2007 another down year for record sales

Darn, I'm getting so tired of old folks going on and on about how much better it was in the old days. Just because you dont know the new stuff is here there dont mean it doesnt exist.
watch the kids in our neighborhood, listening to music recorded before they were even born?!? I ask them why they listen to it and they say its because it is better than the junk coming out now. Don't misunderstand me - my dream ISN'T to have a repeat of the music scene from 2-4 decades ago. I would love to see THIS generation come up with something of their own. Perhaps some day, a visionary of a music producer will fill the void and create his version, for example, of what Motown was in its day.But, it's only a dream...

You know, I actually listen to Mozart occasionally, and that's not because everything of the last two centuries is junk. This generation is already doing things miles beyond what happened in the 70s but that doesnt mean that we should throw all records from the past away.

I'm talking about music technology ofcourse. Creativity and originality is of every generation for as long as there have been music. The only real difference between now and the sixties is that everyone and their dog can buy equipment that you couldn't even find in the most expensive studios back then. Never in the history in the world did we have so much opportunities and possibilities to create music as we have now, independant of everyone and everything.

We should feel blessed that we live in these days instead of complaining that we dont hear the music we like when we zap to MTV. Common, Jimi Hendrix would have sold his soul to have all the creative possibilities we have now. An electric guitar and a Zoom G2 will set you back $300 and your recordings will sound better then a lot of records from way back. Unlimited tracks, huge sites with free and high quality samples, MIDI keybords that cost less then $100, a digital piano will set you back less then $500. The present really ain't all that bad...

I'm talking about music technology ofcourse. Creativity and originality is of every generation for as long as there have been music. The only real difference between now and the sixties is that everyone and their dog can buy equipment that you couldn't even find in the most expensive studios back then. Never in the history in the world did we have so much opportunities and possibilities to create music as we have now, independant of everyone and everything.

We should feel blessed that we live in these days instead of complaining that we dont hear the music we like when we zap to MTV. Common, Jimi Hendrix would have sold his soul to have all the creative possibilities we have now. An electric guitar and a Zoom G2 will set you back $300 and your recordings will sound better then a lot of records from way back. Unlimited tracks, huge sites with free and high quality samples, MIDI keybords that cost less then $100, a digital piano will set you back less then $500. The present really ain't all that bad...

You are right - you can spend less than $1,000 and have a set up better than ANYTHING 40 years ago. So what? Technology advances wasn't the point of my post. My point was that, regardless of all the wonderful technology, the mass marketed music today is terrible, by any standard - not just the past.

I have no idea what your point was about the fact that you sometimes listen to classical (so do I). Lots of great music from the past- 20 years ago, 40 years ago, 60 years ago, 100 years ago, 200 years ago, etc. - just not much great music now. At least the stuff that is on the airwaves. Perhaps there are millions of kids with all the great music gadgets in their basement making masterpieces right now - but I doubt it, or at least SOME of it would have surfaced already.

Go back and reread my post - I clearly said I DID NOT want a repeat of the past, rather I would love to see this generation make their own version of worthwhile music that is mass marketed.

For some reason, I keep getting the feeling that someone's gonna mention Muse, Radiohead, Coldplay, Modest Mouse etc. Just thought I would beat them to it.

:lol: :lol:

My point was that, regardless of all the wonderful technology, the mass marketed music today is terrible, by any standard - not just the past.

Yeah, thank god in the seventies they only had Jimi Hendrix on the radio and all the bubblegum pop didnt exist. And you're absolutely right, the music I'm listening to right now is 'terrible by any standard'. Oh, I guess that just means your standard, right? :roll:
You are right - you can spend less than $1,000 and have a set up better than ANYTHING 40 years ago. So what?

I thought it was obvious enough but apparantly not: it allows for such things as The Eraser to happen. The easier things get the more variety there is: instead of complaining how everything sucks these days you can show us how it's done. Some of my favourite (Dutch) acts recorded their music independantly and broke through without the backing of a major label. With all the availlable equipment and the internet all you need today is inspiration.
rather I would love to see this generation make their own version of worthwhile music that is mass marketed.

Muse, Radiohead, Coldplay, Modest Mouse etc. :P Sure, there is plenty of stuff I don't like. There are some rap acts I lik but all the stuff on MTV is not what I want. No problem, I just dont watch it. Thanks to the internet it's much easier to find new groups I like. And when I had enough of that I'll just write my own music. Today is a great day, both for listeners and musicians.

But yeah, guess the music will never be as good as in 1978 :lol:

For some reason, I keep getting the feeling that someone's gonna mention Muse, Radiohead, Coldplay, Modest Mouse etc. Just thought I would beat them to it.

Assuming Coldplay releases their new CD this year, it will be their 4th in 9 years. That means that one of this decades bigger names has only done 3 so far. Quite a different paradigm than decades past, and one of the reasons I feel sales are down all accross the board.

The trouble with making things easier is that it tends to make things sloppier. If it's easy to churn out 10 tracks in a couple of hours, then you'll get 10 tracks - regardless of their musical quality. They'll all sound pretty much the same, too.

If you have to work really hard to get music recorded, you make sure that it's good and ready, before making any sort of recording. In my opinion, this shows in the vast majority of commercial offerings. It's simply too easy to create tracks without even one single live musician.

I'm not saying ALL music is like this, just the vast majority that gets pumped out of my radio and I don't even listen to the primary music channels, but rather the 2nd string that plays a much wider range of styles.

The trouble with making things easier is that it tends to make things sloppier. If it's easy to churn out 10 tracks in a couple of hours, then you'll get 10 tracks - regardless of their musical quality. They'll all sound pretty much the same, too.

Assuming Coldplay releases their new CD this year, it will be their 4th in 9 years. That means that one of this decades bigger names has only done 3 so far. Quite a different paradigm than decades past, and one of the reasons I feel sales are down all accross the board.

Somewhere something conflicts here. In a sense I guess both are true: acts that write their own material tend to take more time. But a lot of modern 'bands' rely on producers. While the band is touring the label will have a team ready to write pretty generic music so that when the band gets back from 11 months of touring they can go straight into the studio again. These acts will be pretty un-original. The really original stuff is written by bands who write themselves. Most of them will fail miserably but those that do succeed will be copied again by the larger labels.

The trouble with making things easier is that it tends to make things sloppier. If it's easy to churn out 10 tracks in a couple of hours, then you'll get 10 tracks - regardless of their musical quality. They'll all sound pretty much the same, too.

If you have to work really hard to get music recorded, you make sure that it's good and ready, before making any sort of recording. In my opinion, this shows in the vast majority of commercial offerings. It's simply too easy to create tracks without even one single live musician.

I'm not saying ALL music is like this, just the vast majority that gets pumped out of my radio and I don't even listen to the primary music channels, but rather the 2nd string that plays a much wider range of styles.
Trent Reznor is trying something like that as an experiment.

"This music arrived unexpectedly as the result of an experiment. The rules were as follows: 10 weeks, no clear agenda, no overthinking, everything driven by impulse. Whatever happens during that time gets released as... something."

It's available as a free download (or at least 9 of the songs), with the option to pay something (for a 36 track download), or buy a CD.

There is truly great recorded music out there today -- and more than there has ever been at any one time before in history.

But it's not on most airwaves, and it's not in the record stores because by and large it's not being made by people signed to the big labels, or if they are signed, the labels have no idea how to market them because it's not pop crap being made by people with pretty faces and slim bodies.

The reason the big labels are having problems is they haven't figured out how to deal with the age of customized content. We're moving to a post-mass media world. Sure the media is there for the masses, but it's not 3 TV stations and 4 radio stations per market anymore. Instead it's hundreds and hundreds of niche channels each tailored to a very small audience, and even more individualized channels where the content is customized to an audience of one.

The big media companies aren't agile enough to deliver your content to you and my content to me. They want to continue to deliver the same content to everyone. But we've moved beyond that era.

KP, you've got some points well made. In our market, which is in the top 50 in the U.S. population-wise, we don't have JS for radio stations. We HAD a good one that in decades past even received national accolades most notably from Rolling Stone Magazine.

15 years ago, we had a good rock station that played a mix of new & old. Too short of a song list, yes, but a good mix. We had an additional rock station that was geared towards the harder stuff that was coming out then. Great. Got a taste of something different and even got turned on to some new stuff. Our pop radio station still had somewhat of a mix. Fast-forward to just a few years ago, the regular rock station changed to only classic rock. The hard rock station changed and added older classic hard stuff that the other was not playing, and pop music became boy-bands, vocal divas and hip-hop or rap. So, for anyone locally to hear new stuff, it had better be hard and have patience as the hard station has to cycle through all of their Ozzy Osbourne collection before you get to hear anything.

So, hear are my choices. Search the web for good sources of good new music in hopes that I might find it, or spend that time listening to what I already enjoy and play guitar with the time saved.

So, yes. Their mass marketing has missed me completely.

But yeah, guess the music will never be as good as in 1978 :lol:

This.

Everyone needs to remember that the good ol' days probably weren't as good as you remembered. Over time the mass-produced crap that dominated the airwaves in its time gets filtered out and the songs with some substance are the ones that tend to persevere in our memories.

While I agree that the mainstream music market is in a period of stagnation, no matter what your style I can guarantee that somewhere out there is new music you will like, it's just a matter of finding it.

There is truly great recorded music out there today -- and more than there has ever been at any one time before in history.

But it's not on most airwaves, and it's not in the record stores because by and large it's not being made by people signed to the big labels, or if they are signed, the labels have no idea how to market them because it's not pop crap being made by people with pretty faces and slim bodies.

The reason the big labels are having problems is they haven't figured out how to deal with the age of customized content. We're moving to a post-mass media world. Sure the media is there for the masses, but it's not 3 TV stations and 4 radio stations per market anymore. Instead it's hundreds and hundreds of niche channels each tailored to a very small audience, and even more individualized channels where the content is customized to an audience of one.

The big media companies aren't agile enough to deliver your content to you and my content to me. They want to continue to deliver the same content to everyone. But we've moved beyond that era.

Amen. I agree 100%. Honestly, why do you think Brittney Spears is still making albums? Somehow she keeps selling them! Why??? WHy!?!!?! WHY!?@?@ She recently had a song in the top 10. I don't get it... but then, again, the radio stations play it! Why? Because she's a known commodity.

In relation to the digital sales... I was thinking about this issue this morning. I have an IPOD. Most of us have IPODs. Most of us use Itunes to download music. Do I smell a monopoly in terms of distribution? I worry that everyone will only have one play to get their music. I know its hyperbole right now, but IPODS outsell all other mp3 players by ALOT.

KP, you've got some points well made. In our market, which is in the top 50 in the U.S. population-wise, we don't have JS for radio stations. We HAD a good one that in decades past even received national accolades most notably from Rolling Stone Magazine.

15 years ago, we had a good rock station that played a mix of new & old. Too short of a song list, yes, but a good mix. We had an additional rock station that was geared towards the harder stuff that was coming out then. Great. Got a taste of something different and even got turned on to some new stuff. Our pop radio station still had somewhat of a mix. Fast-forward to just a few years ago, the regular rock station changed to only classic rock. The hard rock station changed and added older classic hard stuff that the other was not playing, and pop music became boy-bands, vocal divas and hip-hop or rap. So, for anyone locally to hear new stuff, it had better be hard and have patience as the hard station has to cycle through all of their Ozzy Osbourne collection before you get to hear anything.

So, hear are my choices. Search the web for good sources of good new music in hopes that I might find it, or spend that time listening to what I already enjoy and play guitar with the time saved.

So, yes. Their mass marketing has missed me completely.

Roy - I am in the exact same situation. Thank got for Sirius Satellite Radio, because there are ZERO new rock stations in Hartford. We are smack-dab between NYC and Boston so you'd think we'd have decent radio. NO WAY.

We have three classic rock stations (the same stuff we've all heard a million times... Yes, Zeppelin, Boston, AC/DC, etc, etc) and one heavy rock/numetal/rap-rock station (mostly consisting of music that I'd really like if the singer could actually sing) and nothing for new rock, modern rock, alt rock, progressive rock, etc... I found Sirius and was able to hear bands like Muse, Killers, Coheed & Cambria, SnowPatrol, My Chemical Romance, Kaiser Chiefs, The Shins, etc...

A new station popped up 6 months ago which plays a strange blend of the new (Killers, SnowPatrol) and "vintage" alternative (Meat Puppets, Soundgarden, etc...). I'm not digging it... I've heard Black Hole Sun 1000000000000 times. Enough already.

Anyway... It is hard to appreciate some of the coolmusic out there when you have to listen to recycled rock for 24 hours to get to that one hour of good new stuff.

For my job I have to visit loads of random sites and one of them recently was a music site mentioning a new backstreet boys tune. You wouldn't believe how many replies there were of people who have been fans for over a decade and are completely hyped up. People who say they only listen to them and have all records. People who say that the backstreet boys made music that touches their soul like nothing else. To me it's boring inspirationless music, but when I read all that it made me wonder. Who am I to judge them? Why is it okay to listen to SRV but is it not okay to listen to Britney Spears? To each his own I guess. And I never heared a Britney Spears fan talk down the music I like...