The title of the video above was sufficiently provocative that I was interested in hearing what Beato was talking about and listened to the whole thing. Death of memorable songs? Yes and no. He's identified part of the problem, at least.
Since he's a proudly whitehaired man in his sixties, it may need pointing out that Beato is not saying that there are no good musicians anymore. Far from it. And he's not saying that there are no good songs being written anymore. Rather that there's a near total break between what's interesting and what's popular. I wouldn't disagree.
My explanation for what happened might be a little different. Despite all the payola and hype, there used to be DJs who operated with a certain amount of freedom. And listeners trusted them enough to open themselves up to unfamiliar music. Britain's John Peel was the best known, but there were lower key exemplars here in the US. It wasn't a perfect system, but it had enough give so that there were pleasant surprises.
What went wrong didn't all go wrong at once. MTV was a double-edged sword. While it also introduced some unfamiliar artists, it effectively created a national playlist, taking oxygen from the locals. The 1996 Communications act was a disaster, opening the door to monopolies in radio who had zero interest in anything being unpredictable. Eventually DJs got sidelined where they existed at all. And now radio has been supplanted by Spotify. As Spotify is algorithm-driven, it basically guarantees that what you hear in the future will be an imitation of what you listened to in the recent past.
So what's needed to make good new songs popular again. Thinking humans in a position where they can recommend things again. Whatever genius figures out how to do that will have performed a great service.
1 comment:
I understand what it was that drew your attention to the video as its title introduced a problem we've noticed too. Your contribution to the subject is well thought out and certainly very true. It's also a fact that you have a much better understanding of and history of being open to more contemporary music than us who pretty much never listen to music anymore other than when we're out in the car with the i-pod to entertain us. Something like 18k pieces of music playing on random select provides more than enough musical diversion.
There were good musicians and songs written by them and professional songwriters throughout the 20th century when it became possible for music to be recorded. I wasn't entirely sure whether Beato was talking about rock as we knew it in the decades of our own youth (never mind some of the amazingly wonderful music of earlier decades dance and jazz bands) - or whether he's comparing rock with the pop music that's more prevalent today. There really can be no comparison for the reasons you described. All we had early on was radio But there were many stations in competition with each other and we had our new transistor radios. Then there came the earthshattering development and proliferation of the FM stations that made a lot more room for aspiring musicians to be heard.
Yes, MTV, the 1996 Communications Act (thanks for all the fish, Bill) and the monopolies that it authorized, and now Spotify. The format makes music superficial because corporatization results in music that's formulaic and boring. It could be said pop music is to music as chicken nuggets are to food.
But there it is and I know it's likely there are some good musicians and good bands that we will never hear. Should I mention too that pop music is dominated by young women performers, most of whom don't write the lyrics or play the instruments - it's more posing than anything else.
Once again the answer seems to be to wait for it all to collapse in on itself and start again. Meanwhile, tune up the instruments and hope somebody saved the written music and lyrics. New stuff always grows from the old.
Post a Comment