Live tours? Not this season.

[WRGKMC]

Another sign the industry/economy is in bad shape for artists earning a living either through recording or touring.

Here's an article that came out this morning asking "Where's the Cool Bands." They blame it on world unrest.

 

When all you have are the Geritol bands out there touring its a sure sign our latest generation of artists either

don't have what it takes to be out there touring or they can't get their fans to come out and pay to see them live.

They'd rather stand in line for a new cellphone then buy tickets to see their favorite bands.

We all know the days where recording companies pumped out albums and sent bands on the road touring with other

major bands to sell those albums is pretty much over. Many bands were hits before they even hit the stage.

But when great bands are having to go back to playing bars to earn a buck you know things aren't good.

The last big artist I saw was Paul McCartney a few years ago. Seems like only the older bands are able to carry that torch now.

Question is does the new generation have what it takes to become great live bands or is that mountain finally become insurmountable.

Back in the day, if you wanted to get the hottest girlfriend, you had to at least have a job, and your own car.

Going to see a good band was like the ultimate date to take a chick to. You sure as heck didn't pedal up to her folks

house on a bicycle once you were old enough to drive. I blame the women for not making their boyfriends get a job, any job

and stop living off their parents backs and show they have what it takes to be a good provider. Instead its the women taking

on that role and women see live music as a low priority today.

 

https://music.yahoo.com/news/industry-tries-survive-summer-concert-season-without-superstars-140527496-rolling-stone.html

 

[MikeRivers]

Back in the day, if you wanted to get the hottest girlfriend, you had to at least have a job, and your own car.

 

I thought all you had to do to get the hottest girlfriend was play the guitar (preferably in a band).

 

[Vito Corleone]

Problem is that there are no rock stars anymore. After the rock star excess of the 80s, the 'anti-rock-star' became the new hero in the 90s. That's was cool for a few minutes until people realized they didn't want to spend $75 to stand elbow-to-elbow with 50,000 other people all watching some introspective sensitive 'artist' gaze at his shoes for 2 hours.

 

Combine that with the death of the album format and so many other things for people to do with their $75 and 2 hours and you're at where we're at. There are a few big live acts in the pop world, and most of those have realized the biggest shows and money are in other countries. Modern country is about the only place right now where touring seems to exist much.

 

Whether that ever turns around or not, I dunno. But the world needs more rock stars first. Bring back the show and the spectacle.

[philboking]

Frankly I don't miss it; been there, done that, over & over, for 45 years. Time for something else....

 

I have noticed one thing, over the years: When there is a large group of people, their collective IQ is that of the dimmest guy there, divided by how many people are present.

[Lee Knight]

Nope. It's happening again... http://youtu.be/JRs5G5j0SEs

[Lee Knight]

Oh... And 17 years old ^^^

[AlamoJoe]

Times have changed...Simple statement, to be sure. But the fact is that there will simply be no more; Beatles, Hendrix, Stones, Bachs, Beethovens et al. I think all the ground has been broken. With the Computer Age, anyone can make music..Or something that passes for it....For a while anyway. Buy the software, turn your verse into something, find an audience. Thousands of songs are written and recorded..DAILY. Posted on the Interwebs. There are people that populate this very website, that write and record songs and works of music, worthy of audience, that will never reach the general populace of any country because they are simply, Lost in the Mix.

There's just too much stuff out there...The stuff that gets the attention of The Machine is the stuff you hear from the conduits it controls.

I'm not talking about the folks that come here...I think most of us here are a bit more discerning. But it's the general populace of this miserable ball that keeps the wheel of The Machine greased.

And they digest what they are fed.

By and large, they seem to enjoy the taste of crap.

 

[RockViolin]

Times have changed...Simple statement, to be sure. But the fact is that there will simply be no more; Beatles, Hendrix, Stones, Bachs, Beethovens et al. I think all the ground has been broken. With the Computer Age, anyone can make music..Or something that passes for it....For a while anyway. Buy the software, turn your verse into something, find an audience. Thousands of songs are written and recorded..DAILY. Posted on the Interwebs. There are people that populate this very website, that write and record songs and works of music, worthy of audience, that will never reach the general populace of any country because they are simply, Lost in the Mix.

There's just too much stuff out there...The stuff that gets the attention of The Machine is the stuff you hear from the conduits it controls.

I'm not talking about the folks that come here...I think most of us here are a bit more discerning. But it's the general populace of this miserable ball that keeps the wheel of The Machine greased.

And they digest what they are fed.

By and large, they seem to enjoy the taste of crap.

 

I agree for the most part Joe. I was looking at a very nice gear catalog the other day, and was wondering where is all the crazy, cool new music, where are the pioneers...and speaking of pioneers how many dirt pedals did Hendrix have to chose from? I had to admit to myself that I don't search much...but still...

 

Guys like Schoenberg and Webern went serial for a reason. As far as they could see, in every direction they looked there was no place else to go and nothing to do there. Should popular music be any different? Or will it always be enough to go back few decades and comb the hair to the other side, add some miniscule twist and dress it up different?

[WRGKMC]

Besides the fact the economy isn't so hot and people cut back on entertainment first, even before they

cut back their 6 packs, What I saw with my last bad was people just didn't appreciate live music like they used too.

 

It may be they are oversaturated to any music they want and have access to decent quality playback system.

Back when I first started playing out, most people listened to pop music on AM radio. The sound quality you get

from even an amateur band live is many times better than AM radio, and in most cases FM as well.

 

Maybe having kids listening to low quality MP3's isn't such a bad thing. At least they will appreciate

good sounding live music when they hear it. I think the whole Woodstock type thing that drew kids to pop

bands is gone. Even the bands don't get along with each other like they did in the past. This would make sense

because many are independent and in the past you had many bands from the same recording label tour together.

 

That's probably how I got to hear allot of bands for the first time. I think the first big concert I went to was Foghat, Poco,

and Johnny Winter. I never heard of Foghat and it was probably one of their first US tours. I later bought their albums and they

didn't come close to how well they played in the concert. Poco too was much better live then their albums, even though the rowdy

crowd booed them off stage after their third song.

 

There have been many occasions where I'd see a band live, then buy all their albums looking for those songs they played and couldn't

find them. The songs were done live only and the recording companies made allot of money on people collecting their albums.

 

You do see allot of nutty stuff go on at concerts too. I saw a guy fall from the upper balcony at the Philly Spectrum once.

The guy got up and was able to walk away. That's scary stuff. The big concerts where I lived were a good hour or two drive

from home too, so having a whole group of people getting together and driving into NY and spending some time there was

allot of fun too. Allot better than anything you could see locally which was often old fogie bands in local bars or really bad

cover bands playing at ultra low db levels.

 

[Screaming Stone]

The article and you mention the quote "Where's the cool bands". I always thought "the cool bands" were the new bands who were not (yet) charging the $150/ticket price.

 

I think what that article points out - fewer top-tier / arena bands bands touring this Summer - actually opens up opportunities for the cool bands. Instead of someone spending a couple hundred to see one or two bands, they can spend that same amount to go to a few smaller shows, or go to a fest and see a dozen bands.

 

Possibly the trend away from arena shows and towards fests (note popularity of Coachella, Lollapalooza, FMF, etc...) indicates the fans' desires to go to a more communal event where they can see and experience more, instead of sitting in a seat so far away you can't even see the stage.

[gdoubleyou]

When Forbe's lists Tiesto as the highest paid musician, you KNOW times have changed.

 

My son lives in Vegas and when they opened up Hakkasan, I found out.

 

Six floors of dance club, six world famous DJs in residence.

 

$50 in advance only, they sell tickets by gender to create the right mix.

 

With my baby-boomer eyes I prefer to artists in more intimate spaces, where I can have a nice cocktail and dinner.

[WRGKMC]

The article and you mention the quote "Where's the cool bands". I always thought "the cool bands" were the new bands who were not (yet) charging the $150/ticket price. I think what that article points out - fewer top-tier / arena bands bands touring this Summer - actually opens up opportunities for the cool bands. Instead of someone spending a couple hundred to see one or two bands, they can spend that same amount to go to a few smaller shows, or go to a fest and see a dozen bands. Possibly the trend away from arena shows and towards fests (note popularity of Coachella, Lollapalooza, FMF, etc...) indicates the fans' desires to go to a more communal event where they can see and experience more, instead of sitting in a seat so far away you can't even see the stage.

 

Well we used to call bands not making the big bucks underground bands back in the day. Cool Meant street wise or hip to what was going on.

Over the years the term has changed but most get its the opposite of being uncool, and I could name plenty of bands that fall into that category.

Underground can be great stuff artistically but not be mainstream pop. Many of my favorite bands were in that category. Some may have had

some brushed with mega stardom but you didn't have to stand in line to get tickets and could see them in smaller places at times too.

 

I don't know if I agree bands prefer playing small venues. The pay is a whole, whole lot less and the work is just as hard if not much harder because you're hauling a

all your own gear around, even if its on a bus and you have roadies. Maybe the people like it more, but I been to enough small events playing out myself for 45 years

and I'll take that big show with a big stage over a hundred small gigs any day of the week and I'm sure most bands would also. The sound you get playing in a big

place is incredible.

 

Of course it takes an audience too and that's what the article is about. Going back to small dives is like the last thing a musician wants to do because its the bottom ring

on the ladder. Maybe theres some musicians that prefer that, but I'd likely guess they never made it to the big gigs and don't have that first hand comparison.

[Vito Corleone]

Frankly I don't miss it; been there, done that, over & over, for 45 years. Time for something else....

 

Well, with all due respect, they'd be way off the mark if the goal was to try and draw people to concerts who have been there and done that over and over for 45 years.

 

 

 

[Vito Corleone]

Nope. It's happening again... http://youtu.be/JRs5G5j0SEs

 

If the kids love it and turn these guys in rock stars----then I think that's great. My only complaint is it sounds like what 17 year old kids were doing 35 years ago. If this is the "Next Big Thing" then maybe it's true that there IS no more new rock music to write.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Nope. It's happening again... http://youtu.be/JRs5G5j0SEs

 

I enjoyed listening to / watching that... it's not the greatest song I've ever heard, but they're obviously talented young musicians who can play.

[Folder]

There are lots of cool bands today but unfortunately many of them are not very popular.

 

It's interesting that One Direction (a boy band) is the only act in the article playing stadiums and most of the others are pop. A lot of these artists are not really bands. They are pop stars and a lot of their music is computer generated. Kids today are growing up in a world where it's all been done before and I'm not sure they appreciate musicianship the way previous generations did. I mean when I was a kid if you said in the future thousands of people would pay money to go to see a DJ in concert no one would have believed you.

 

One thing I noticed in the article is that all the successful bands on big tours are getting played on the radio. Where I live there is not much rock music on the radio anymore. Most of the new music that I and many of my friends listen to nobody has ever heard of because they don't get played on the radio. We find most of our music on the Internet.

 

But there is a lot of competition on the Internet so a lot of really cool bands have a hard time getting noticed. In order to tour you have to have an audience. Radio is still the number one source where most people find out about new artists. And it is the medium that creates rock stars.

[Vito Corleone]

There's a lot to unpack in that post, Folder. First of all, I don't know that kids EVER appreciated "musicianship", and to the degree any previous generations did, it's because other things attracted them to the music first. I can remember attending a few huge Day On The Green concerts back in the 70s. 10s of thousands of kids there. Most big fans of the bands that were playing. But I seriously doubt more a small percentage cared a whit about "musicianship". They were there, and were fans of the music in the first place, largely for the cultural experience.

 

Second of all... Yeah, rock doesn't get played much on the radio these days. Why would it? Most of it sounds like it could have been written decades ago. Why anyone expects kids to like music that sounds old completely escapes me. We had little interest in dated sounding genres when we were kids. Why should today's kids be any different?

 

Who are these "really cool" bands that radio doesn't touch? Bands that are actually new and progressive? Or bands that sound like they could have put out their music decades ago?

[RockViolin]

 

If the kids love it and turn these guys in rock stars----then I think that's great. My only complaint is it sounds like what 17 year old kids were doing 35 years ago. If this is the "Next Big Thing" then maybe it's true that there IS no more new rock music to write.

 

It's not so much that there's nary an un-rocked riff to be found maybe. Found a couple myself...as far as I know. It's the whole act, in one form or another, the whole rock star thing that's tired. (Yes, it is I, RockViolin that just said that. I'm a dad and over 50 now though...so maybe it's just me.) And there are so many other...um, quickly gratifying ways to be entertained now. Distractions and temptations take their share more than ever methinks.

 

 

[Folder]

There's a lot to unpack in that post, Folder. First of all, I don't know that kids EVER appreciated "musicianship", and to the degree any previous generations did, it's because other things attracted them to the music first. I can remember attending a few huge Day On The Green concerts back in the 70s. 10s of thousands of kids there. Most big fans of the bands that were playing. But I seriously doubt more a small percentage cared a whit about "musicianship". They were there, and were fans of the music in the first place, largely for the cultural experience.

 

Well I would have to disagree but the larger point I was trying to make was that music is all around us now and it's not that special anymore. WRGKMC said earlier in this thread "What I saw with my last band was people just didn't appreciate live music like they used too." I have been having this feeling for a while as well. Anybody can go on YouTube these days and see hundreds of great musicans playing just like Jimi Hendrix in their bedrooms. At the same time people are listening to music generated by computers. Not that there is anything wrong with that but the question I have is do people today even know the difference and do they care?

 

 

Second of all... Yeah, rock doesn't get played much on the radio these days. Why would it? Most of it sounds like it could have been written decades ago. Why anyone expects kids to like music that sounds old completely escapes me. We had little interest in dated sounding genres when we were kids. Why should today's kids be any different?

 

It doesn't get played on the radio yet people still like it and play it. Kids listen to rap and its been around thirty five years so I guess you could say that they are listening to music that sounds old. I was flipping thru the channels last night and on American Idol there was a girl singing a Jefferson Airplane song. From the fifties through the eighties musical styles and technology changed rapidly. The change has been less great in the last twenty years and I think we are at a point where styles are no longer neccessarily linked to a time period. I mean rock, punk, metal, rap, country etc... are still current genres that never went away.

 

Who are these "really cool" bands that radio doesn't touch? Bands that are actually new and progressive? Or bands that sound like they could have put out their music decades ago?

 

Well I'm not sure if these are new or progressive enough for you but I like Rooney, Starsailor, Junip, Kurt Vile, Fanny Franklin, Ty Segall and the Kaiser Cheifs none of whom I've ever heard on the radio. I also listen to a lot of local bands and unsigned artists. I like a lot of music that I discover on social media sites including Harmony Central. There are a lot of bedroom musicians out there making great music and I think there are a lot of artists out there who could have some success if only they had some radio exposure.

 

[Vito Corleone]

Well I would have to disagree but the larger point I was trying to make was that music is all around us now and it's not that special anymore. WRGKMC said earlier in this thread "What I saw with my last band was people just didn't appreciate live music like they used too." I have been having this feeling for a while as well. Anybody can go on YouTube these days and see hundreds of great musicans playing just like Jimi Hendrix in their bedrooms. At the same time people are listening to music generated by computers. Not that there is anything wrong with that but the question I have is do people today even know the difference and do they care?

 

It's not special anymore because the artists aren't making it special. Hendrix was cool in 1967 because he was doing stuff nobody had done before with his instrument and with the genre of music he was playing and reaching young people in a new way. That every guitarist is still trying to sound like Hendrix is the problem, not the solution. Art has to evolve to remain relevant. Old movies are great, and I know lots of young kids who still like to see an old movie once in awhile. But if everything at the theater was still in black and white, they'd all have shut down years ago.

 

 

It doesn't get played on the radio yet people still like it and play it. Kids listen to rap and its been around thirty five years so I guess you could say that they are listening to music that sounds old. I was flipping thru the channels last night and on American Idol there was a girl singing a Jefferson Airplane song. From the fifties through the eighties musical styles and technology changed rapidly. The change has been less great in the last twenty years and I think we are at a point where styles are no longer neccessarily linked to a time period. I mean rock, punk, metal, rap, country etc... are still current genres that never went away.

 

Yeah, that's my point. From the 50s through the 80s, while there were occasionally flashes of "retro", most of the stuff that was popular sounded like nothing ever did before it. Somewhere in the 90s it became ultra-cool to sound like older bands and we've never recovered from that. The fact that these old styles are still what passes for "current" is a big part of why music isn't special anymore to young kids. It's not what is defining their culture the way it did for us. There's nothing wrong with liking older music and singing an Airplane song on TV or whatever. But what made the music of our generation "special" is that it was OURS. It didn't belong to anyone else. It didn't sound like anyone else. It wasn't something our parents might like.

 

 

Well I'm not sure if these are new or progressive enough for you but I like Rooney, Starsailor, Junip, Kurt Vile, Fanny Franklin, Ty Segall and the Kaiser Cheifs none of whom I've ever heard on the radio. I also listen to a lot of local bands and unsigned artists. I like a lot of music that I discover on social media sites including Harmony Central. There are a lot of bedroom musicians out there making great music and I think there are a lot of artists out there who could have some success if only they had some radio exposure.

 

I'm 52 years old. Whether it's new or progressive enough for ME isn't the question. Is it something that the younger generation wants to embrace and own and does it speak to them in a way that nothing else does? That's what matters. When musical artists figure out how to do that, then they'll start packing stadiums again. Whether they do it with computers or guitars is irrelevant.

[Folder]

 

Somewhere in the 90s it became ultra-cool to sound like older bands and we've never recovered from that.

 

I don't exactly see it that way. I think the grunge and alternative bands decided they didn't like the bombastic (cheesy) production values of the eighties and the alternative was a more "dry and natural" sound which also happened to be the sound of classic rock. Both the eighties and nineties bands were influenced by sixties and seventies rock but it was the alternative rockers who rejected the eighties sound and (playing styles). The "dry and natural" sound has stood the test of time because I think many people think it sounds better is considered to be a timeless sound.

 

 

It's not special anymore because the artists aren't making it special. Hendrix was cool in 1967 because he was doing stuff nobody had done before with his instrument and with the genre of music he was playing and reaching young people in a new way. That every guitarist is still trying to sound like Hendrix is the problem, not the solution. Art has to evolve to remain relevant.

 

 

Like I said in my original post "Kids today are growing up in a world where it's all been done before" and maybe we are in a time where innovation is slowing. If everything has been done before then where is there to go? But I agree with your basic point. I mean I loved Nirvana when they came out but in some ways I think they both saved and destroyed rock and roll at the same time. But I don't agree that older music forms should disappear. I think some basic templates have been set in the last fifty or more years that will be around for a long time if not forever. I think there will always be kids who want to get together and bang on drums and play guitars.

 

 

I'm 52 years old. Whether it's new or progressive enough for ME isn't the question. Is it something that the younger generation wants to embrace and own and does it speak to them in a way that nothing else does? That's what matters. When musical artists figure out how to do that, then they'll start packing stadiums again. Whether they do it with computers or guitars is irrelevant.

 

This is where I think we are not seeing things the same way. My problem is not so much with current music as it is with the current music business model. It's sad to me that a lot of young (and old for that matter) talented musicians have been effectively locked out. Just like Wal-Mart can come in and put mom and pop out of business, I feel something similar has happened to the music business. When you have only three major record companies in cahoots with a handful of media conglomerates they are in total control. A lot of people talk about how they don't care about radio and don't listen to it and that there are other sources to discover new music and that's fine. But I still believe that being played on the radio is the most effective way to reach the most people. Also there is a sense of community that comes from listening to the radio. But when people are all sitting around listening to their own personal playlists on their ear buds that community is fractured and an artist's potential audience is diminished. When an artist has a small audience then they can't go on big tours. Of course radio is in the business to make money and serve the least common denominator and it may never change but I can still complain about it can't I?

[Vito Corleone]

 

I don't exactly see it that way. I think the grunge and alternative bands decided they didn't like the bombastic (cheesy) production values of the eighties and the alternative was a more "dry and natural" sound which also happened to be the sound of classic rock. Both the eighties and nineties bands were influenced by sixties and seventies rock but it was the alternative rockers who rejected the eighties sound and (playing styles). The "dry and natural" sound has stood the test of time because I think many people think it sounds better is considered to be a timeless sound.

I'm not talking about production styles or how much reverb is on a snare drum. I'm talking about the basic way the music is written and performed. But as far as "standing the test of time" goes....seems to me that if it was really doing that, we wouldn't even be having this conversation....

 

 

Like I said in my original post "Kids today are growing up in a world where it's all been done before" and maybe we are in a time where innovation is slowing. If everything has been done before then where is there to go? But I agree with your basic point. I mean I loved Nirvana when they came out but in some ways I think they both saved and destroyed rock and roll at the same time. But I don't agree that older music forms should disappear. I think some basic templates have been set in the last fifty or more years that will be around for a long time if not forever. I think there will always be kids who want to get together and bang on drums and play guitars.

 

Old stuff never completely goes away, nor should it. There are still symphonies playing Mozart. But it isn't what is moving the art form forward or speaking for the current generation. Are they growing up in a world where "it's all been done before"? Of course not. The only stuff that has been done before is that the stuff that has been done before. Coming up with new stuff is just a matter of creativity, imagination and maybe some technology to help.

 

 

This is where I think we are not seeing things the same way. My problem is not so much with current music as it is with the current music business model. It's sad to me that a lot of young (and old for that matter) talented musicians have been effectively locked out. Just like Wal-Mart can come in and put mom and pop out of business, I feel something similar has happened to the music business. When you have only three major record companies in cahoots with a handful of media conglomerates they are in total control. A lot of people talk about how they don't care about radio and don't listen to it and that there are other sources to discover new music and that's fine. But I still believe that being played on the radio is the most effective way to reach the most people. Also there is a sense of community that comes from listening to the radio. But when people are all sitting around listening to their own personal playlists on their ear buds that community is fractured and an artist's potential audience is diminished. When an artist has a small audience then they can't go on big tours. Of course radio is in the business to make money and serve the least common denominator and it may never change but I can still complain about it can't I?

 

Does anybody even listen to radio anymore? Especially younger people?