@soillodge: I meant indie as independently released, as in someone doing the work of a label themselves not necessarily as underground music.
Industrial Music forum » Music news discussion forum
when music stops being product, we get culture back
(77 posts)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
atari.holocaust
offlineMember@djtekslave
I definitely agree many many many great works of art have been commercial products, but my feelings are a reaction to contemporary music CULTURE in general. the system has been gamed so hard. they convince people what to listen to with the illusion of production values and pandering to the lowest common denominator. As this exploitation continues, more and more good music goes unnoticed. It's not "just the way it is" its getting progressively worse. there should be some push back, ESPECIALLY when it comes to the perception of value.
Not saying a recording artist shouldnt be compensated for his/her work and I'm not saying its impossible to make a living off it either. I AM saying rampant consumerism has too much influence on music and music culture. I feel more artists should find a way to push away from this. What is important? making music and listening to music. everything else is just in the way if it doesn't help facilitate those goals. and preferably without compromise.
Posted 1 year ago # -
soillodge
offlineTech Moderator@Fractured, yeah I know what you meant. Often times an indie artist with a self-release will put a lot more into an album than the usual label find. They inevitably do this OR just release the album for free on Media Fire like a throwaway. But the point remains-you can change your lifestyle to fit your income and be more realistic about your music supporting your life. It does not mean you have to make better music, because within independent releases "better", is subjective. Some of the stuff in this scene that sells is IMO just terrible all around, they sell the gimmick, they have great marketing for that, and that is a business tool. Not an artistic tool. With indie music the focus is supposed to be on the idea, within mainstream they are selling you a product.
I actually agree with most of what Atari is saying here. Consumerism has far too much influence on music and music culture, that is why there has been such a back lash of people that want to get it for free. Now we have the cause and effect and the reverse, bands that want to circumvent the system and give the music away for free-or at the very least be extremely generous about it. They have taken economics 101 out of the equation and can feel more secure as artists because of it.
Everything is cyclical though and as was mentioned before, we are in a transitory period. Once this all equalizes out, the playing field will be much more solid.
`michael
Posted 1 year ago # -
soillodge
offlineTech Moderator"I think making music a good that poeople need to pay for raises the quality automatiocally"
I do not agree with Stefan here. I can understand his POV because the quality on Dependent Records is very high, and Stefan personally grooms and directs his artists to strive for a higher result. However that does not span to all bands and all labels even just within this scene. We do not have the production resources that mainstream artists have and we do not have the system in place to rate our production and cause our engineers to compete and thus-raise the overall bar of quality for our released music. Right now our rating system simply works on what the DJ's fancy at the time. DJ's typically only know about hooking the audiences attention and what sounds good in a club atmosphere. Most of our labels work on a system where one of the house bands does production and mastering duty and the focus is on loudness and intensity. So inherently we are selling ourselves short selling a typical club product to typical club people-except that the industrial core has much broader interests than that, and regular club music has a much higher bar of quality than we have. In this, the whole system is a farce and there really is no quality control whatsoever.
So if your interest is really just to get the music to your audience and you can afford that technique, more power to you. The backing of a label these days is much less impressive and can often time stifle your creativity within their limitations.
`michael
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sewn
offlineMember@soilodge
I think the thing is when there is money involved the production is better not necessarily the music itself. I think there is great opportunity for more creativity when a profit is not a concern.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Daemon_w60
offlineMemberI would have to say... if the majority of people like a certain CD or track, doesn't that make it good. For example; Combichrist or Nine Inch Nails, if their stuff wasn't good and had the quality it does people wouldn't generally listen to it. There's a reason why they are popular (I mean, sure they have/had labels backing them to get their stuff out but in the end if they weren't good... people wouldn't be listening to them). You are pretty much saying that the majority of society has been duped into thinking that these bands are good... but my question is; If they aren't good why are they so popular?
Posted 1 year ago # -
soillodge
offlineTech ModeratorBecause that is how marketing strategies are designed. Specifically in regards to pop music but more often now even in electro industrial. There is a gimmick and a style presented best to force an outcome. If you understand your audience and can deliver what they are looking for and you have the promotional clout to tell them all that it is what they are looking for. You are golden. You do not even have to have a good product, you just need to have a good sales pitch.
On the other side, if you start out with an audience that expects to be challenged and then start to force feed them accessible and predictable stuff, you lose half the audience you were trying to appeal to in the first place.
`michael
Posted 1 year ago # -
kAlte fArben
offlineMemberi'm really astonished what the hell is being discussed here. 'culture' as an expression has far more to do with social environments and education than being a result of art - the contrary is the case: art is a result or a reflection of social influences, it's always something that supports or critizises an ongoing system or personal experiences. even if we do art which is created by personal emotions, somebody told us what 'pain', what 'love', what 'honesty' is. and that semantic scheme is a blueprint for how we deal with new impression, how we digest them.
if our system bases more and more on economic interests, well, then it's nothing more than a testground for people who are acting like ants with something that is called a 'hardly better developed brain'. but instead of being directed by instincts, like ants do, human tend to act for their own advantages. aha, THIS is actually the 'sense' of being the most 'powerful' and 'intelligent' creature on this world, eh?! is that something we could define as 'culture'? does it make sense to discuss about what kind of music we have to compose and/or produce to make it a living, instead of simply follow our own inner voices and pleasures, our own obsessions and passions?
the moment i'll do music i don't like to produce is the moment i give in my passion to a game that will destroy the goal of improving a global society to the next step of evolution. call me a screwball or whatever you like... if i WANT to produce pop, if i WANT to produce r'n'b or if i WANT to do volksmusik, then i'm better off than all those pseudo-indies who think they are 'cool' and tweak on their gear because they want to act like children at kindergarten - like kids they still have to grow up and instead of kids they don't even touch the playground of real creativity. switch off the current and you'll experience a completely new variation of darwin's laws. :D if those people once discover that cognition, THEN they are able to discuss about 'culture' because culture is based on responsibility and tolerance.
and wtf is the point of that? would i 'sell' music as a 'cultural good' today?! in times the internet devours all of our senses and changes a lot of us to stupid download-and-must-have-zombies? is THAT a thing we could call 'culture'? of course, yes, it is and although this is one of the worst things to be observed in behavioral science, it's something that was created by the 'art' of using technology.
ergo i make the music i want to make. i take the time i need to do that. i delete old songs if they bother me because i don't follow an egomania that dictates to release every shit i took while 'producing' my 'art'. i freelance to earn some money and i try to save some of that money to being able to afford new stuff that helps me creating more 'art'. i don't dime myself because someone still expects from me to do the same old shit i did more than a decade before. some do so, that's okay, but not my thing.
why? because i change like people usually do while growing up. try to live a modest life, like testube said. try to be as creative as you can and grow, like `michael said. and stop wasting time to think about moneymoneymoneysuccesssuccesssuccessegoegoego... we STILL create our own world. we aren't 'victims', especially not here in the first world. and we influence our own taste but we unquestioningly follow the rules of capitalism (as a term in general!) that do kill humanity. but without humanity, why living anyway?
[hidden marginal note]
i bet everyone get it that without human beings nobody will discuss about 'culture' anymore. maybe some dolphins... no, penguins. i hope it will be penguins in 2049 because they are better dressed than dolphins. yeah, i like their 'style', so where the fuck is my suit? ;)if (human==true) {
doThink();
} else {
watchThePenguins(2049);
};[end of hidden marginal note]
Posted 1 year ago # -
soillodge
offlineTech ModeratorSo long, and thanks for all the fish ;)
`michael
Posted 1 year ago # -
kAlte fArben
offlineMemberyeah, Douglas should close this thread with a big 'amen'... sorry, Douglas, don't wanted to be an impious penguin. :D
Posted 1 year ago # -
djtekslave
offlineMember@Kalte Farben
See I tried to discuss the definition of product and got shut down... the same just happened to you with the definition of culture. Welcome to the club.Posted 1 year ago # -
kAlte fArben
offlineMemberah, never mind. i know
michael good enough to be shure he let it through on the nod. am i right,michael?! am i right?? ;)
we just should keep in mind the neat imagination, if Don Quixote once have had the chance to meet Terminator he probably would have said 'talk to the hand!' :DPosted 1 year ago # -
panzerschreck
offlineMember@ Ingo - Stop worrying about this petty crap and focus on the album....THE ALBUM MAN COME ON!
Posted 1 year ago # -
[+] Embed the video Get the Flash Videos Posted 1 year ago # -
soillodge
offlineTech Moderator@Ingo-Preaching to the choir my man. I get what you saying. Art imitates life imitates art imitates life. Now we have a consumer culture, Snuggies and Sham Wow. No one gives a fuck about anything they are not told to like [a generalization but mostly true] and music culture has suffered because of this. Instead of it being a social commentary, it has become a 2 hour info-mercial. Desperately trying to sell you on the idea of it's merit and worth, after countless years of convincing people to pay for the product alone. Not only has the audience rebelled against this, the artists are saying fuck the system as well.
What is the worth of personal expression? What is the point of artistic integrity? If you just have cliché gimmicks force fed to you in all directions at all times. How do you recognize the old man behind the curtain moving the levers? Your not supposed to, you are to take what they give you as the truth of law.
lol, ah, the Man of La Mancha and the man of brutal precision technology meeting up. Both of them driven by a singular idea of unreality. There is a culture shock for you.
`michael
Posted 1 year ago # -
1) If you aren't an "instant-hit" type of act, be prepared to live like a pauper. Most artists are not likely to make a great living off of their art. Learn to enjoy living in a studio or tiny room, use public transportation (move to a city if you don't have this), eat cheaply, and not have children. This is just reality.
2) Try to imagine a world where most artists hold a job and do their music in
their spare time. What happens in this world? Art gets released slower, it doesn't
go away. What is inherently wrong with this? This is most likely the case right now
anyway, but for the sake of this discussion, we can pretend otherwise.3) There's good paid music, and there's good free music. There's bad paid music,
and there's bad free music. There's more music getting released at any time in history, and yes, a lot of it is garbage - that's the nature of humanity; Sturgeon's Law applies always and everywhere. Instead of relying on A&R, we now rely on "tastemaker" and review blogs, "music you might like" algorithms (last.fm, Pandora, etc.) and forums like this (where I've found more good music than anywhere else by looking at the "latest purchase" threads).It's a different world, with different models, and there are clearly many people still
having problems adjusting. I recommend reviewing this thread:http://www.side-line.com/forum/threads.php?id=40846_0_20_0_C
for a refresher. The discussion there is (overall) very good.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Aside from the "I'm a DJ, I get tons of music sent to me" argument, the main flaw with the paid vs. free argument is this: if a band/label announces a free download and it piques your curiosity in the slightest, you don't hesitate to download it (you might even get around to listening to it at some point). But when you have to pay for it, you do some research, listen to previews, last.fm, etc. before you buy it.
So yes, naturally for the average listener there will be more quality releases from paid music rather than free music. Would it still be the same if you favorited two or three bands on Amazon.com and then bought whatever random album they recommended to you without previewing it?
To add on to the embedded player comment: the reason for the player is that right at that minute that a potential listener is on your site they can listen to your music. By forcing them to download your music you rely on them a) having the free time at the moment to download it (or going back to your site when they do), b) adding the music they downloaded to their player of choice once they downloaded it, and c) remembering to listen to it. Plus, with an embedded player you can track listens, which are 100% more accurate than downloads.
That being said, I've got good music that I downloaded for free, and I've got bad music I've paid for. But that's because my tastes differ from everyone elses.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.