>Mfw the music industry has stagnated for over a decade
There was a huge shift in the music scene from 1996 to 2006 but literally nothing has changed since 2006 aside from that shitty Vaporwave meme
>>66063255
Memerap has become more popular
>young thug
yeah its the same as 2006 for sure
>ITT OP is out of touch
Rap has gotten a lot weirder.
>what is streaming
also
>implying industry and scene are the same thing
>>66063290
wayne
>>66063360
The industry generally goes with whatever is popular on the music scene
>>66063448
Not really from a technical standpoint, in fact it's often the other way around. CDs would've come out in the 80s regardless of whether or not it was glam metal or cowpunk ruling the rock airwaves.
there won't ever be huge shifts or game changing acts like nirvana because the internet and the old industry is dead. ever heard about niche markets? scenes? there's no mainstream anymore
>>66063764
Pop (Ariana Grande, Justin Bieber type pop) will still be mainstream for years to come but yeah, you're right for the most part.
>>66063764
correction: because the internet - and the old industry is dead.
>>66063286
yeah it's been a long time since mtv, radios and big labels lost their relevance on telling young people what to listen to etc. think of it like the meme phenomena
lots of really really popular memes for some crowds, other crowds have never heard of those memes; they know and love their own memes; it's niche
>that time when kanye changed the entire hip hop landscape, and then did it again two years later
>>66063764
So basically nothing is underground anymore?
>>66063850
yeah of course but apparently op was talking more like the said indie (pop) rock revolution that happened in that time period. pretty much that and the hot topic "emo" were the last dying breaths of this old massifying industry of culture.
like for instance the garage indie rock and emotional hardcore examples, both started small as everybody knows. there were scenes, small bands and small audiences for them, it took a while for it to reach the mainstream: big labels and mass media in general diluting and simplifying it all so the average joe and gets access to it
>>66064045
Yeah and no. When everyone's special nobody is.
>>66064045
it's just less of a community now. There's emphasis on actually going to local shows and seeing your friends play because you can just hear their album on bandcamp and stay home instead. Cellphones and internet culture has killed a lot of motivation to go to a concert and actually enjoy being in the moment
>>66064045
yeah that's the whole point. there's no such thing as underground or counterculture anymore.
it's been like this for a while but now it's pretty blatant and people are finally starting to understand it
>>66064172
And streaming/torrenting/itunes/youtube/etc have killed the actual physical industry, or at least dwindled it in size.
>>66064172
>Cellphones and internet culture has killed a lot of motivation to go to a concert and actually enjoy being in the moment
No not really
Internet killed the motivation to buy records but people still enjoy the concert experience even if they're holding up a cellphone. They still understand the enjoyment of going to a concert rather than just watching it online
>>66064268
But Death Grips is a perfect example of a band that started underground and launched into the mainstream because of word of mouth on the Internet
>>66064499
That just goes to show how different the "mainstream" is than what it was a decade ago. Ten years ago The White Stripes were mainstream and could probably fill stadiums if they wanted to. Death Grips could probably fill a concert hall.
>>66064499
yes they're very popular in the alt/indie circles of course. but not exactly mainstream.
the point I'm making here is that the underground/mainstream dynamic has ceased to be relevant. you don't need to "make it" to the mainstream to be quote unquote successful
>>66064592
again: no longer one and only mainstream channel to represent and tell what the world is into right now. they're multiple and diversified, different popular music for different circles
>>66064673
I was adding to your point.
this is the official /mu/ timeline
>>66064905
This desu
>>66063255
>Nothing's changed
Young thug is out here mumble rapping and making millions from it and you want to tell me nothing's changed
That's an L for you op
This mumble rap shit wouldn't fly in 2000 to 2013
>>66065107
Young thugger mother fucker is also cross dressing and saying he smokes penis, that flexible lifestyle wouldn't fly in 2010 rap game(I have no problem with homosexuals)
>>66064078
I'd say niche subcultures can and are still marketed to mainstream audiences, just that the means have changed. For example, the internet was (more or less) a subculture until the mid 2000s, now (more or less) every 13 year old on Reddit and Tumblr has a shirt for a band, show, meme, or whatever that they found on the internet. Another example: the entire notion of hipsters was not widespread until the mid to late 2000s, now everyone wears sweaters.
As for music, while there hasn't been anything widespread or impactful as a grungy second coming of Nirvana, the music being released today is hardly the same. I mean, ten years ago Funeral was still fresh and being widely imitated, today people complain about how stale it sounds.
>>66065107
Mumble rap's been big for decades now
EPMD mumbled
Mase mumbled
MF DOOM mumbled
Gucci Mane (and a lot of other southern rappers) mumbled
It's weird to specifically criticise Young Thug for it
>>66064905
>>66065004
I hope this is irony...
>>66063290
>>66063316
>>66063365
>>66065107
>>66065230
ODB is proto-young thug
>>66063255
have you been in a coma for the past 10 years
Basically music has gotten better and better since the internet dropped. The 2010s are for music what southern California is for food: every single genre is represented, and done better than its place/time of origin.
>>66065230
How dare you say the masked villain mumble rapped.
MF DOOM is the best rapper of all time period
Put some fucking respek on the mans name
>>66065216
>widespread or impactful
Within their own subcultures, bands like Sunn0))) or Death Grips are every bit as impactful as the grunge bands that were actually shitty enough to get played on the radio.
How many times do we have to explain "niche" to you guys??
>>66065399
I thought this too when I had just discovered hip hop.
>>66063764
There's still, and always will be, plenty of movies, music, shows, plays, etc. with wide enough appeal to essentially universally known. I mean, if SNL does a skit making fun of the avengers, everyone watching will get it. I understand the idea that thousands of niches are diversifying and growing because of the internet, but there is definitely still a "mainstream."
>>66065473
Who do you think is the best rapper of all time?
>>66063255
Everybody is busy making """"political"""" statements instead of experimenting.
>>66065454
Nobody misunderstands what niche means. There was a time when groups like The Clash, Nirvana and The Cure grew out of their niche. That doesn't happen anymore.
>Timbaland and DJ Mustard productions sound exactly the same
>the massive rise of a genre that was previously restricted to cheesy European one hit wonders had no effect on the music industry
ok
>>66065399
Legit, I don't know if I've heard an MF DOOM song since before his mid-'90s hiatus where he doesn't mumble. Idk if he has a slight speech impediment or what. I like it and all, but he's a pretty mumbly guy as rappers go.
>>66065399
>MF DOOM is the best rapper of all time period
You mispelled Nas
>>66065267
It's not.
>>66065509
In terms of pure, technical mic skills? I can name you 10 rappers who are more precise on the mic than DOOM and none of them are the best rapper of all time. Here: Qwel, Homeboy Sandman, Killer Mike, Black Thought, Gift of Gab, Jonwayne, Biggie, RA the Rugged Man, Kool Keith, Vince Staples.
Best of ALL TIME??? I think Rakim should be a pretty uncontroversial answer.
>>66065216
>>66065543
it's widespread alright. wider than before
>>66065454
Right, but being impactful within a genre/niche is a different beast than being impactful on the mainstream. King Crimson was extraordinarily impactful on many other progressive and art rock bands, but they weren't half as impactful on the mainstream understanding of rock as the Beatles were (sorry scaruffi).
My interpretation was that op was bitching about how nothing is changing in music, and I was trying to make the point that while no huge mainstream stylistic shifts like those of Music in the Time of Nirvana in mainstream music have occured in the last ten years, niche music has changed drastically.
>>66065543
But bands like Sunn0))) and Death Grips are popular on an entirely different scale than their 70s/80s/90s equivalents would have been. They can sell out fairly large venues and make a living touring and selling recods. This was unheard of for underground niche music back in the day.
It doesn't matter at all that these bands don't become universal zeitgeist defining cultural barometers like The Beatles anymore.
>>66065783
>Right, but being impactful within a genre/niche is a different beast than being impactful on the mainstream
In what relevant way is it different?
>>66065743
It's not wider, if it was then, again, it'd be selling these mainstream venues.
>>66065796
These fairly large venues aren't anywhere near as large as the 70s/80s/90s equivalents. I'll show Nirvana, The Clash and The Cure again as my examples for bands from these eras doing exactly what I'm describing.
>>66065885
>These fairly large venues aren't anywhere near as large as the 70s/80s/90s equivalents
Sure they are. Those bands didn't always play stadiums. Stadiums have shitty sound. Radiohead likes to play in smaller venues even though they could play stadiums. Wtf is your point even?
>>66065721
You didn't mention pac? Your credibility just went downhill.
>>66065951
I don't think he's a particular gifted rapper technically, but that wasn't what made him great.
Or DOOM while we're on the topic. He's way more dexterous on the KMD records than he was as an aged mumbler but who fucking cares?
>>66065107
In terms of polyrhythms and complex internal rhymes, Nicki Minaj runs rings around DOOM. Sad but true.
>>66065721
Rakim? This nigger mainly did ending rhymes and you think he is better than DOOM?
Check this
https://youtu.be/QWveXdj6oZU
>>66065928
They could've played stadiums whenever they liked and charted in ways that Sunn0))) and Death Grips still have yet to. If they were "just as mainstream" or popular as these 70s/80s/90s bands then we would've seem some equivalency by now. Death Grips doesn't even have a video on youtube with more than 5 million views. If they were on the same playing field as any of the bands I mentioned during their peaks they'd be in the hundreds of millions of views by now.
Radiohead's popularity started during the era of Nirvana, so they're not exactly a good band to bring up as an example. The point I'm making is that even if they wanted to Death Grips and Sunn0))) couldn't play stadiums.
>>66066015
DOOM is just soooooo sloppy with his rhythm man. Once this was pointed out to me I could never get over it.
I love the tone of his voice. I think rhyming every word in a bar is not as impressive as layered internal rhymes though where there is a rhyme scheme within a rhyme scheme, but it sounds really lovely and I enjoy it.
Rakim's precision was fucking insane, his voice cuts everybody else to ribbons.
>>66065267
The original post is a youtube comment that was anything but ironic.
>>66065995
Well shit you sound like you know what you're talking about. I'll tat this L like a man and check out the rappers you said are better than DOOM
>>66066028
>Radiohead's popularity started during the era of Nirvana, so they're not exactly a good band to bring up as an example.
It's fair, but I would say the only reason Radiohead ever had the kind of financial power where they could do a stadium tour is because they were part of that era. Now they wouldn't rise above the level of The National or Foxygen or something.
>even if they wanted to
I'm not sure about that. Death Grips was one of the headliners of FYF a few years ago, and the crowd they drew was massive.
Also Sleep plays stadiums.
And even if they couldn't I still don't get your point.
>>66066170
highly recommend Homeboy Sandman, but he has a wealth of material and its all different be sure to poke around before you dismiss
oh man I'm on saturday night inside out I don't want this to end.
extra kings Is very much a stopping point on SILY but this just makes me want more ;_;
>>66066015
Funny that OME reps him so hard, I would also cite Busdriver as another example of a rapper that just runs rings around DOOM micwise
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32E8lTa15RI
>>66066170
This is the first time I've ever seen a post like this. Great thread.
>>66065850
You can't strike up a conversation with a stranger on which Mac Demarco album is your favorite, but you'll have a much easier time figuring out their favorite Taylor Swift song. Some music permeates every level of society and therefore affects every level of society in some way or another.
>but what if you don't like top 40s and don't listen to it
You hear it whether you want to or not, assuming you aren't a neet. If you dislike it strongly enough you'll probably seek out something reactionary.
Music always has a cultural impact because to really sell music, an artist has to have personality that reflects and enhances their music. Justin Bieber has always been marketed as the cute boy singer, Taylor Swift as the strong independent white woman who don't need no man, Beyonce as a queen, and Miley Cyrus as a brave sexual warrior. People will constantly be imitating the stars that they feel they identify with through their clothing, personalities, and maybe even beliefs. The mainstream artist figureheads are helping to reflect and define the entirety of culture, while niche interests only do so for small groups of people.
If space rock suddenly mixed with post punk, creating the new genre of Martian rock (low growling to screaming vocals, all over spooky space synths and hard rock guitar riffs), I wouldn't have to listen to it every time I walked into a store. If Miley Cyrus gets big doing and edm show completely naked with a 9" butt plug in though, everyone will wear a shirt with her hairy taint on it and we'll have to deal with it wherever we go.
>>66066346
That genre you described is literally Last Crush
>>66066346
But top 40's is almost COMPLETELY irrelevant today. We are down to like, 2 artists that are current and that popular, Kanye and Swift. All the other household names are from bygone eras (Beyonce). And even ye and Swift have been around for over a decade.
All those people you can have water cooler conversations with about Kanye, they are probably listening to their own niche shit at this point too.
>The mainstream artist figureheads are helping to reflect and define the entirety of culture, while niche interests only do so for small groups of people.
This is only if you don't want to take the time to get to know people and explore the interesting things they can tell you about the various subcultures they belong to.
Stop waiting around for the next universal, unifying musical movement and realize that you can get everything you want from the bandcamp model.
>>66066346
>you'll have a much easier time figuring out their favorite Taylor Swift song.
This is less true as time goes on. People who ONLY listen to top 40s and don't know how to find music that they actually like are increasingly disgusted with what gets played for them. They know Taylor Swift exists but they only know "that one song" (being the one that is in current heavy rotation). Gradually this sort of bullshit will disappear entirely.
>>66066346
We used to be really obsessed with the notion of celebrity and these megastars that we would emulate as you say.
It was a flash in a pan, and now that the internet has equalized all content, it will gradually fade from memory. And we will all be better off for it.
>>66066346
They probably have heard of like, FKA Twigs and Grimes though.
>>66063255
https://m.reddit.com/r/lewronggeneration/
>>66066426
There'll always be good music so it doesn't really matter, but it's always a little difficult when mediocre music becomes massively popular to not be the least bit salty since your favorite artists will never know that type of success (we all get snobby sometimes)
Although rather obvious, this is a cool discussion to exist on this board; there are more people who think like OP than you'd imagine, even on here
>>66066453
>>66066426
Good points
>>66066798
anyone one who thinks large scale piracy hasn't caused a massive stagnation of good artists producing new material is deluding themselves.
>>66066492
>The internet has equalized all content
I disagree since people on the internet with similar interests and opinions clump together and reassure themselves about their opinions (just look at /pol/, tumblr, or any subreddit). Once people are in those communities everything is emotionally charged content rather than genuine Socratic style discussion intended to increase the understanding of all who participate. /Mu/ is no exception since the most popular threads are started with a basic opinion on an album that everyone on /mu/ knows, and people flood the thread just giving their opinions and maybe one or two weak arguments about why they hold that opinion.
To be fair though, ultimately art is subjective, so if the internet helps us find stuff we enjoy or appreciate, that's about as much equalization of content as we need to get what we want from music. And I don't think anyone can realistically argue that being able to listen to literally any music you want for free or dirt fucking cheap is anything but incredible (butthurt record company execs don't count).
>>66066870
I want to hear this point argued
>>66066346
This phenomena is slowly fading away. Poptimism will too collapse in the next decade, if not less
I read an article somewhere on how the poptimism revival in music criticism right now is how this obsolete business is keeping itself alive, it has a lot to do with clickbaiting and so on. It's all about to change on that matter, but not really when it comes to like, "big shifts" in artistic/aesthetic/musical style (arguments for this above)
>>66066870
Name a few
>>66066876
I get what you are saying. For example I post on a forum dedicated to stoner rock and doom, and you would be hard pressed to find a negative opinion bandied about towards any given artist. Especially since most of the artists use the forum too, so you have to say it "to their face". But even so, it amounts to you getting easy awareness/access to ALL 150 stoner/doom albums that came out that year, and you can judge which 20-30 are worth keeping around.
Another aspect that you don't address is that means of production have also become accessible to more people. This also helps equalize shit: you don't need a record deal to make a good sounding record.
>>66066980
he's saying that they don't exist, how could he name them?
>>66066870
how is there stagnation? when did good music stagnate in your perspective?
the common sense which I happen to agree with is that there's actually too much good music to keep up with than there ever was.
so many outlets and ways to find and consume music than there ever was before. I don't see stagnation. on the contrary
>>66067065
yes, if anything the problem is a surplus, not a lack.
i used to live with and care for my senile grandfather and in order to do stuff he liked such as read books, he used organizational systems to take notes and keep track of characters and plotlines since he was basically Memento in terms of short term memory.
i feel like I need such a system to keep track of my current listening habits
>>66067065
but few people can make a living doing it. And see the product they poured there soul into creating taken from them. There will be no longevity of artists as in the past. Music will be a constant revolving door.
>>66067252
>but few people can make a living doing it.
This is the one thing that has demonstrably gotten MUCH better. Even dudes like Milo can actually support themselves selling their sadraps.
>There will be no longevity of artists as in the past. Music will be a constant revolving door.
Untrue, this is what the bigwigs at the music studios would have you believe. But the reality is that they aren't getting to skim as much off the top anymore, and it's MUCH more viable for an artist to be a career musician today than it was in any other era of modern music.
>>66067252
>signed to a major label in the 90's
>the %.00001 percent of each album sale that should go to you just goes to pay off the massive debt you owe the record label for recording and releasing your album
>selling your shit on itunes in 2015
>literally get $0.85 of every dollar people spend on your music
You are so fucking wrong man, so fucking wrong.
>>66067120
you're for sure not the only one. recently I've been digging into /bleep/ stuff, going through record labels on discogs, looking up a song on from an ep on youtube, and downloading the ep if i like it. i end up downloading so much stuff that sometimes when i'm casually scrolling through my music library i'll see something that i don't even remember downloading.
>>66067352
my fear is that with so much stuff, i tend to favor the instantly likeable over the stuff that i need to acquire a taste to get. i wonder how many masterpieces of discarded over the last decade
>>66067349
but he meme on /mu/ is "you actually buy music." if its actually good it will just be stolen. I don't have that chart that gets posted but it shows the revenue that is generated with download services and streaming And it is dismal unless you are in the top tiers. certainly not enough to survive on your craft alone without having a backup vocation.
>>66067349
Albums used to sell enough that you could actually make a living just off albums if you were big enough. Tours were afterthoughts. Now tours are what give artists a living and albums specifically are made to help boost revenue for tours.
>>66067547
You can cite a meme on /mu/, I'll cite fucking steve albini.
The 90's:
http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=17
Today:
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/nov/17/steve-albinis-keynote-address-at-face-the-music-in-full
>>66067606
>if you were big enough
If you were Metallica or Michael Jackson, yes. But today underground artists can support themselves playing music. This simply was not the case in any other era.
>>66065293
yeah and so what, only young thug is young thug. there is none, nor will there ever come, a second young thug
I'm confident that the reason Donald Trump decided to finally run for president was because he saw how well ridiculousness-for-PR worked on the poisonous contrarianism that has been building up in american culture.
>>66067349
>>literally get $0.85 of every dollar people spend on your music
That's if people buy your music off soundcloud or itunes, not if they stream you music like most people do.
>>66067606
>Now tours are what give artists a living and albums specifically are made to help boost revenue for tours.
Um, albums are a form of creative expression and are made because artists want to record the music they have created.
You are probably one of those people who thinks of live music as a shitty substitute for a studio recording.
>>66067647
It's widely recognized that Spotify and them are cooking the books and robbing artists. It's a problem that will get solved.
EVEN WITH the problem, you are still fucking wrong. More artists are able to make a living playing music than before. You are discounting how much of a difference it made to eliminate all the middlemen. Artists sell directly to their fans and it's a fucking miracle.
>>66067647
Confused by this chart. Is the X-axis supposed to be time or something?
>>66067692
Labels still get a big portion of streaming money m8. Streaming itself doesn't even make the streaming companies money. There's no denying since the internet has put its fingers into music that a significant portion of money has left the industry.
Hell, even Roger Waters said from a financial standpoint there's no point in The Who ever making another album since they'll never get the money they put into it. If The Who can't make money off an album than who can?
>>66067735
>There's no denying since the internet has put its fingers into music that a significant portion of money has left the industry.
Yes there is. Read Steve's post. Only the suits got robbed. Fuck 'em.
>Hell, even Roger Waters said from a financial standpoint there's no point in The Who ever making another album since they'll never get the money they put into it. If The Who can't make money off an album than who can?
>The Who
>Roger Waters
>>66067735
>If The Who can't make money off an album than who can?
All the underground artists who are suddenly able to support themselves off of the internet model, who never were able to before.
The days of the rich megastar are over, that's true. You will now see artists making music because they are passionate about making music, not to get rich.
>caring about making money for your art
wew lads
I'm sick of this shit. I already posted this. Read it and THEN fucking argue about how the industry sucks now. Argue against the specific points he makes and rebut them with actual hard fucking evidence or fuck off with your bullshit speculation.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/nov/17/steve-albinis-keynote-address-at-face-the-music-in-full
>>66067774
Roger Daltrey, my bad.
And yes, I do have a link, albeit not a great one.
https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/general_music_news/the_whos_roger_daltrey_theres_no_music_industry_anymore_why_would_we_make_an_album.html
>>66064385
No they don't. people who sit and record one their cellphones at a concert is sickening and horrendous. there's no way they could be enjoying the show, they have to show it off to all their faggot friends on their facebook and snapchat!!!
social media killed concerts
>>66067798
We're talking about an industry here, we have been since the beginning of this thread. If the industry is no longer able to support rich megastars that it used to be able to support then yes, the industry has fallen from what it once was.
>>66066870
>>66066918
People who pirate music also buy the most music, not a very good point.
>>66067842
He sounds just as uninformed as you anon. You and he have bought into the same bullshit the record execs have been preaching.
>>66067868
>If the industry is no longer able to support rich megastars that it used to be able to support then yes, the industry has fallen from what it once was
it can support many, many more artists now. Instead of ONLY michael jackson and madonna getting rich, now there is more good music than you can possibly process each year AND a much larger percentage of those artists are making better money doing it than before.
You can cry that Metallica doesn't get to live in a mansion anymore, but this is a MUCH better arrangement for MOST musicians and ALL music fans.
The only people who got screwed were the rare artists who had sensational contracts that gave them an anomylously large cut of their royalties, like Michael Jackson owning his own masters or whatever. And of course the suits, who are mainly the ones peddling this bullshit story that you have bought into so hard.
>>66067881
do you buy music? I do. And my preferred medium is CD. But its because I am old and set inn my ways as most of the older gens are.
>>66067647
>graph is super shitty
>labelled as information is beautiful
every time
>>66068024
>>66067881
I fucking spend way above average on music per year. 2 shows a month average, and I always by at least 1 record from the merch table. Usually more since I'm drinking and dgaf. I pirate tons but also probably buy 30-40 LPs a year.
>>66067850
It's like, 2-3 guys doing this. 99% of the audience is always immersed in the show. You are clearly not speaking from the experience of someone who regularly attends shows.
>>66068077
Dubs don't lie. Piracy is great for music
>>66067842
>You notice, the internet is a slowly but surely destructive thing in all ways. I don't think it's improved people's lives. It's just made them do more work and feel like they're wanted a bit more, but it's all bollocks.
Actual quote from the article.
>>66068077
do you think what you spend is average. I'll be honest. Even in 70's and 80's i seldom bought more then 20 albums a year. And I'm not pristine in any way shape or form either. I downloaded tons of mp3's when the format first started appearing on IRC channels in 94 and 95. I owned a Diamond RIO mp3 player years before the first iPod was available. But their is no denying band longevity will be declining. The average under 30 has a very short attention span and music fans are not kind to unattractive or old. especially women. I'm just waiting to see Radiohead get U2'd by the next generation.
>>66067850
When people do this they only do it for like 5-10 minutes out of the show max. usually it's only a picture or two and then they put their phone away. cell phones really aren't too much of a distraction in a live setting
>>66068281
>do you think what you spend is average.
As I specified in my post, I believe it to be "way above average"
>The average under 30 has a very short attention span and music fans are not kind to unattractive or old. especially women.
I wholeheartedly disagree. For example, Sunn0))) and their ilk are comprised of chubby, hair old guys. They would not have found *their place* in any other era than the 21st century. I would argue that the previous model was much more image-driven than what we have now.
Also, if you go to any sludge or doom show, there are lots of young cuties.
> I'm just waiting to see Radiohead get U2'd by the next generation.
I fucking love you for this comment, brilliant
>>66068297
Apple just patented a process that makes video taking an cameras cease to work at concerts.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/30/technology/apple-patent-stop-phone-recording/index.html
>>66068507
jesus fucking christ
did they tell the NSA to fuck off solely to get the cred to pull this shit?
>>66068507
this is stupid as shit, I can't believe it's real
>>66068367
>I wholeheartedly disagree. For example, Sunn0))) and their ilk are comprised of chubby, hair old guys. They would not have found *their place* in any other era than the 21st century. I would argue that the previous model was much more image-driven than what we have now.
i disagree with this. Cass Elliot would have more trouble achieving the level of success she enjoyed had she been born in the late 80's or 90's. Radio was not a visual medium and people at the time heard the artist and became interested in how they sounded way before they knew what the artist actually looked like. If Cass was a young artist today she would be googled. Seen to be grossly overweight. and summarily written off.
>>66069016
She could do whatever she wanted to with her image. That's the miracle of the internet. You can meme it however you need to. For example, billy woods has the whole "there are no photographs of me that exist" thing going.
I agree that some people would write off Cass Elliot based on appearance, but the counterarguments far outweigh it. The internet allows her to reach a far more global and diverse group of listeners than radio ever did. She can emphasize or de-emphasize or countermand her image to her content on a level she couldn't do in olden days. Etc.
>>66068507
well, as stupid as it is, i really wouldn't mind the feature at concer-
>The patent filing suggests video capabilities would only be disabled if the phone is pointed in a certain direction. So users would be still able to take photos of their friends in the crowd, but their camera would switch off if they point it at the stage
>still be able to take photos of their friends
so people will just take videos of themselves dancing now
nice
>>66069188
regardless what she tried to do with her image live concert photos would emerge and show her for her true self. The she would be driven completely out of the business for trying to portray herself as something she obliviously was not. Adele and Meghan Trayor are classic examples. You may not like their music but they both have good singing voices. Yet if they get posted you can bet that by at least the 5th comment there will be a "fat" remark or some snide comment about food and overeating. Cass was twice Adele's size.
>>66069382
>The she would be driven completely out of the business for trying to portray herself as something she obliviously was not.
Can you elaborate on this? I don't know anything about this artist, so what was she trying to portray? If her appeal was entirely based on a falsified notion that she was physically attractive, it clearly has nothing to do with our conversation. If you are arguing that ugly musicians can't achieve success in the 21st century, you have already been proven wrong.
>>66069481
I was replying to this.
>She could do whatever she wanted to with her image. That's the miracle of the internet. You can meme it however you need to. For example, billy woods has the whole "there are no photographs of me that exist" thing going.
>>66069481
Mama Cass Elliot along with John and Michelle Phillips and Denny Doherty were the Mamas and the Papas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mamas_%26_the_Papas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-aK6JnyFmk
>>66065596
DJ mustard just modernized g funk.
>>66069765
In that case fuck you. THey were popular for their music, not their image.
>>66069858
wasn't that the point. She would have more difficulty getting acknowledged for her music in this day and age then she did in the late 60's. That was my whole point since i posted this >>66069016
>>66069919
The amount of avenues for her to gain notoriety and fame, and acdeptance, are FAR greater today than in the late 60s/early 70s.
check out Rose Windows
>>66069919
>>66069971
in fact i bet you ms&ps gains about as many new fans today as they did in heydey thanks to glut of internet
post-black, blackgaze, caverncore, djent, post-metal, orthodox black metal
metal's had a fuck ton of changes in 10 years, dunno why you guys are following music that isn't.
>>66067881
Not only that, but chronic pirates are also the type to share good artists and talk them up to friends or on forums like this. Piracy is the only thing keeping otherwise unknown bands from being just that. No one would be shelling out the money to purchase some obscure album.
>>66070307
Not to mention atmospheric/ambient black metal
Relatively young genres like black metal, electronic or hiphop tend to go through more changes than older ones like rock or jazz, neither of which has really seen substantial development in the past two decades, if I'm not mistaken.
>>66066564
>it's always a little difficult when mediocre music becomes massively popular
Mainstream music has virtually always been mediocre. It's easy to look back and say "muh pink floyd" but the fact is that most of the popular artists were shit then too and they've just been filtered out of memory. The greats like King Crimson are generally only recognized for their greatness in hindsight anyway.
