Where are the MySpace superstars?

[sabriel9v]

dean has more opinions than gigs.

 

This is also one of the smartest things I've read in this forum

[HKSblade1]

well I just roll on by most musicians hosting at MySpace and so do most of the people I know. Some use Itunes and other mediums.

 

The best bands or the ones I have taken seriously enough have a MySp account but LINK to their OWN site domain with NO sponsored garbage like Free webz and so on.

 

I think more people take groups seriously enough when they see a nice well laid out website (private) that is not tucows, tripod or other pop up trash embedded. I for one think more highly of the group that has the means to support a well made site. MySp is just too overloaded with POD shredder one man band or 13 yr olds to sift through. You get that enough on Youtube looking up REAL videos that are layered with attempts from inspiring 10 yr olds.

 

For me, it's the clutter of My Space that makes bands seem less inviting and taken less than serious unless they have links to unsponsored free hosting, I just can't take them serious enough to listen.

 

If a band can't spend less than $100 for a domain and a web host, I won't take them seriously. Free hosts and popup ad sites lend less to their credibility.

[NewWorldMan]

 

There in fact are not many superstars being created today. I have said this repeatedly. Name one act or person of superstar status doff the top of your head that has emerged in the past 10 years. There may be a few-50 Cent, JayZ, John Mayer, Amy Winehouse (who will unfortunately be tossed into the Brittney-Anna Nicole-Lindsey Lohan category of being more known for her train wreck life than her talent). You can name some, but you really have to think about it. Names of the current 'superstars' that immediately jump out at most people are those from the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

 

 

Well, there's quite a few...you mentioned 50 Cent, Jay Z, John Mayer, Amy Winehouse, etc. To that list, you can also add Alicia Keys, Nickelback, Miley Cyrus (crazy as that is), Black Eyes Peas, Fergie, Justin Timberlake, Carrie Underwood and the American Idol crew, Linkin Park, Kanye West, Foo Fighters didn't hit stride until the late 90's, etc...the list goes on.

[HKSblade1]

 

Well, there's quite a few...you mentioned 50 Cent, Jay Z, John Mayer, Amy Winehouse, etc. To that list, you can also add Alicia Keys, Nickelback, Miley Cyrus (crazy as that is), Black Eyes Peas, Fergie, Justin Timberlake, Carrie Underwood and the American Idol crew, Linkin Park, Kanye West, Foo Fighters didn't hit stride until the late 90's, etc...the list goes on.

 

 

It wasnt myspace that did it. Most went on after media recognition.

Same as artists that jumped to MP3.com yrs back. They did not start there, they just went there for more visibility and ruined an Indie based no label related operation.

[NewWorldMan]

 

It wasnt myspace that did it. Most went on after media recognition. Same as artists that jumped to MP3.com yrs back. They did not start there, they just went there for more visibility and ruined an Indie based no label related operation.

 

 

He didn't say anything about Myspace. He asked to be named "one act or person of superstar status off the top of your head that has emerged in the past 10 years...

[soundwave106]

 

BTW- I agree with Dean, and have made his point before, too: Superstars are a result of shared cultural experience that are one facet of a cohesive society. Once society loses all of it's common experiences and values, it quickly begins to break down, which is what Balkanization does. We're a long ways away from that, but music is one more way in which the culture is becoming isolated into genre and lifestyle 'tribes'.

 

 

MHO, MySpace is not going to replace superstardom, and superstardom is not going to go away. Think of MySpace and other Internet aspsects as more replacing or supplementing all those tape-trading networks, zines and photocopied flyers of the good old days in the alternative underground.

 

You heard all these "superstar" bands that people mentioned on MySpace, and you saw how most of them ended up being up-and-coming niche artists targeting mostly youth genres? That's *exactly* what MySpace is best for.

 

The flip side of the coin is that, for more mainstream sounding integrated bands at least, the opportunities for promoting yourself to the national level are less. So, in choosing a sound, let's look at the options. Would you rather chose a niche and become popular through MySpace networking, or would you start a mainstream band and hope that the automated computer at the terrestrial radio station actually plays your band's tune on the air? The chances at MySpace working are surely a helluv a lot better. This is different than the time that terrestrial radio had DJs, that actually spun local/regional stuff occasionally.

[sabriel9v]

 

If someone takes the diversity in current entertainment and slides down into a self-reinforcing niche, that's their own damn fault. Granted, it would be nice for the masses to have a better common filter for music than they do now. But whose fault is that? It's not MySpace's. Terrestrial radio's quality went to hell after the consolidation movements of the 1990s. MTV, another filter, chose to focus on more profitable reality shows. The last thing that I saw, that had a chance to be a common culture filter (Fuse/MuchMusic), quickly decided that it was more profitable to show endless shows on skateboarding. Television and movies, after all, have done a *lot* better at presenting "super" experiences... although there is signs that even their quality is slipping, the quality of the main outlets has overall been a heck of a lot better than music's main outlets. MHO, MySpace is not going to replace superstardom, and superstardom is not going to go away. Think of MySpace and other Internet aspsects as more replacing or supplementing all those tape-trading networks, zines and photocopied flyers of the good old days in the alternative underground. You heard all these "superstar" bands that people mentioned on MySpace, and you saw how most of them ended up being up-and-coming niche artists targeting mostly youth genres? That's *exactly* what MySpace is best for. The flip side of the coin is that, for more mainstream sounding integrated bands at least, the opportunities for promoting yourself to the national level are less. So, in choosing a sound, let's look at the options. Would you rather chose a niche and become popular through MySpace networking, or would you start a mainstream band and hope that the automated computer at the terrestrial radio station actually plays your band's tune on the air? The chances at MySpace working are surely a helluv a lot better. This is different than the time that terrestrial radio had DJs, that actually spun local/regional stuff occasionally.

 

 

 

Myspace is great because it allows artists to do exactly what you said, find their audience and cater to the people who are already involved within that niche. You can set up tours this way, gain fans, allow these fans to subscribe to your blogs, there are endless options. And it's all much cheaper and effective when you compare myspace to other options artists had when the Internet was first gaining in popularity.

[Dean Roddey]

I think it's more appropriate to say that MySpace allows artists to put their music up and hope that their audience finds them. They can of course network, but that's still a pretty limited marketing mechanism. Anything more than that and they start coming off really obnoxious, since it's not really a forum for heavy marketing type of pushing.

 

If they already have visibility for other reasons, then obviously it can then be a way for them to just easily make information/material available directly to existing fans.

 

I'm certainly not trying to come off like it's useless. Any direct to the public mechanism that has sufficient visibility to provide a lot of eyes has some sort of potential, whether realized yet or not. But I've just heard endless posts of idealists who believe that the internet is going to any day now or already has made the labels obsolete, but they are really projecting their own desires more than seeing the reality I think.

[keithtoxic]

 

well I just roll on by most musicians hosting at MySpace and so do most of the people I know. Some use Itunes and other mediums. The best bands or the ones I have taken seriously enough have a MySp account but LINK to their OWN site domain with NO sponsored garbage like Free webz and so on. I think more people take groups seriously enough when they see a nice well laid out website (private) that is not tucows, tripod or other pop up trash embedded. I for one think more highly of the group that has the means to support a well made site. MySp is just too overloaded with POD shredder one man band or 13 yr olds to sift through. You get that enough on Youtube looking up REAL videos that are layered with attempts from inspiring 10 yr olds. For me, it's the clutter of My Space that makes bands seem less inviting and taken less than serious unless they have links to unsponsored free hosting, I just can't take them serious enough to listen. If a band can't spend less than $100 for a domain and a web host, I won't take them seriously. Free hosts and popup ad sites lend less to their credibility.

 

 

Are you speaking 100 a month? Because that's a rip off.

 

I was actually thinking it's the excact opposite, and that myspace was making it so a band didn't need a website. I don't know a single person that even really cares if a band has a real page, most people just goto their myspace, it has everything they want, the bands music, updates, when they're going to be playing in their town, everythings right there. Why would a band waste money paying for a page when myspace can have everything they need right there, when most people don't even view a bands webpage anymore.

 

And judging a bands seriousness by how much money they spend is asinine. That's like saying I won't listen to a band unless they have killer shirts.

[BlueStrat]

 

Well, there's quite a few...you mentioned 50 Cent, Jay Z, John Mayer, Amy Winehouse, etc. To that list, you can also add Alicia Keys, Nickelback, Miley Cyrus (crazy as that is), Black Eyes Peas, Fergie, Justin Timberlake, Carrie Underwood and the American Idol crew, Linkin Park, Kanye West, Foo Fighters didn't hit stride until the late 90's, etc...the list goes on.

 

 

 

Point taken.

 

I wonder how many we'll have when (and if) labels become irrlevant?

 

Or will they?

 

It's an interesting discussion. My hat's off to all y'all for being serious, civil and intelligent. This is what I really enjoy this site for.

[kurdy]

 

Are you speaking 100 a month? Because that's a rip off. I was actually thinking it's the excact opposite, and that myspace was making it so a band didn't need a website. I don't know a single person that even really cares if a band has a real page, most people just goto their myspace, it has everything they want, the bands music, updates, when they're going to be playing in their town, everythings right there. Why would a band waste money paying for a page when myspace can have everything they need right there, when most people don't even view a bands webpage anymore.

 

 

My thoughts exactly. I actually made a similar post, but it didn't go through.

 

I hardly ever notice whether a band has a real page or not, and if they do, I never visit it. I doubt I'm in the minority with this. Most people couldn't care less. Band sites are so slow to load anyway, with all the Flash and effects; most of the time, the Myspace page is far more convenient.

 

I used to add a band on Myspace if I liked their music; now I don't even bother. With all the friend requests I get from random bands on a daily basis, not to mention all the "friends" I've already accumulated that I can't keep track of, I no longer add anyone unless they are a band I know personally, or they are at least from my area. There are simply too many of them to keep track of, never mind notice whether they have a site or not.

 

It's really hard to imagine a band of grown adults even half-serious about what they do believing that having a Myspace page will make them famous. They'd have to be seriously delusional. Anyone who spends any significant amount of time on that site will say there are too many freakin' bands on there. It's merely a more convenient way to keep in touch with the fans that a band already has, since practically everybody and their mother is on there. It's great for keeping people up to date on shows, music, new developments, etc. But it really won't make you any new fans or advance your music career.

[NewWorldMan]

 

Point taken. I wonder how many we'll have when (and if) labels become irrlevant? Or will they?

 

 

Don't know how many there will be then. I do agree agree that labels will become less and less important over time. I don't know if they'll ever become completely irrelevant, but I think their importance will eventually become pretty minimal versus what it used to be.

[DevilRaysFan]

With MySpace everybody has a chance to get a morsal of pie, instead of big corporations being the "Yay" or "Nay" of who gets a piece.... The new business model only means that, instead of a hundred millionaires in the music business, we will have a million hundredaires........ Id rather be a hundredaire and have total artistic control and a chance to do my own music on my own terms, instead of big labels being judge and jury on who is successful or not

[Dean Roddey]

I dunno. If I found myself a millionaire dangling on a string, I could handle it until I finally choked on my vomit (the whole thing about me also being in a maid's outfit and a gerbil being involved was just a slanderous lie though.)

[HKSblade1]

 

Are you speaking 100 a month? Because that's a rip off. I was actually thinking it's the excact opposite, and that myspace was making it so a band didn't need a website. I don't know a single person that even really cares if a band has a real page, most people just goto their myspace, it has everything they want, the bands music, updates, when they're going to be playing in their town, everythings right there. Why would a band waste money paying for a page when myspace can have everything they need right there, when most people don't even view a bands webpage anymore. And judging a bands seriousness by how much money they spend is asinine. That's like saying I won't listen to a band unless they have killer shirts.

 

 

Maybe some think like that but I've seen and purch cd's from many MySp groups that had much broader websites. No a website does not cost 100 a mo, and most not even a 100/yr. That is little investment imom but it sets the serious approach more than the pod jammers you have to dally through.

 

Most good bands I've seen have Both. A MySp link they mention as well as the website itself.

 

No doubt MySp is convenient, but the OP is to determine Success as in Label type success which is NOT prevalent with 99% of MySp musicians.

[teziF]

all the topics suggesting the fail of modern music in the 90s and that internet dont work for music have the same response

 

radiohead

 

you can see their free webcast here, enjoy

http://www.stage6.com/user/fooosco/video/2068414/Radiohead-Webcast-2008-New-Year's-Eve

 

and there is some another interesting artist in myspace like Mike Patton and mine others not so mainstream if you prefer some more indie

 

i suggest to listen all the john frusciante solo work too

[Dean Roddey]

 

all the topics suggesting the fail of modern music in the 90s and that internet dont work for music have the same response radiohead

 

 

This has been well discussed already. How did Radiohead get into a situation where they could do that? They were a major label act who had already long since built up a big following. And, even then, the numbers that they sold were pretty piddly small for such a well known band. Radiohead was using the internet the way Amazon uses it, just to sell something. They didn't use it to get known.

[sabriel9v]

all the topics suggesting the fail of modern music in the 90s and that internet dont work for music have the same response radiohead you can see their free webcast here, enjoy http://www.stage6.com/user/fooosco/video/2068414/Radiohead-Webcast-2008-New-Year's-Eve and there is some another interesting artist in myspace like Mike Patton and mine others not so mainstream if you prefer some more indie i suggest to listen all the john frusciante solo work too

 

I'm not sure if you're trying to say that all of these people have experienced success using Internet based business models or that they make good music. Either way I agree with both points

[metalmonkey]

job for a cowboy owe alot of their success to myspace apparently

[Poker99]

Who the {censored} are they?

 

Voila. Proved wrong.

[soundwave106]

Who the {censored} are they?

 

(looks up)

A death metal band with a decent following, big enough to get on the Gigantour 2008 tour (organized by Megadeth).

 

So, if you are into death metal, you might know of them. Yet another example of niche.

 

Personally I'm not aware of them, but it's hard to keep up with all the new bands sometimes. On the Gigantor tour, I know three of the five bands (Megadeth, In Flames, Children of Bodom) and I don't know the other two (Job for a Cowboy or High on Fire). The thing is, I bet a huge amount of the population doesn't even know of In Flames or Children of Bodom.

[BlueStrat]

(looks up) A death metal band with a decent following, big enough to get on the Gigantour 2008 tour (organized by Megadeth). So, if you are into death metal, you might know of them. Yet another example of niche. Personally I'm not aware of them, but it's hard to keep up with all the new bands sometimes. On the Gigantor tour, I know three of the five bands (Megadeth, In Flames, Children of Bodom) and I don't know the other two (Job for a Cowboy or High on Fire). The thing is, I bet a huge amount of the population doesn't even know of In Flames or Children of Bodom.

 

yeah, but they're 'Superstars!'

[thedolaon]

Job For A Cowboy was #1 on the indie list for the US in all genres the other day. I wouldn't have cared less about who they were, but you sed something so i noticed who they were. Hate their music tho.

[zack]

Soulja Boi tell 'em.

 

Argument over.

[soundwave106]

 

Soulja Boi tell 'em. Argument over.

 

 

Mentioned previously in the thread. He's a first to me in that he got a nationally-successful hit heavily through Internet marketing.

 

There are a few problems with this example, for purist arguments. First off, Soulja Boy would not have had a national hit had he not been signed to Collipark Records. Essentially, MySpace can be viewed as the vehicle he used to launch his national signing and promotion.

 

The second problem is that Soulja Boy looks to be having a tough time sustaining his "Crank That" momentum. Unless things turn around, he's less "superstar" than "one hit wonder".