Sales of Music Plunge Sharply

[Super 8]

What happened to the part where the person creating the music gets money?

There aren't many people making money off of their music, and of those who are, most aren't making very much.

I understand artists wanting to make a living from their music, but that has always been more myth than reality. I can understand artists wanting to control distribution, but honestly, how much control do you have when you sign away the Rights of your songs to a record company? Copyrights should be no more than 5-7 years before they are public domain anyway.

Music is viral now. 10 years ago you couldn't get your songs heard. Now you can't stop them from being heard. Gosh, what a dilemma!

[Spin Cycle]

Jotown you're certainly correct for the present. I was saying that, if all goes well, the situation I described is where we are headed. Forgive my youthful idealistic fantasies.

[Lancaster]

I take this as a step in the right direction- away from marketing schemes and repetitive flash-in-the-pan pop music and back towards music made for music's sake. Thank God, after 40 or so years of being fed recycled ideas people are beginning to see the light.

 

Yup.The industry must accept that the decline of the quality of the products being offered accounts for a lot of the drop.

 

Produce repetitive ,formulaic, disposable pap long enough and people will realize they can save their money.

 

Downloads? I'm sure many people d/l some of this current stuff , listen to a minute of it and then delete it. It's all the same, only the names change and how hawt they look on TV.

 

Apparently looking hawt on TV doesnt necessarily lead to a long-term career with steady sales of CD after CD.

 

Imagine that.

[aliensporebomb]

Chris Doughtry, American Idol and Dreamgirls is not what I'm listening to.

 

The record companies lost it eons ago and never catered to what I like to

listen to.

 

But a quick look at some of the labels involved of the material I do like to

listen to shows labels such as Monsway, Belle Alliance, Jimco,

Magna Carta, InsideOut, CMP, Silence, Day Eight, ECM, DGM,

and very few major labels. It's just the way it is.

[franknputer]

Well, look on the bright side: Record companies are working night and day, coming up with innovative new ways to exploit the digital revolution. For example, once they realized that the future was digital, they...uh...well, they...uh...hoped Apple would sell a bunch on iTunes, and they also...well...they decided to...uh...oh, never mind. They have no digital strategy. None. They just keep thinking they're going to sell CDs forever, preferably re-packaged versions of recordings they've already sold multiple times on vinyl, cassette, CD, remastered, as part of a boxed set, as a package with a DVD, etc.

 

Bingo! They're killing their Golden Goose, and aren't even smart enough to see it. Screw 'em - they deserve to fail.

[Lancaster]

. The lack of innovative thinking displayed by the record companies is appalling. If Steve Jobs or Bill Gates had been equally unintelligent in terms of rolling with the punches, Apple and Microsoft would be distant footnotes in computer history.

Well put. They had it easy for so many decades starting in the sixties they had developed no capacity for creative thinking and how to deal with real and/or percieved threats to their business.

 

Dont forget, Apple had to practically beg the majors to go along with iTunes.Apple agreed to take such a tiny cut of the pie because it was the only way to get these dinosaurs to wake up and look at the calendar.

 

And yeah, I think I'll pass on the Re-re-re-re-re-re-mastered/packaged 10 CD compilation of So And So's Greatest Hit. I'll just run the original through 20 compressors myself and fake it,thanks.

[Cry Logic]

IMHO people will look back on the 20th century as an aberration in regard to
music and movie sales...and the era of the "megastar".
The decline in sales in both these industries is not wierd or scary.
What was scary is how the big corporations took over both industries and
raped the consumer for billions of dollars, while minimizing what they
paid to the Artist, sometimes to the point of downright criminality.
And how they put all their backing behind a few "megastars" to the detriment
of all other "struggling" artists!

Another thing....the CD format is dead.
The mere act of having to take a CD out of it's cover, insert it into a
mechanical player (either standalone or in a computer) and play it
mechanically is simply old fashioned, outdated and soooooo pass

[Cry Logic]

I am sorry but you are living in fantasy land if you think that artists will be able to survive financially by giving their music away.

 

 

Maybe the whole concept of making "megabucks" from music is fading?

How did musicians make money before recording and record companies

came along?

They played for it for of course..

It's a bit different now, in the digital age,actually better, in that we can put

recordings of our live performances up on the web.. or even broadcast live

to the net...

So you give away examples of your music to attract people to your live performances...

You give away a free MP3 of a couple of tunes to attract people to your

website where there are other tunes and other merchandise, or tickets

to your next show for sale.....

 

Is that such a crazy idea?

Is it really fantasy land?

Or was the era of the superstar and million dollar albums the real fantasy?

[Cry Logic]

1- Most new music is crap, Just listen to the {censored} that is played on satellite radio. Who wants to buy that of what they are already hearing/payig for on satellite?

I disagree.. I'm 53 and came up in the so called "Golden Era" and I think there's plenty of good music around..

2- Personally I have too much music to listen to and I`m sure most of us are at the same saturation level. So the music industry is now feeling the effects of their own price gouging because the kids are downloading from all kinds of internet sources. Oh well ! If the CDs were less than the 17 bucks they keep jamming us for they might sell more. A frigggin new CD should be less than 10 bucks. I don`t feel sorry for them.

 

Music itself is now less important than it was in the 50's 60's 70's ...there are many other forms of entertainment now that compete for

the consumer dollar ...we all have to get used to the new way.... live or die by it.....

3- Rock is almost dead. The hand full of legends keeping it alive will be in their 70s & 80s soon.

So what? Rock had it's day... life moves on...did you really expect "Rock" to just go on forever?

4- The music "industry" is led by non-visionaries who promote {censored} only

Some good stuff gets through. IMHO it's the same as it ever was in any creative endeavor....

90% of it is crap, 8% is OK, 2% is golden....

What else is new?

[Cry Logic]

Musicians and fans may just have to change their attitude to the way
the whole business is run at the moment....

Smaller venues may come to the fore again.... stadium rock and other
huge venues may even be a thing of the past.
What about a small intimate venue where a live band is performing to a
crowd of say.. 50 to 500 people... but it's broadcast to millions on the net,
either live.. or as a podcast maybe?

What about selling recordings directly to fans at the gig?
Not necessarily even on CD .... that medium is dead....
but straight on to flash memory stick/iPod/Mp3 Player for example?
The fans rock up to the gig, have a ball, then walk over to the
dispenser where, for a reasonable fee, they load just the songs
they like onto their memory stick/iPod/Mp3 Player and maybe even some
others from other bands as well.
Acts may form co-operatives where they join together to finance such
operations and at each venue the music dispenser has every band in that
co-operative loaded up read for instant transfer to flash stick.

Venues may have to bear the responsibility of providing the sound system
and even some technical crew to take the load off of touring performers..
Or even the "Music Dispensers" I mention above.

The band rocks up to the gig, sticks their flash stick/iPod/Mp3 Player into
the dispenser and loads it up, then sets up and plays... the music may stay
on that particular dispenser depending on the arrangement with the venue.
So on any particular night there may be a selection of bands that have
played at that venue available for instant transfer to the fans flash stick/iPod/Mp3 Player...
The "Dispenser" may even be "pre-loaded" with music from up & coming acts,
which might act as advertising and incentive for people at the current gig
to come back and see those bands as well...
The "Dispensers"could even act as "Juke Boxes", playing music from the
"library" between acts or on a night when there is no live performance.
"Dispensers" could be linked via the net and swap "libraries'.
And every time someone buys a song the $ is paid direct into the artists
account ... no need for a middleman..
Coffee shops and restaurants and other places that don't have
facilities for "live" music could link into the system and have a "Dispenser"
hooked into the system... each one selling tunes, 1 at a time or many.
Each time the $ clicking over into the artists accounts.
A big corporation may seize the opportunity and buy up a huge chunk of
this "Dispenser Network" and the whole system becomes "corporate" again.
Whatever ....
The main thing to remember is, the CD is dead or dying.
Music is now software and needs a new distribution model.
And no moving parts!!!!

The internet is affecting many other areas of life as well as the music biz.
All over the planet companies are facing up to new methods of selling and
distribution.
Retail outlets are receding while net based warehousing with direct to
consumer sales via a web site is proliferating....
Businesses of all types and sizes are being faced daily with challenges that
simply didn't exist only a few years ago...
Some will resize and survive ...others will merge .. some will take on new
ways of doing things ... new technology etc etc ....others will go broke...
It's happened before and it will happen again.
The only absolute certainty in this existence is "Things will change."
If they didn't , Dinosaurs would still walk the earth and we would still all be
cavemen.....

Adapt or die

Stop thinking negatively and start thinking "what's possible?"

I am sorry but you are living in fantasy land if you think that artists will be able to survive financially by giving their music away. This is a myth and a falacy. CD sales (or digital music sales) are a part of how artists make their living. Many, many artists break even or lose money when touring. You have to make all of your revenue streams profitable. Giving your records away is a disaster of a business model. How will you pay to record your music (or buy the gear to) if you don't make any money from your recordings? From your concert ticket sales? When your tour is losing money? You have to rethink this model and talk to people who are really out there trying to make a living in the music business and not just hobbyists who have a day job.

[sventvkg]

IMHO people will look back on the 20th century as an aberration in regard to music and movie sales...and the era of the "megastar". The decline in sales in both these industries is not wierd or scary. What was scary is how the big corporations took over both industries and raped the consumer for billions of dollars, while minimizing what they paid to the Artist, sometimes to the point of downright criminality. And how they put all their backing behind a few "megastars" to the detriment of all other "struggling" artists! Another thing....the CD format is dead. The mere act of having to take a CD out of it's cover, insert it into a mechanical player (either standalone or in a computer) and play it mechanically is simply old fashioned, outdated and soooooo pass

[philbo]

The only 2 CDs I bought in 2006:

One from The Mates, from Macle (a forum member)

One from a girl out playing for tips on Main St. during the town's "Pumpkin Festival" - - She was very good, and had fresh sounds, and was a class act. (She ended up hiring my studio for quite a bit of demo CD work).

I saw no need to feed any already-fat label execs with my hard earned money. I only buy independent music - - there is a whole WORLD of excellent music out there. I don't even have to search for it any more, I just end up stumbling across it...

My point: The labels are walking corpses. They don't realize it yet. But the day is coming, and soon.

When that day comes, I guess radio stations will have to bribe each other instead of leaching off the payola industry. But I still don't believe I'll live to see the day commercial radio actually plays decent music again - - it's too far corrupted, festering in it's own cancerous juices.

[Jotown]

Jotown you're certainly correct for the present. I was saying that, if all goes well, the situation I described is where we are headed. Forgive my youthful idealistic fantasies.

Hey Spin; sorry if I came off as rude.

Its just that we have been having this discussion in one form or another for 5 years now and I have been saying the same things all along.

I know two very good bands in my market (Detroit) who have independent CD's out; one with a label and the other on their own label.

They have both been on the bubble for a couple of years now. They have both been touring to support their CD's and build their fan base this winter.

They are getting great reviews and responses but the cost of touring is high. They are just above the break even point and if it wasn't for the CD sales they do at their shows they would be losing money.

It is easy to preach anarchy and down with the record biz; but if you are in the record biz you better think twice before you start a fire on your own boat.

[realtrance]

I don't think the music industry is crashing anywhere near as hard as it needs to, to reset the whole environment.

 

I'm not saying this as an advocate of digital download, by any means. I'm still a traditional CD buyer, and there's been plenty of reasonably good stuff, if not great stuff, to get, at the rate I get it: Tom Waits' "Orphans," Mastodon's CD, stuff like that, recent, and good.

 

But I think we've reached a point where all the official media channels, in almost every medium -- magazines, newspapers, television, internet broadcast -- have reached a level of tedious, mediocre garbage culture that is literally reversing Timothy Leary's '60's slogan "Tune in, Turn on, Drop out"-- well except for maybe the last part.

 

I'm totally tuned out of everything, and the irony is, every now and then I "tune in" to see what I've been missing, and I can literally go for about 3-5 YEARS of being tuned out and then tune back in and find about a day's worth of stuff to shop for I'd be interested in. And I'm no old fogey only interested in listening to Mahler, the Beatles and Bob Dylan, either.

 

This is increasingly the case across the board. The iCrap is a nice little fetish-fad, a convenience toy like cell phones that once you've gotten over... you realize, what the hell, better than a walkman with CD? not so much. Certainly not for the price, when it dies and you have to throw it away 'cause you can't replace the battery, except at an exorbitant price.

 

Cell phones have reduced the ability to have an actual conversation on a phone to zilch, zero, because of the crap quality. I had an easier time talking to people over in Asia in the '60's on hissy long distance.

 

TV's an utter wasteland.

 

What's in the movies lately? Nothing much. Some visual extravaganzas, but good actors, with great dialogue and a compelling story? The closest to that I've seen since 2001 was Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth," and I don't consider Gore a particularly good and charismatic actor, far from it!

 

Any GREAT novels lately? No.

 

I think our entire culture has basically lost inspiration. Education's been going rapidly downhill for at least two generations. Popular understanding of science is virtually nil, people were smarter in the 1700's.

 

It's basically the end of one civilization, all told. I'm not sure there's anything on the way next except maybe the cockroaches.

 

Global warming may prove a blessing in disguise, if it helps things change rapidly.

[Phil O'Keefe]

 

Indie sales could be down too, for all we know. Unless (or until) there's a reliable way to track them, they really shouldn't be factored into the equation. Best, Geoff

 

 

 

I agree that those sales could be up or down compared to last year, but I do think that there has been significant growth in the number of independent releases vs label releases over the past decade or so. Some artists are deciding that it is better to go their own way and stay independent, thus retaining artistic control and a larger share of the profits, than to sign to a label that may not even have a serious interest in promoting anything beyond what they feel they can market to the masses. IMO, the fact that many labels are "swinging for the fences" and trying to sign mega-hit potential material that they can market to the maximum amount of customers (the "least common denominator" theory) is hurting the industry.

 

I think it would be possible to sell a lot of units in other genres. You might not get multi-platinum results, but if the budgets are kept in check and reasonable, you can spread your investments around to more releases, in more genres, and still make a reasonable profit. IOW, invest a smaller amount per album, but put out more albums, across a larger range of genres. Offer something for everyone instead of trying to get everyone interested in the same thing. If manufacturing costs are the issue, sign more acts to download / digital only deals.

 

The industry needs to shed the old paradigms and start thinking outside the box. IMO, the record industry has got to get creative if they want to survive.

[Anderton]

IMO, the record industry has got to get creative if they want to survive.

 

 

That's why I'm so glad they're working so hard on coming up with a really creative digital strategy! Well, they are...aren't they?

[jbutler1982]

"realtrance", you are out of your mind.

Everyone who says there isnt good music now is nuts. There is plenty of good music. Sure, it might be different, but come on. "No" good albums over the entire year? Anyone who says they didnt buy an album over the last year, fair enough, but that is a far cry from "no" music being good. Theres a ton of great music out there currently. I might not share the same tastes as some, but theres plenty of music for me... Ryan Adams, Old Crow Medicine Show, John Lisi / Delta Funk... theres great music out there, you just have to not be lazy.

There were also solid movies, books and TV. I dont watch much TV outside of Curb your Enthusaism, but movies in the last year? Children of Men was great, Pan's Labyrinth, Casino Royale, Zodiac, Offside... I could go on and on and on...

Same with good novels. Saying there are "no" good novels recently is ludicrous. Read Erickson's Malazan Book of the Fallen series (if you like fantasy...) and tell me you can put it down.

Art today is fantastic, at least i think. I think if you are going to issue statements like "there are *no* good ______ (

-John

[RickTaylor]

 

Person downloads music, person enjoys music, person pays money directly to the artist in ticket sales at their concert. This does two things. A) Cuts out the money-grubbing scum{censored}s from the music industry and B) ensures that only bands that can actually put on an entertaining show make any cash.

 

 

What if said musician has no desire to show, tour, etc, etc and would rather simply sell their product like any other craftsman or artist?

[RickTaylor]

Music is viral now. 10 years ago you couldn't get your songs heard. Now you can't stop them from being heard. Gosh, what a dilemma!

 

You can get them heard and feel an immense joy and pride in the fact that many people have listened to your music as you walk to your job at Starbucks?

 

"Would you like sprinkles?"

[Greenshoe]

I haven't posted here in ages (haven't visited this board in ages actually), but this thread caught my eye.

 

Anyhow, the biggest reason for the decline in record sales is quite simple actually.

 

We live in an era of playlists, not albums. Especially those 25 and under, playlists are the ONLY thing they are really familiar with anymore. And labels are still pushing albums.

 

For the average listener, it's all about playlists (however organized or disorganized it is). That's how people listen to music on their iPod, on their computer, in their car, etc. Of course there are musicians/music fans like us who *drink* every decibel of every track from our favorite artist, but the average listener doesn't do that anymore. And when you're talking about the industry as a whole, it's the average listener that drives sales.

 

What this means is that the playlist is king. And the album format and rock star are dying (or soon to be dead). But labels are still pushing albums and rock stars, when frankly, the average listener just doesn't give a {censored} - they want a good playlist to fit their mood, to help them pass the time in the subway, act as background music while they do their homework, etc.

 

It's not about piracy. Or crappy music today vs. great music yesterday. Or consolidation of radio. (Although all three don't help sales, I don't think any of them collectively are the primary drivers of what's happening).

 

It's simply that people are not listening to music in the same way that they used to. No matter what labels do, consumers will find ways to get the music they want in a way that they want - either purchasing singles on iTunes (or whatever subscription service), or simply downloading it on any P2P for free.

 

The problem is, the labels see online/digital sales as a supplement to CD/physical sales, rather than the other way around. To average consumers, digital mp3 is the norm now, and labels need to find a business model where digital sales IS the norm for the labels. Of course, it's easier said than done, but they'll figure it out eventually when CDs continue to plunge to the point where they absolutely have to change. It just may not be the same labels you see today that will emerge as the big fish (i.e. will any indie label out there be the next Motown?).

 

With playlists, it's hard to say who wields the power over the consumer. The rock star is dying. But music will still be around. In fact, there's more music out there than ever before - from the majors to the indies to the bedroom musicians. There is a lot of crap (but there's always tons of crap) - the difference is, with recording costs coming down and having an internet connection allows you to thereotically broadcast your music to anyone anywhere (free distribution), there sheer volume of great, good, and bad music is simply overwhelming. An average listener only has so many hours in a day.

 

The folks who can figure out how to be the tastemakers and curators will be the new "rock stars" - those whose playlists or opinions are so highly regarded by listeners that rather than go out and search billions of songs to painstakingly create their own playlists, they are willing to pay a "respected" curator to compile playlists for them. In many ways, websites like Pitchforkmedia not only can make or break "indie" artists with their reviews - I'm willing to bet that many an indie hipster uses that site as a means to compile their own playlist of songs of all the great indie music out there.

 

Which leads to another point - something that may have been discussed already. In the age of playlists, iPods, mp3s, etc. music isn't viewed in the same way as it was in the 1990s and earlier. These days, music is a very personal thing - which is helped by playlists. Music is no longer a communal thing. It's like books. It's a solitary activity, or if you are listening in public, it's a background activity. As such, there's less of a "community" around a certain band or style of music, since the average listener has tastes that likely run the gamut and are a hodgepodge of genres and eras. Social groups are no longer defined by what kind of music you listen to. Especially amongst the guys, it's being replaced by video games and spectator sports (which has only continued to grow in popularity).

 

Of course, what about the older folks? The theory is that true "music lovers" are in the minority, and as the average consumer gets older, they will listen to even LESS music (let alone being open to new music) simply because they don't have the time or inclination. Yes, there are older folks who will continue to listen to new music, but they are a minority. Not the average suburban adult. And it's getting to "joe average" which constitutes a mass market (or a big market). So it's not about making 90% of your sales from 10% of your artist roster, but maybe something like 50% of your revenue from 50% of your roster (or something where rather than having a label of superstars, you have a greater mix of successful niche artists -- which isn't that different than book publishing).

 

I'm rambling so I'll stop.

[RickTaylor]

 

Which leads to another point - something that may have been discussed already. In the age of playlists, iPods, mp3s, etc. music isn't viewed in the same way as it was in the 1990s and earlier. These days, music is a very personal thing - which is helped by playlists. Music is no longer a communal thing. It's like books. It's a solitary activity, or if you are listening in public, it's a background activity. As such, there's less of a "community" around a certain band or style of music, since the average listener has tastes that likely run the gamut and are a hodgepodge of genres and eras. Social groups are no longer defined by what kind of music you listen to. Especially amongst the guys, it's being replaced by video games and spectator sports (which has only continued to grow in popularity).

 

 

...And I thought 1984 painted a depressing picture.

 

Where are you from, by the way? When was the last time you toured the clubs in a major city?

[Greenshoe]

Oh, I forgot one other thing.

Another common refrain is how live performance will save music.

It won't.

The top grossing concert acts cater to Gen-Xers and older.

You are not going to have another artist again who can sell out Shea Stadium, MSG, etc. Not because their music sucks, but because in the era of playlists, no band will be mass market (think niche; example - Arcade Fire - no matter how popular they get, they will be playing to 3,000 - 5,000 seat concerts). And once labels figure out that it isn't about rock stars and more about a roster of medium-sized or niche acts, this wil be even more the case.

Sadly, Bruce Springsteen, The Eagles, Rolling Stones, Madonna, Paul McCartney, etc. are the last of the mega-acts who sell millions and can play sold out mega-stadiums.

And given the economics of touring, it's REALLY hard to make money as a tiny act. Traditionally, it was seen as a money loser or a way to market your CDs, and not the other way around. And the economics of touring has only gotten more expensive over the last decade. The future is about festivel or package tours where you have a bunch of niche acts touring together to small- and medium-sized venues.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

It's all about the music. Not about the rock star.

[DirtyBird]

Or maybe people's ability to hear music that isnt forced on them by the entertainment cartels has allowed them to expand into more obscure genres.

If people can have the access to listen to ANYTHING they want, then perhaps they will discover artists/bands/music they otherwise wouldnt have.

The whole flavor of the week money-making formula the RIAA has enjoyed for so long is coming back to bite them in the ass.

[Greenshoe]

 

You mean the best search engine will win? Google will be the new tastemaker..? People who can afford the best placement will define our music for us? ...And I thought 1984 painted a depressing picture. Where are you from, by the way? When was the last time you toured the clubs in a major city?

 

 

I'm not saying that nobody goes to see concerts anymore. It's just that they don't go to the same degree that they did in the 1990s and earlier. Ask anyone who's been around for that long, and most will tell you that the kids these days just don't go see live acts in the same numbers.

 

While the nostalgia acts (Billy Joel, Elton John, Cream, The Police, Rolling Stones, etc.) have no problems selling out stadiums (concert acts which are geared towards boomers and older Gen-Xers), the current acts like The Killers, Linkin Park, or whatever big act that is a hit with kids these days have trouble filling their venues. You may say that the current acts suck, but sucky bands in the old days at their peak were able to sell out routinely (exhibit: the hair bands like Poison, Warrant, etc. were able to rake it in on huge stadium tours in the '80s).

 

Again, kids don't go to concerts in the same numbers like they used to. Doesn't mean that Arcade Fire can't sell out everywhere they go. Or that the Arctic Monkeys can sell out in 15 minutes. But they aren't playing football stadiums or big arenas (and if they are, large sections are curtained off). They are playing the 2,000 - 5,000 seat venues, which is medium.

 

And you add in the fact that hip hop is a good chunk of what sells - and it's a genre that isn't about touring, nor is the "culture" of hip hop about seeing concerts - it's about DJs and clubs. You can say that's bad, good or whatever - but that's how it is.

[RickTaylor]

 

I'm not saying that nobody goes to see concerts anymore. It's just that they don't go to the same degree that they did in the 1990s and earlier. Ask anyone who's been around for that long, and most will tell you that the kids these days just don't go see live acts in the same numbers. While the nostalgia acts (Billy Joel, Elton John, Cream, The Police, Rolling Stones, etc.) have no problems selling out stadiums (concert acts which are geared towards boomers and older Gen-Xers), the current acts like The Killers, Linkin Park, or whatever big act that is a hit with kids these days have trouble filling their venues. You may say that the current acts suck, but sucky bands in the old days at their peak were able to sell out routinely (exhibit: the hair bands like Poison, Warrant, etc. were able to rake it in on huge stadium tours in the '80s). Again, kids don't go to concerts in the same numbers like they used to. Doesn't mean that Arcade Fire can't sell out everywhere they go. Or that the Arctic Monkeys can sell out in 15 minutes. But they aren't playing football stadiums or big arenas (and if they are, large sections are curtained off). They are playing the 2,000 - 5,000 seat venues, which is medium. And you add in the fact that hip hop is a good chunk of what sells - and it's a genre that isn't about touring, nor is the "culture" of hip hop about seeing concerts - it's about DJs and clubs. You can say that's bad, good or whatever - but that's how it is.

 

 

http://www.doubledoor.com/shows.php

http://gochicago.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=gochicago&cdn=travel&tm=3&f=20&su=p531.25.152.ip_p284.7.420.ip_p284.5.420.ip_p531.23.420.ip_&tt=11&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.metrochicago.com/

http://www.tickets4u.com/SearchResults.asp?VenueName=House%20of%20Blues%20Chicago

 

...An example or two.

 

Personally, I like many current acts. I really don't see that there's any real difference in djs playing records 2o years ago and djs playing records today.

 

As far as tastemakers go... how many people {general public} will look past yahoo, Rolling Stone, or even the advertisements on tv or in their local paper? That's your tastemakers. The 'net had the power to change that but it's all been bought by the same folk that have always controlled it. Don't kid yourself.