The Music or the Gear?

[microstrip]

When it comes to music apparently a lot of people still enjoy living in the past. The Jan 2022 issue of the Atlantic reports “Old songs now represent 70 percent of the U.S. music market, according to the latest numbers from MRC Data, a music-analytics firm.…The new-music market is actually shrinking. All the growth in the market is coming from old songs.”

…

• The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
• The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
• Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
• The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
• In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
• Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
• Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
• When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
• Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace.

?​

Apparently, many people’s clocks are rewinding.

Interesting article, thanks, but I was addressing mainly classical music - I do not see "Old songs" being relevant to people who prefer non amplified music for system evaluation and tuning. It would be nice to see similar data for classical. Anyway, people should read the whole article to get a more correct perspective of what is being addressed there: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/old-music-killing-new-music/621339/


I quote:

" Only songs released in the past 18 months get classified as “new” in the MRC database, so people could conceivably be listening to a lot of two-year-old songs, rather than 60-year-old ones. But I doubt these old playlists consist of songs from the year before last. Even if they did, that fact would still represent a repudiation of the pop-culture industry, which is almost entirely focused on what’s happening right now."

IMHO it is mainly what is being addressed - all else was author speculation.

 

[Cellcbern]

When it comes to music apparently a lot of people still enjoy living in the past. The Jan 2022 issue of the Atlantic reports “Old songs now represent 70 percent of the U.S. music market, according to the latest numbers from MRC Data, a music-analytics firm.…The new-music market is actually shrinking. All the growth in the market is coming from old songs.”

…

• The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
• The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
• Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
• The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
• In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
• Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
• Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
• When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
• Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace.

Is Old Music Killing New Music?​

Apparently, many people’s clocks are rewinding.

Count me among them. I prefer the jazz of the 1950's and 1960's, and the popular music of the 1950's - 1980's.

 

[Audire]

Interesting article, thanks, but I was addressing mainly classical music - I do not see "Old songs" being relevant to people who prefer non amplified music for system evaluation and tuning. It would be nice to see similar data for classical. Anyway, people should read the whole article to get a more correct perspective of what is being addressed there: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/old-music-killing-new-music/621339/


I quote:

" Only songs released in the past 18 months get classified as “new” in the MRC database, so people could conceivably be listening to a lot of two-year-old songs, rather than 60-year-old ones. But I doubt these old playlists consist of songs from the year before last. Even if they did, that fact would still represent a repudiation of the pop-culture industry, which is almost entirely focused on what’s happening right now."

IMHO it is mainly what is being addressed - all else was author speculation.

.

For some reason I thought that most Classical music was older music, you know like Bach (1685-1750), Beethoven (1770-1827), etc.

It’s amazing how you tried to defend your point by only highlighting part of the quote. What about the quote in red? Funny that you emphasize only the part in bold, but ignore the part in red.

None the less, older music at present is substantially out doing newer music. 70% of the U.S. market shouldn’t be ignored!

 

[facten]

I do not see "Old songs" being relevant to people who prefer non amplified music for system evaluation and tuning

I doubt that the article is focused on people listening to "Old Music" with respect to system evaluation and tuning versus pure listening enjoyment. There's a large population of folks who could care less about audiophile gear and setups and just listen to music via whatever, earbuds, phones, etc.

 

[microstrip]

.

For some reason I thought that most Classical music was older music, you know like Bach (1685-1750), Beethoven (1770-1827), etc.

It’s amazing how you tried to defend your point by only highlighting part of the quote. What about the quote in red? Funny that you emphasize only the part in bold, but ignore the part in red.

None the less, older music at present is substantially out doing newer music. 70% of the U.S. market shouldn’t be ignored!

Surely "I doubt" is simply speculation as I have told. Extrapolating data from the new (less than 18 month old) to the sixties and seventies is just that. Thanks for defending my point.

 

[microstrip]

I doubt that the article is focused on people listening to "Old Music" with respect to system evaluation and tuning versus pure listening enjoyment. There's a large population of folks who could care less about audiophile gear and setups and just listen to music via whatever, earbuds, phones, etc.

Surely. It is why it has little relevance to our original discussion. The article is focused on the troubles of new music and the whys of it. .

 

[facten]

Surely. It is why it has little relevance to our original discussion. The article is focused on the troubles of new music and the whys of it

The original post :

There’s Audiophiles that enjoy music the most, others the equipment, and yet others both.

Mine is the music with the caveat that I need the proper gear to listen to it with.

What’s your goal as an Audiophile? The music? The gear? Both? And why?

Discussion has nothing to do with what music is used to evaluate and tune systems, but if some are more focused on music or the gear. And , Audire's post of the article is related to the music side of his original post.

 

[Audire]

Surely "I doubt" is simply speculation as I have told. Extrapolating data from the new (less than 18 month old) to the sixties and seventies is just that. Thanks for defending my point.

Deal with the facts … once again from the article, which includes stats, not from the author, but a third party.

• The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
• The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
• Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
• The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
• In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
• Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
• Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
• When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
• Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace

 

[microstrip]

The original post :

There’s Audiophiles that enjoy music the most, others the equipment, and yet others both.

Mine is the music with the caveat that I need the proper gear to listen to it with.

What’s your goal as an Audiophile? The music? The gear? Both? And why?

Discussion has nothing to do with what music is used to evaluate and tune systems, but if some are more focused on music or the gear. And , Audire's post of the article is related to the music side of his original post.

I was directly answering to Bonzo post #37 in this thread. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/the-music-or-the-gear.35593/post-829165 Please read posts in the full context, not just the last ones. His post was the original post of this particular subject.

 

[microstrip]

Deal with the facts … once again from the article, which includes stats, not from the author, but a third party.

• The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
• The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
• Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
• The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
• In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
• Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
• Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
• When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
• Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace

Sorry, none of these are relevant to my answer to Bonzo. But if you get proper statistics I will be happy to know about it.

 

[tima]

For some reason I thought that most Classical music was older music, you know like Bach (1685-1750), Beethoven (1770-1827), etc.

"Classical Music" is, imo, an over-arching notion that generally covers music performed with 'classical' acoustic instruments: strings, woodwinds, brass, and percussion. (The piano is a percussive instrument.)

Because there is so much of it, classical music is sometimes organized into time periods - as you represented. A variety of views hold on this. One suggests:

• Early / Medieval -- 500-1400.
• Renaissance – 1400-1600.
• Baroque – 1600-1750.
• Classical – 1750-1830.
• Romantic – 1830-1900.
• 20th Century – 1900-2000.
• Modern – 2000-present.

A 'ton' of marvelous classical music came out of the 20th Century. It saw the rise of minimalism and constructed dissonance, perhaps a result of two world wars. But there is far more to the 20th C than angular dissonant music. Consider composers such as Sibelius, Ravel, Debussy, Elgar, Vaugh Williams, Rachmaninoff, Stravinsky, Shostakovich, Samuel Barber, Coplin, Schoenberg, etc.

Several of the modern film score composers are writing great classical music: Korngold (Robin Hood, etc.) John Williams (E.T., many) James Horner (Aliens), Hans Zimmer (Batman, Gladiator, etc.), Howard Shore (LOTR), Ennio Morricone (The Misson, Spaghetti Westerns) and more.

 

[Tuckers]

I had a cat who would come sit in my lap if I put on any Mozart. It was the only music he reacted to and he seemed to enjoy it.

My cat loved violin music and would stretch out on the carpet to enjoy it. Miss her!

 

[tima]

Is Old Music Killing New Music?

New music is killing itself.

 

[Audire]

Sorry, none of these are relevant to my answer to Bonzo. But if you get proper statistics I will be happy to know about it.

Well if you would have read Bonzo’s post in its entirety, it begins with general assertions concerning both digital and analogue. There was no music genre mentioned in the first part of his post. Then he gave us a well written example of how Classical music can be used in testing. However, if you think that only Classical music may be used in system testing, then I believe you’ve missed the point of the post.

But as to Classical music it’s is also on the rise with younger listeners:

Classical music is becoming more popular among young people, according to new joint research by the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, streaming service Deezer, and British Phonographic Industry (BPI).

Of those streaming classical music in the last year, a third (34 percent) were 18 to 25 years old. Over the same period, classical streams by listeners under 35 rose by 17 percent.

A decade ago, data published by BPI showed just a tenth of classical listeners were under 30, while the vast majority (70 percent) were over the age of 50.

 

[Rensselaer]

Deal with the facts … once again from the article, which includes stats, not from the author, but a third party.

• The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
• The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
• Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
• The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
• In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
• Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
• Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
• When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
• Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace

Interesting points, but what is it saying?

>New musicians will naturally want the major portion of money made from their own work/talent, but the music industry is bean-counter-driven and the risk of fronting costs, and handing over most of the profit to someone that people might not like, is just too risky?

>Owning song catalogues allows the music industry to keep nearly all of the profits from new releases of that music. They simply dictate new talent to sing "covers" of music they own, thereby only having to pay new musicians studio rates?

>Older "audiophiles" are the ones with money, buying the music and format they prefer and driving the market?

>Could it be that the music industry learned it's lesson after getting rid of LP-making talent to pump out cheap CDs (which may of made them a sh*tload of money at first until people were able to make copies on their home computers)? Going back to vinyl does two things, it panders to us old dinosaurs who believe vinyl sounds better (analogue vinyl does ) while returning to a format that nobody can pirate at scale cheaply enough to make it worthwhile.

>Then there is a belief held by many out there that things were better "back then". There was greater talent back then because artists worked harder and only the best and most talented got record deals. It seems that today one can record bits from several different records of old and mix them together on your home computer and instant hit! Or singing different words to a well known tune with a karaoke machine backup on your computer then emailing that to digital radio station and presto!

And it is not just modern music that has gone cheap and nasty, there are comparisons across all fields. "Quality" has taken a dive over the years (bean counters will tell you it is necessary to "maximise profits"). Take painting as another example: Look at a still life painted by one of the Dutch masters (A bread roll looks like a bread roll, a glass looks like a glass, faces look real, the brush strokes are nearly impossible to discern) and compare the skill required to do that with that of a modern-art painter (walking on a large canvas pouring out paint from a can in some haphazard random way and then selling the splatter as art). How about that lady who put a canvas down in the mud at the edge of a watering hole in Africa and then framed and hung the animal- droppings-and-muddy-footprint-covered canvas as her work/art?

Maybe I am just another grumpy old man bitching that everything of late is just plain mediocre, that nothing has any real intrinsic value anymore. But what if what I am saying is what those bullet points indicate? No wonder that people want to go back to more pleasant times (even if only temporarily while listening to old music the way it sounded back then)?

 

[rando]

"Classical Music" is, imo, an over-arching notion that generally covers music performed with 'classical' acoustic instruments: strings, woodwinds, brass, and percussion. (The piano is a percussive instrument.)

A neat sidestep to allow...

New music is killing itself.

To which I add the rejoinder new high end gear is killing itself and the industry.

Let's have some fairness of reporting on the other half of your stated equation as well. A rather intentionally large blind spot was forming.

 

[rando]

Interesting article, thanks, but I was addressing mainly classical music - I do not see "Old songs" being relevant to people who prefer non amplified music for system evaluation and tuning. It would be nice to see similar data for classical. Anyway, people should read the whole article to get a more correct perspective of what is being addressed there: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/old-music-killing-new-music/621339/


I quote:

" Only songs released in the past 18 months get classified as “new” in the MRC database, so people could conceivably be listening to a lot of two-year-old songs, rather than 60-year-old ones. But I doubt these old playlists consist of songs from the year before last. Even if they did, that fact would still represent a repudiation of the pop-culture industry, which is almost entirely focused on what’s happening right now."

IMHO it is mainly what is being addressed - all else was author speculation.

Typical small print exclusionary practices to craft a framework meeting some headline - any headline - that sells. I appreciate you calling out the lack of intellectual honesty.

 

[rando]

>The music industry learned it's lesson after getting rid of LP-making talent to pump out cheap CDs, which may of made them a sh*tload of money at first until people were able to make copies on their home computers. Going back to vinyl does two things, it satisfies us old dinosaurs who believe vinyl sounds better (analogue vinyl does ) while returning to a format that nobody can pirate at scale cheaply enough to make it worthwhile.

Sorry for snipping out just this.

Basement vinyl represses and other forms of contraband were a very real threat to the industry built up around home audio. Sales numbers were much smaller allowing a dent to be made from one or two centers of (re)distribution.

I feel you are obliquely unaware how widespread this black market process has become once again. What was once much easier to spot has become a challenge due to sophisticated technology allowing a more accurate mirroring of packaging and labeling.

 

[tima]

Let's have some fairness of reporting on the other half of your stated equation as well. A rather intentionally large blind spot was forming.

Not sure about an equation. As the article laid out, something is causing the music industry to put its money where it does. It doesn't seem a matter of fairness so much as what's happening today. If the marketplace does not support something then simply making more of that thing will not make it viable.

 

[Rensselaer]

Sorry for snipping out just this.

Basement vinyl represses and other forms of contraband were a very real threat to the industry built up around home audio. Sales numbers were much smaller allowing a dent to be made from one or two centers of (re)distribution.

I feel you are obliquely unaware how widespread this black market process has become once again. What was once much easier to spot has become a challenge due to sophisticated technology allowing a more accurate mirroring of packaging and labeling.

That's ok, I admittedly don't know much about black market LP production.

I do however believe that I am representative of the people illuminated in the points Audire made. I only buy LPs that are D2D or pure analogue cuts from master tapes (although I have mistakenly bought the odd Mobile Fidelity LP). If I ever bought an LP that was a cheap bootleg cutting I would know it from the sound of it and would never buy another thing from them, ever. The only people out there that would support that sort of cheap and nasty product would be new-be's without the experience or equipment to tell the difference.