no right answer over all, only what works for you.

 

You might not need anyone's help to grow a fan base, but it isn't necessarily easier. It's swings and roundabouts. Whatever you choose you can make it work. Indeed much of what we do on Songstuff is about making the indie unsigned case work, by a number of ways. 

 

Unless you have a contract on offer it is an academic argument... i.e. It is indie unsigned or nothing, you choose. If another choice comes along, you can then weigh it all up and maybe make a new choice.

 

On indie, yes you get to keep a larger slice of the pie, if not all, but it is likely to be a far far smaller pie. The trick is in being happy with what you give away in order to get a slice that is larger than the 100% of the small pie. Lol

[GuesSs]

23 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

And how many rap artists are there at the moment? You mention a few.. a few who are known and have a fanbase, so they can sell a decent amount if their fans know the album is coming out. 

 

Kayne was singing and rapping way before that and yes, my knowledge of hip-hop isn't what it used to be, there is a reason for that, because I am not impressed with anything I have heard for a while. It is good that some rappers are talking about interesting subjects, but is that the norm?

 

I totally agree with you, I think all country music sounds the same and there is actually discussion on the internet about this. There is a blog/video about the biggest selling country songs in the last 10 years are all the same song!!!

 

I say hip-hop is stagnant because I haven't heard anything different for a long time, anything that makes me think, wow that is good and go out and buy the album.

 

You like hip-hop, that is your genre and clearly your musical love, so you will be bias towards it, just like I love 80's music and will defend most of the music created back then to the hilt. But I am also a realist and I know there was a lot of shit released in the 80's, but there was also so much variation and groundbreaking music created as well. All the artists were labelled the same, but they nearly all sounded different. And just like I believe now, it became stagnant and a lot of the artists realised this and tried to move on, or just left the industry all together. It has been the same way for years. Musical periods grown and fade away for something else to take it's place. We had New Wave, Synthpop, Electronica, Rave, Dance, Brit-Pop, Grunge - all genres that were huge at the respective times, but all faded away when the music started to sound the same. Things need to die to allow others to grow.

 

Maybe, just maybe, the new much more interesting version of hip-hop is waiting in the wings to appear, but it can't until the current one dies and let's something else take it's place for a while.

Quite a lot actually I can name you more but I know you haven't heard of them. For example, Jcole did what he called the dollar and a dream tour. He'd show up in a random city and tweet the location of the venue he was performing his show at and all the fans had to pay to get in was a dollar. You can look it up yourself but he sold out evry single venue and the lines were blocks long. J.Cole can do something like that because of the fanbase he has built for himself not because a label promoted it. And yes I know kanye was singing and rapping way before that but it was never for an entire album.

 

I never stated i think all rap is good i think a lot of it is garbage. I simply said if you think rap in say 2005 sounds the exact same as rap now then you are very mistaken. 90's hip hop sounds nothing like modern hip hop. Yet what they have in common is that they are appealing to the youth and as long as that is the case it won't die. Rap has clearly evolved it just doesn't have 30 subgenres like other types of music. But you can see it by artist who were once popular that are no longer popular. 50 Cent once upon a time was the biggest rapper a live but times have changed and hip hop changed and now nobody cares to check for his music. Trap is popular now but it wasn't a thing in 2006. Autotuned rap lyrics wasn't a thing in the early and mid 2000s but now it's very common. For better or for worse you can clearly tell the difference between hip hop at differnt points in time. 

 

Hip Hop (i'm not sure about other genres) is pretty much a young mans game. People who loved rap in the 90s hate what it is now and people now think rap in the 90s was corny.  What's new and interesting to 18-25 year olds isn't going to be interesting to someone much older.  There are rappers for people who want to hear substance but there are more rappers for people who want to party and turn up because that's what the core fanbase at the moment wants to hear.  But there is something for everyone with rap 

[GuesSs]

26 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

The ones you mentioned all followed the same process for getting themselves known - it is easier if you are targeting to a particular demographic and you have seen others succeed from similar ventures. Yes, the internet can be useful and I will more than likely use it to my benefit once I start to release my music, but that isn't what we were talking about. I think it is sad that a Brand becomes bigger than the music. I don't know if you have this saying in America, but we do here and it is in relation to a footballer at a big club, as soon as any of the fans think that footballer is getting too big for their boots they say "no footballer is bigger than the club". Now put that into context with the music. No artist should be bigger than their music. You shouldn't buy into an artist because of who they are, it should be about their music, as that is what should attract you to them in the first place.

 

Yes, it is nice when the artists are interacting with their fans, but it shouldn't get in the way of the music and it should never get to the stage when the music becomes secondary and you think, well it's not my best work, but hey, they will buy it cause it's my music. I know of so many artists who have thrown out a whole album once it was finished because they didn't think it was good enough to release to their fans. They thought it was okay, but not great. That is an artist thinking of the fans and not themselves. They are not thinking about the Brand, or they are but in a different way.

 

EDM is a strange one. It is electronic music, but is hated by a lot of electronic fans because of what it now stands for and they feel it is reduced the good work done by other EDM artists in the past.

Yes they all targeted specific audiences but it wasn't the same audience. The difference between your example and music is that sports is a team effort. With music espescially if you know how to brand yourself it's all about you and your creation. You may not be one of these people but for a lot of others they like feeling like they know the artist themselves and that that artist speaks for them and is their voice. When i find a new artist i like I listen to their music but then i look for interviews they have done because i am curious about who they are as a person. There have been artist i have never listened but i've stumbled across a random interview and  gave  it a listen to and decided to give their music a chance because I liked what they stood for.  That is part of branding. If it was just music and nothing else there's a lot of artist I wouldn't have given a chance. But because of artist knowing how to brand and market themselves I bought into their music. They made me interested in them.

 

I think of music like a mall. There are tons of stores in a mall. Maybe you open up a brand new clothing store in the mall. You could have the best clothes ever and it can be innovative and cutting edge. But if you  don't market and promote your store and make people want to come in and look around nobody is going to care. You have to make people care and make people interested in your clothes because there are so many other stores they can go to. So in that regard branding is just as if not more important than the quality of music because you have to make people care. 

[Richard Tracey]

3 minutes ago, GuesSs said:

Quite a lot actually I can name you more but I know you haven't heard of them. For example, Jcole did what he called the dollar and a dream tour. He'd show up in a random city and tweet the location of the venue he was performing his show at and all the fans had to pay to get in was a dollar. You can look it up yourself but he sold out evry single venue and the lines were blocks long. J.Cole can do something like that because of the fanbase he has built for himself not because a label promoted it. And yes I know kanye was singing and rapping way before that but it was never for an entire album.

 

I never stated i think all rap is good i think a lot of it is garbage. I simply said if you think rap in say 2005 sounds the exact same as rap now then you are very mistaken. 90's hip hop sounds nothing like modern hip hop. Yet what they have in common is that they are appealing to the youth and as long as that is the case it won't die. Rap has clearly evolved it just doesn't have 30 subgenres like other types of music. But you can see it by artist who were once popular that are no longer popular. 50 Cent once upon a time was the biggest rapper a live but times have changed and hip hop changed and now nobody cares to check for his music. Trap is popular now but it wasn't a thing in 2006. Autotuned rap lyrics wasn't a thing in the early and mid 2000s but now it's very common. For better or for worse you can clearly tell the difference between hip hop at differnt points in time. 

 

Hip Hop (i'm not sure about other genres) is pretty much a young mans game. People who loved rap in the 90s hate what it is now and people now think rap in the 90s was corny.  What's new and interesting to 18-25 year olds isn't going to be interesting to someone much older.  There are rappers for people who want to hear substance but there are more rappers for people who want to party and turn up because that's what the core fanbase at the moment wants to hear.  But there is something for everyone with rap 

 

I didn't actually mean that as a question, I should have used an exclamation mark instead. I know there are thousands of rappers out there, but that is one of the problems, the genre is over-saturated.

 

It is good that JCole is giving something back to his fans, maybe some of the others should take a leaf out of his book and stop thinking about how much money they can make on top of what they already have.

 

See this is where we will disagree. I still view hip-hop as a genre and that it hasn't really moved on. Yes there may be slight changes and variations, but it is still the same to me. You hear something different, you hear a difference in some artists to others. I just hear someone rapping, something I have heard for 30 years. The beats have changed slightly, but most are interchangeable with each other, so there isn't much variety to me. Again, this is me, I like intelligent music, where it feels like someone grafted to make it. I can turn on my Native Instruments Maschine and create a beat in seconds, or choose from lots of loops or presets that will give me something that sounds like everything else. They have lots of expansions for r'n'b and hip-hop as they are selling the Maschine as a beat making machine, so they are popular in that genre, so they cater towards it. But, unless you have serious skills, nearly everything starts to sound the same.

 

To get back to one of my main points. I feel that the market is saturated with the same type of music and we need more variety, but for that to happen, we need the other artists to get the same crack at getting their music heard as everyone else and that is not happening.

 

Most hip-hop is derived from other types of music, mostly electronic, soundtrack, classical - they should be promoting this and getting their fans interested in the artists they have been influenced by.

 

There is one r'n'b / hip-hop artist (can't remember his name at the moment) is a huge Kate Bush fan and talks about it all the time, even mentioning that one of this best moments was meeting her. Now that is the kind of thing they should do more often, as his fans can go and listen to another artist and maybe see where his influences are coming from.

[GuesSs]

27 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

EDM has been around since the late 70's - Visage were creating Electronic Dance Music to play in night clubs. It has evolved, unfortunately not for the best as we now have a lot of DJ's prancing around behind a desk playing a record and thinking they are gods.

 

Read John's post re trying to do it all yourself. The thought behind it is great and I will go that route myself, but I am under no illusion that anything is going to come from that (although I would love to be proven wrong).

 

One thing I am not when it comes to the music industry is blind. I have read so many articles over the years, listened to interviews with knowledgeable people and had may discussions, a few with well known artists who have commented on this same subject for a number of years.

 

"I have watched an Empire Fall and cried a tear for them all".

 

I wrote a song about this years ago. You are younger and haven't seen all the changes that others have. You have grown up with people pirating music and causing this issue in the first place and I have watched as record companies laughed about the internet and then ran around like headless chickens trying to pick up the pieces.

 

Your last comment about quality of music means nothing, makes me really sad. I think the quality of the music is everything.

 

Why do you think classical music has prevailed for hundreds of years? Is it the Brand, or is it the quality of the music?

I don't necessarliy like it but I understand it's how the world works now. You can either be upset and complain about it or try to adapt to what's going on. I'm sure there are people that hate the way netflix works but the times have changed and most people wanna watch their shows when they want. It's the same with music.

 

Rather than complain about people pirating music plenty of artist use it to their advantage. They make the people invested in them as a person and give their music for free but make money other ways. The fact is if someone likes you as a person and likes your personality they will support just about anything you do. However, there are others who do not brand themselves properly and focus just on the music. What happens when that person wants to try something different? they lose a large portion of their fanbase because they don't want to hear you do something other than the music you got popular for. All they care about is your music they don't care about you as a person or what you stand for and that's a big part of keeping fans. They have to like you for more than just your music.

 

I can flip that question and ask why is classical music, jazz, and rock only popular amongst very niche audiences instead of mainting the mass appeal they used to have?

[Richard Tracey]

4 minutes ago, GuesSs said:

Yes they all targeted specific audiences but it wasn't the same audience. The difference between your example and music is that sports is a team effort. With music espescially if you know how to brand yourself it's all about you and your creation. You may not be one of these people but for a lot of others they like feeling like they know the artist themselves and that that artist speaks for them and is their voice. When i find a new artist i like I listen to their music but then i look for interviews they have done because i am curious about who they are as a person. There have been artist i have never listened but i've stumbled across a random interview and  gave  it a listen to and decided to give their music a chance because I liked what they stood for.  That is part of branding. If it was just music and nothing else there's a lot of artist I wouldn't have given a chance. But because of artist knowing how to brand and market themselves I bought into their music. They made me interested in them.

 

I think of music like a mall. There are tons of stores in a mall. Maybe you open up a brand new clothing store in the mall. You could have the best clothes ever and it can be innovative and cutting edge. But if you  don't market and promote your store and make people want to come in and look around nobody is going to care. You have to make people care and make people interested in your clothes because there are so many other stores they can go to. So in that regard branding is just as if not more important than the quality of music because you have to make people care. 

 

See in that analogy, the brand is what you are selling when you talk about a clothes shop. When it comes to music, it should be the music you are selling and then the artist. The minute the artist gets too big and starts to believe their hype, then that is when problems set in. This is what happens when you set the artist as the Brand to sell the music. An example would be boy bands. Most are happy to go along with it, then when the Brand starts to get too big and certain members become the Brand, it all falls apart and they split up.

 

I have no problem with selling the brand when it comes to an artist, but what I am saying is, it shouldn't be more about the brand over the music.

 

Another example is the group A-Ha. The record company were trying to sell the Brand - these 3 young boys who write and play their own music. Lead singer is a handsome man, so the teens will love them. They bombed when their first single was released. They went back to the drawing board and realised the song wasn't strong enough. So they brought in a couple of producers to create different versions and one of them was the single that took the charts by storm. Now, the other clever thing they did was release a very good video with the song, but it was the song you heard on the radio, it was the song that stayed in your mind, it was the song you couldn't stop singing or humming. They realised, if you get the music right the Brand will sort itself out, but the music needs to come first.

[Richard Tracey]

1 minute ago, GuesSs said:

I can flip that question and ask why is classical music, jazz, and rock only popular amongst very niche audiences instead of mainting the mass appeal they used to have?

 

I think you might find that Classical and Jazz have a massive audience, probably more so that hip-hop. Rock has taken a downwards tumble, but that is probably because it is not in vogue at the moment and needs something to make it relevant again.

 

I was never a Heavy Metal fan, can't stand the caterwauling, but it is still huge today. Just because you don't see it getting into the charts, doesn't mean that it's not relevant. But would it be even bigger if more people were exposed to it, the way they are to hip-hop!! I can't answer that, but then we will never know as we won't get that chance.

 

America and the UK view music differently and that is probably why we are having such a long discussion about this.

 

I am not sure if you watch any music channels, but on SKY we have probably 30 channels that play videos all day. One is dedicated to Vintage and used to play all the older stuff. There are a few Rock/Heavy channels and the rest are meant to be modern/pop stuff. Whenever I decide to have a look it is the same music playing on nearly every channel. It is hip-hop after hip-hop song playing and everything blends into each other. The lyrics all start to sound the same, the same phrases, the same way they rap, a girl or some other artist singing on a chorus. Even the videos are all starting to look like the same person has done them on a conveyor belt. That is why I despair. When I see what they are showing, anyone watching that will think that is all there is to listen to. Someone young finding out about music watching that will think there is only one style of music. 

[GuesSs]

12 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

I didn't actually mean that as a question, I should have used an exclamation mark instead. I know there are thousands of rappers out there, but that is one of the problems, the genre is over-saturated.

 

It is good that JCole is giving something back to his fans, maybe some of the others should take a leaf out of his book and stop thinking about how much money they can make on top of what they already have.

 

See this is where we will disagree. I still view hip-hop as a genre and that it hasn't really moved on. Yes there may be slight changes and variations, but it is still the same to me. You hear something different, you hear a difference in some artists to others. I just hear someone rapping, something I have heard for 30 years. The beats have changed slightly, but most are interchangeable with each other, so there isn't much variety to me. Again, this is me, I like intelligent music, where it feels like someone grafted to make it. I can turn on my Native Instruments Maschine and create a beat in seconds, or choose from lots of loops or presets that will give me something that sounds like everything else. They have lots of expansions for r'n'b and hip-hop as they are selling the Maschine as a beat making machine, so they are popular in that genre, so they cater towards it. But, unless you have serious skills, nearly everything starts to sound the same.

 

To get back to one of my main points. I feel that the market is saturated with the same type of music and we need more variety, but for that to happen, we need the other artists to get the same crack at getting their music heard as everyone else and that is not happening.

 

Most hip-hop is derived from other types of music, mostly electronic, soundtrack, classical - they should be promoting this and getting their fans interested in the artists they have been influenced by.

 

There is one r'n'b / hip-hop artist (can't remember his name at the moment) is a huge Kate Bush fan and talks about it all the time, even mentioning that one of this best moments was meeting her. Now that is the kind of thing they should do more often, as his fans can go and listen to another artist and maybe see where his influences are coming from.

I think the same can be said for just about every genre of music. On the outside looking in classical music, jazz, rock, country, metal, and EDM all sounds the same to me. But if i were to heavily invest time into listening to these genres i'm sure i'd notice all sorts of differences. 

 

If artist want to get more people listening to their music they need to brand and market themselves in a way that draws people to them. Labels aren't to blame for this. They are simply chasing after what has a buzz on the internet and then trying to capitalize on it and monetize it so that it's appealing to the masses. There are some who don't  mind selling out for the money mainstream attention brings and others who love the integrity of their art and will refuse to water it down. The key ( and many independent rappers have done this well) is to get a folloowing on your own so that if a label ever does show interest someday it's because they need you more than you need them and then you can dictate your terms. 

 

If you were to go to a resturaunt and you found out the chef didn't actually make your meal with passion and love and he just used tools to accelarae the process will you care? Probably not. As long as the music taste good that's all that matters. You could say to any casual listener you know the person that made this record just used a bunch of loops and presets they aren't going to care at all they just care if it sounds good or not.  That is why i stress branding so much because when you make music the people who listen to it probably are not musicians themselves. So they aren't gooing to care how long you worked on your chord progression, how many hours you put into desiging your sytnth just right, or how long it took you to write your lyrics. I find the only people who really care about this are music makers themselves.

 

I agree it would be cool if more artist do this and promote the artist they sampled but I don't think most people will care. Lex Luger is a popular hip hop producer who samples a lot of opera but I will never go back and listen to the opera songs he used because i don't care for the music. That's just me maybe others will

[GuesSs]

15 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

See in that analogy, the brand is what you are selling when you talk about a clothes shop. When it comes to music, it should be the music you are selling and then the artist. The minute the artist gets too big and starts to believe their hype, then that is when problems set in. This is what happens when you set the artist as the Brand to sell the music. An example would be boy bands. Most are happy to go along with it, then when the Brand starts to get too big and certain members become the Brand, it all falls apart and they split up.

 

I have no problem with selling the brand when it comes to an artist, but what I am saying is, it shouldn't be more about the brand over the music.

 

Another example is the group A-Ha. The record company were trying to sell the Brand - these 3 young boys who write and play their own music. Lead singer is a handsome man, so the teens will love them. They bombed when their first single was released. They went back to the drawing board and realised the song wasn't strong enough. So they brought in a couple of producers to create different versions and one of them was the single that took the charts by storm. Now, the other clever thing they did was release a very good video with the song, but it was the song you heard on the radio, it was the song that stayed in your mind, it was the song you couldn't stop singing or humming. They realised, if you get the music right the Brand will sort itself out, but the music needs to come first.

You keep using exapmles of bands and teams that have multiple people. But like you said the lead singer is handsome and the teen girls love him. That got people interested in them already without hearing their music. If they were all very unnattractive they wouldn't have the same appeal. It is cool what they did with the music but i gurantee you the intial interest in them came from their looks and their brand. WHy do you think people shop at the same places? because they know what to expect going into that store. They know the clothes they are going to get. A random pop up shop is going to have to get people interested in their brand first before their clothes. It's why people will spend hundreds on shoes that probably aren't as high quality of other shoes but they wnat them for the brand.

[GuesSs]

9 minutes ago, Richard Tracey said:

 

I think you might find that Classical and Jazz have a massive audience, probably more so that hip-hop. Rock has taken a downwards tumble, but that is probably because it is not in vogue at the moment and needs something to make it relevant again.

 

I was never a Heavy Metal fan, can't stand the caterwauling, but it is still huge today. Just because you don't see it getting into the charts, doesn't mean that it's not relevant. But would it be even bigger if more people were exposed to it, the way they are to hip-hop!! I can't answer that, but then we will never know as we won't get that chance.

 

America and the UK view music differently and that is probably why we are having such a long discussion about this.

 

I am not sure if you watch any music channels, but on SKY we have probably 30 channels that play videos all day. One is dedicated to Vintage and used to play all the older stuff. There are a few Rock/Heavy channels and the rest are meant to be modern/pop stuff. Whenever I decide to have a look it is the same music playing on nearly every channel. It is hip-hop after hip-hop song playing and everything blends into each other. The lyrics all start to sound the same, the same phrases, the same way they rap, a girl or some other artist singing on a chorus. Even the videos are all starting to look like the same person has done them on a conveyor belt. That is why I despair. When I see what they are showing, anyone watching that will think that is all there is to listen to. Someone young finding out about music watching that will think there is only one style of music. 

Considering a classical and jazz song hasn't been in the billboard hot 100 or any other sales tracking site for decades i'm going to disagree. But i'm jduging on what's popular in America perhaps they are bigger world wide but I doubt it since there hasn't been a new popular jazz or classical musician in forever. I'm not saying these other genres aren't big in their own right they just aren't appealing to mass audience. Hip Hop culture just outside of music is fascinating to people because of the dangerous lifestyle it promotes. People want to be apart of it and feel badass. Metal doens't have that same appeal and so it will only appeal to fans of the genre. Hip Hop dictaes cultre. A few years again everyone was saying YOLO because of drake. Now everyone says it's lit and turn up because of what they hear and rap songs. Other genres don't have that appeal. 

 

People keep gravitating to hip hop and those music channels because it is cool and popular. Young people like feeling cool and popular. Until other genres make younger people want to listen to that music it's going to keep being this way. People love the brand of hip hop. People don't necessarily care about other genres because its not cool to them. 

[Richard Tracey]

14 minutes ago, GuesSs said:

You keep using exapmles of bands and teams that have multiple people. But like you said the lead singer is handsome and the teen girls love him. That got people interested in them already without hearing their music. If they were all very unnattractive they wouldn't have the same appeal. It is cool what they did with the music but i gurantee you the intial interest in them came from their looks and their brand. WHy do you think people shop at the same places? because they know what to expect going into that store. They know the clothes they are going to get. A random pop up shop is going to have to get people interested in their brand first before their clothes. It's why people will spend hundreds on shoes that probably aren't as high quality of other shoes but they wnat them for the brand.

 

You didn't read it correctly. They released a single pushing the band, with the handsome singer and it failed. They went back and realised the song wasn't working. A new producer came in, fixed up the song and it was a massive hit. The initial interest was not the singer or the band, it was the music.

 

Fashion and Brand go together hand in hand.

[Richard Tracey]

24 minutes ago, GuesSs said:

I think the same can be said for just about every genre of music. On the outside looking in classical music, jazz, rock, country, metal, and EDM all sounds the same to me. But if i were to heavily invest time into listening to these genres i'm sure i'd notice all sorts of differences. 

 

'Now I feel you are trolling me, because even if you are trying to make a point to go with everything you have said previously, there is no way in hell you can believe that those genres all sound the same to you. There is no one on this planet who would agree with that sentiment.

[Richard Tracey]

15 minutes ago, GuesSs said:

Considering a classical and jazz song hasn't been in the billboard hot 100 or any other sales tracking site for decades i'm going to disagree. But i'm jduging on what's popular in America perhaps they are bigger world wide but I doubt it since there hasn't been a new popular jazz or classical musician in forever. I'm not saying these other genres aren't big in their own right they just aren't appealing to mass audience. Hip Hop culture just outside of music is fascinating to people because of the dangerous lifestyle it promotes. People want to be apart of it and feel badass. Metal doens't have that same appeal and so it will only appeal to fans of the genre. Hip Hop dictaes cultre. A few years again everyone was saying YOLO because of drake. Now everyone says it's lit and turn up because of what they hear and rap songs. Other genres don't have that appeal. 

 

People keep gravitating to hip hop and those music channels because it is cool and popular. Young people like feeling cool and popular. Until other genres make younger people want to listen to that music it's going to keep being this way. People love the brand of hip hop. People don't necessarily care about other genres because its not cool to them. 

 

I would not hold any sway on what makes into into the Billboard 100. The thing has been a fix for a very long time, just like it has been in the U.K.

 

Classical and Jazz tend to have their own charts anyway.

 

See I think that is the wrong attitude to have, wanting to be a part of a dangerous lifestyle and feel badass. If they knew the real side of it, not the glorified side, but the part that rips families apart, leaves loved ones without family members and promotes drug use and violence towards women and other gang members, then they might think twice about hero worshipping these characters.

 

Being told something is cool and popular is not the same as it being cool and popular. If your friend told you to jump off a bridge would you do it?

[Richard Tracey]

Any replies, I'll get them in the morning. I'm an old fart who needs to get some sleep as it's nearly one o'clock over here. Good night all.