The State of Music Today

Overheal

This might possibly be one of the most sensible things I have ever read about the current state of music and the music industry.

Gizmodo wrote:

Technology always helped bring the listener closer to the music. Progressing from wax tubes, to records, to cassettes, to CDs, each jump has benefited the music fan. But maybe it's gone a bit too far.

The History

Admittedly, new music formats have always changed the way we listen to music. However, I don't think any have had such an effect over the last 60 years as the move to MP3 and other digital file formats. The advent of the 45 RPM single in the 50s is arguably the first big shift in the way popular music was consumed. Records went from longer-playing 78s and 33s, to the cheaper 45 format, which carried two or three songs on a disc, and became much more accessible for mass consumption. Soon, every big pop artist was releasing their big hits on 45s, and this became the main mode of consumption.


Then came cassettes, which shrank down the record onto magnetic film and brought the long-playing album back into vogue. Cassingles also remained popular among consumers, but the idea of the album as the main purchase was gaining steam again because tapes were more durable and easier to store. It also made it possible for people to record their own mixes very easily.


But the problem with all these analog formats is that they wore down and degraded over time. Vinyl lost it's sound quality the more you played it, scratched easily, and storing it in the wrong place climate would warp it's shape. Tapes would sound muffled over time, and the actual tape could easily be spooled out from the cassette.


Enter the Compact Disc. Created as a way to prevent the degradation of sound over time, the compact disc ushered in the digital era of music, but it wasn't without complaints. Audiophiles said the sound was cold and sterile, and purists worried about the idea you could skip around the album order so easily, that albums were meant to be listened to sequentially, and not on one-track repeat for hits. It also wasn't impervious, still liable to scratching and subsequent choppy playback. Still, it was the best available option to get music to consumers, until the MP3.


Too Much Music

Sometimes, I feel the rise of MP3s made music too easy to obtain. Instead of taking time to appreciate good work, we now devour as much music as we possibly can. My music collection feels increasingly impersonal, to the point that I have albums I've forgot I downloaded. Sometimes I'll listen to an album I like just once, and never touch it again. Why?


Because at any given time, I have about 10-20 other new albums I'm wanting to check out. There's just not enough time to give every album the same attention, and when you try to really get into a handful of albums, you miss out on 100 other new releases.


The MP3 era is enabling the music junkie's futile quest to stay up on all music, at all times.


But that's not to say it's all bad. Albums that used to take me months to track down in the past can be found with a few minutes of google ingenuity. I've been able to listen to artists I might have only known by name in the past, and not have to wait for corporate America to make their music accessible to the masses.


Narrowing Tastes

Despite the greatly enhanced variety of music available to the average music listener, I feel like people's tastes are actually narrowing, more than they're branching out. Sure, the hardcore music fan will go out and dig out obscure artists in 20 different genres. But for the casual indie rock fan, it's just as easy to go out and find 20 other bands who sound just like Sigur Ros.


As a result, you find people digging deeper into genres that they really like, while ignoring the access they have to so many other great genres. The rise of internet forums and communities based around certain kinds of music have only helped listeners to identify with other like-minded individuals and firmly entrench themselves.


However, the rise of unclassifiable, genre-free music this decade would seem to go against my notion of narrowing tastes. Fans have embraced musicians who pull from a variety of seemingly unrelated influences, and reassemble the parts into a whole new beast.


Artists as big as Timbaland, as small as the Avalanches, as weird as Flying Lotus, or as colorful as M.I.A have all made a name for themselves by consciously ignoring the boundaries of genre. And as a result, I've seen myself and many of my friends digging into genres, past and present, they previously had ignored. We're better music fans because of this.


The Death of the Album, The Rise of Musical A.D.D.

I blame the iPod. Before MP3s, when you wanted to listen to something, you at least had to insert a complete album, or at least take the time to piece together a mixtape. Tracklists meant more back then, because it was more difficult to rearrange the order (save for the skip/shuffle functions).


These days, you can crap out whatever you want into an unfocused playlist and take it on the go. Add or subtract songs in a matter of seconds, it's a thought-free process. There's no need to give a whole album the time of day anymore when you can just add your favorite. We all have Musical A.D.D.


But the truth is, I'm just being a paranoid purist. When CDs first came out, vinyl purists lamented how too many tracks were packed into the 74-minute capacity discs, and how easily people could just switch from track to track. Before that, the entire pop music culture was formed around 45 RPM singles in the 50s and 60s.


So while the crotchety old man in me wants to say that we need to preserve the complete album, the truth is that it's significance among music fans has always changed and evolved.


As much I want to say MP3s have ruined all our listening habits, the truth is, they've just pushed us into the next wave of music culture. Maybe it means the album tracklist really is dead. Maybe I'll only listen to a complete album once or twice from here on out. Or maybe it just means people need to start making more interesting albums worthy of such attention.

- Adrian Covert

I think he's dead right. Easily half my music folder has never been listened to.

Placid_Casual

Overheal wrote: »

I think he's dead right. Easily half my music folder has never been listened to.

Then what's the point in having it?

I've never really bought into this. I still prefer buying CDs to downloading and I wouldn't bother downloading something if i didn't intend to to give it a good listen. I'd say pretty much all the music I have has been listened to at least an amount of times in double figures. I generally have to listen to something that much to decide if I really like it.

And I never download individual tracks, albums or nothing.

Rigsby

Placid_Casual wrote: »

Then what's the point in having it?

I've never really bought into this. I still prefer buying CDs to downloading and I wouldn't bother downloading something if i didn't intend to to give it a good listen. I'd say pretty much all the music I have has been listened to at least an amount of times in double figures. I generally have to listen to something that much to decide if I really like it.

And I never download individual tracks, albums or nothing.

I agree with this, but can also see Overheal's point. The point in "having it" is because it's easily and cheaply aquired. It's like being at an all-you-can-eat restaurant, while you are eating, you are looking to see what else there is available.:D

I dont frequent this restaurant, as I too am a cd man. Having said that, there are a good few of them that I have only played once.

I thought the article itself was very good.

nyarlothothep

I'd like to see the album surviving through this. I rarely skip a song I've started listening, even if I don't want to listen to it anymore, out of respect for the song and a sense of completion. Albums are cool because not every song needs to be instantly gratifying but can satisfy the greater overall storyline and concept. But if it all becomes about instant gratification that's a loss imo.

lordgoat

Very good article/post.

I download alot of music but i have a rule i try and stand by, i'll have listened to the artist in question on myspace/youtube/spotify. If after i download it and i get bored of it i delete it.

So to me music has become expendible to some degree. This might seem to cheapen it somewhat and maybe it does but i also feel there has never been more dross to listen to.

I also think that paying for a music subscription service like spotify is the next stage of this cycle.

I normally will pay for a music i download the circumstances i dont is if i own the album already. For example i have a good bit of my music on vinyl. Which i like to listen to as it slows you down and makes you pay heed to what you choose to put on. Also as someone once said sometimes you have to just sit with an album to appreciate it.

Overheal - where is the original post from Gizmodo from?

Overheal

I didnt hyperlink eh.

http://i.gizmodo.com/5217090/how-tech-changed-the-way-we-listen-to-music

Cant agree that I would sit through a track I didnt like. Life is too short for that bullsh!t. As for why I have so much fill blame my External Drive - I used to carry that everywhere and have had it for 3 years now. Anytime youre at a friends or got a hold of their laptop its just a matter of copy and paste. I mean once in a while if I dont need my ears for something I will throw on a full album, but lots of the time I'll just do shuffle or a mix CD.

Rigsby

Overheal wrote: »

Cant agree that I would sit through a track I didnt like. Life is too short for that bullsh!t.

Sometimes a track, or album can take a while "to grow on you". Generally I find that these make for more rewarding listening in the long run. There are lots of albums I'm glad I took the time to become aquinted with.

Resi12

Oh god not another preaching thread of "In my day music was better"..
Times change so does music just get over it already jesus!!

grumpytrousers

Resi12 wrote: »

Oh god not another preaching thread of "In my day music was better"..
Times change so does music just get over it already jesus!!

oh god, not another dullard commenting on a thread he's not bothered to read.

The point being made isn't necessarily about the quality of the music, per se, but rather the fact that you can have so much, so quickly, that it's not appreciated as much. I think he's got a point. It *has* to back to 'in my day' to an extent; discounting copying tapes from your mates, if you went out and bought an album, spending your hard earned pocket money/paper-round cash on it, then you made sure you 'listened' to it. Properly. Got to like it, even if it were utter crap.

Nowadays, where the means of getting music is largely free, if you want to be illegal about it, people don't seem to take as much time actually listening to an album 'cos there'll always be something else languishing on the 1Tb hard-drive you've not listened to.

go back fifteen years, and the only way of getting the next album was to pay for it in a physical format, so while you were saving, you were listening to the old stuff - the 1Tb harddrive didn't exist.

John

I haven't downloaded albums in a long time (aside from live sets from the odd band) but when I used to download stuff I definitely had that "OMG, so many albums, get them all" and never listened to most of them. I'm definitely an album man, even on my iPod I tend to listen to the albums rather than playlists or jumping randomly from track to track.

lordgoat

John wrote: »

I haven't downloaded albums in a long time (aside from live sets from the odd band) but when I used to download stuff I definitely had that "OMG, so many albums, get them all" and never listened to most of them. I'm definitely an album man, even on my iPod I tend to listen to the albums rather than playlists or jumping randomly from track to track.

More and more i find myself listening to music on spotify, and what isn't on there i normally have the album anyway. I don't listen to an i pod too often as i'm either home or in work.

I too was once a get it all at once, now i realise that the album will still be there in a few weeks so i figure if it's good enough i'll get around to it in the end. I do have a list of artists/albums...

GLaDOS

Technology has let people obtain music en masse. If they can't be arsed to actually listen to it, it's their fault for not taking the time to appreciate it.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI

John wrote: »

I haven't downloaded albums in a long time (aside from live sets from the odd band) but when I used to download stuff I definitely had that "OMG, so many albums, get them all" and never listened to most of them. I'm definitely an album man, even on my iPod I tend to listen to the albums rather than playlists or jumping randomly from track to track.

I know that feeling too, but it seems to be something that wears off after the initial wow factor of pretty much every recording by anyone being right at your fingertips dies down.

These days, I'd much prefer scouring a shop for half an hour or so to buying it online or downloading it (though I never download stuff I really want, I'm still that old 20th century relic, the corporeal junkie) because of the thrill of something unexpected just popping up. Or even the simple pleasures of going into a shop and hearing something you like and asking the shop attendant what it is.

I think there's a lot of enjoyment lost in our instant gratification culture, I remember some albums being like holy grails to me because they aren't available anywhere in the country, I'd have to order them online to hear the band for the first time ever, and I'd be waiting eagerly for the postman every morning to see if my package had arrived...and when it does arrive the music is like magic when you hear it for the first time. And when you've been waiting that long to hear it, you really hear it...

How many times have people downloaded albums and been disappointed? It's too easy just to skip around the songs on iTunes, but when you have a CD you almost force yourself to get to know it, and you're more likely to listen to it through. With the 600 or so albums I own on CD, only a tiny handful have disappointed me on listening to them

cashback

I agree with the argument that music has become more disposable. My friend gave me a loan of his external hard disk last year and told me to just copy them all onto my PC. In the end I just copied over the stuff I thought I'd actually listen to. I knew I'd never bother with most of the music on it.

I still like buying CDs as I generally give the album a proper chance as opposed to when I click on a folder and give it a quick listen.
So many albums in the past that I initially wrote off went on to become favourites. I know it's not an argument against mp3s but I just tend to savour music more from a CD.

Colmfatcamp

It's Evolution, Baby.

There's one for ye all to download now too...

Dante

I have over 40GBs of music on my computer and I must admit, I havn't listened to loads of it! Its mainly due to that fact that if I hear a good song from a band, I usually download and album or two to see if I like them. True, in a many cases its just a waste of time and space but I don't care as long as eventually I find stuff I like however little it may be

ccosgrave

Overheal wrote: »

Despite the greatly enhanced variety of music available to the average music listener, I feel like people's tastes are actually narrowing, more than they're branching out. Sure, the hardcore music fan will go out and dig out obscure artists in 20 different genres. But for the casual indie rock fan, it's just as easy to go out and find 20 other bands who sound just like Sigur Ros.


As a result, you find people digging deeper into genres that they really like, while ignoring the access they have to so many other great genres. The rise of internet forums and communities based around certain kinds of music have only helped listeners to identify with other like-minded individuals and firmly entrench themselves.

This is an absolutely ridiculous thing to have a problem with. People are listening to what they want to listen to, what the hell is the problem? People can listen to what they like, they don't need to have branched tastes if they don't want to. I know he's trying to point out that people are probably less knowledgeable about different genres than in days past, but I don't think this is an issue at all.

I'll accept his point about the saturation of my life with music, however. I do indeed find that I care much less about music than I used to as a result of having constantly having all I want to listen to at my fingertips. However, I also think that the exact same thing happens to people as they get older - they begin to care less about music than they did when they were young and everything was new. I think the author is assuming that his jadedness is a result of iPods and MP3s, when it's mostly just him getting older. There's a bit of both in there, I'll agree, but I think it's predominantly the latter that's the root cause.

To me, it just sounds like he's saying "Hey, remember all those other musical revolutions we had? Well, they were all great but this next one is bad, it's going to **** everything up!"
It's such a dumb thing to say. People are always going to like music, that's a fact. As a result, the music industry is always going to survive and whatever form it exists in doesn't matter because it'll always be accessible. I wasn't around for the advent of CDs, but I can imagine the exact same discussion that we're having now happened in those days too. It might have changed something, but we're all here now saying how great THAT revolution was and we're afraid of next one.

In reality, this revolution is no different than any other that have been encountered. Music will survive and prosper and you can listen to it however you like. The next generation will have their own ways of listening to music and let them at it because it just won't affect you.

Rigsby

ccosgrave wrote: »

This is an absolutely ridiculous thing to have a problem with. People are listening to what they want to listen to, what the hell is the problem? People can listen to what they like, they don't need to have branched tastes if they don't want to. I know he's trying to point out that people are probably less knowledgeable about different genres than in days past, but I don't think this is an issue at all.

I'll accept his point about the saturation of my life with music, however. I do indeed find that I care much less about music than I used to as a result of having constantly having all I want to listen to at my fingertips. However, I also think that the exact same thing happens to people as they get older - they begin to care less about music than they did when they were young and everything was new. I think the author is assuming that his jadedness is a result of iPods and MP3s, when it's mostly just him getting older. There's a bit of both in there, I'll agree, but I think it's predominantly the latter that's the root cause.

To me, it just sounds like he's saying "Hey, remember all those other musical revolutions we had? Well, they were all great but this next one is bad, it's going to **** everything up!"
It's such a dumb thing to say. People are always going to like music, that's a fact. As a result, the music industry is always going to survive and whatever form it exists in doesn't matter because it'll always be accessible. I wasn't around for the advent of CDs, but I can imagine the exact same discussion that we're having now happened in those days too. It might have changed something, but we're all here now saying how great THAT revolution was and we're afraid of next one.

In reality, this revolution is no different than any other that have been encountered. Music will survive and prosper and you can listen to it however you like. The next generation will have their own ways of listening to music and let them at it because it just won't affect you.

Who said there was a problem The article is merely expressing the fact that people have more access to music today than they know what to do with. That can be a good or bad thing, but definitely not a problem.

I dont think that getting older has anything to do with the amount of music you listen to, or how you acquire it. I'm the wrong side of 50 and listen to as much music (but more varied now) as I did in my teens, albeit I admit, on cd.

I was around for the advent of cd's, and while it was regarded as a revolution of sorts, it was still fairly low key, if my memory serves. It was basically another format that you had to go and physically buy. It was light years behind what we have now.

IMO the interpretation you take from the article, i.e. " .... they were all great, but this next one is bad..." is incorrect. My interpretation of it is one of complete fact..... but then maybe it's just to do with my age.

ccosgrave

Rigsby wrote: »

Who said there was a problem The article is merely expressing the fact that people have more access to music today than they know what to do with. That can be a good or bad thing, but definitely not a problem.

What I was referring to there was the fact that the author seems to think that delving into musical genres one enjoys more deeply is a problem. He didn't say it out right, I admit, but it's obvious from the words that he uses that he believes it to be true. I just don't see how anyone could think that listening to more and more of the kind of music one enjoys could possibly be a problem.

Rigsby wrote: »

I dont think that getting older has anything to do with the amount of music you listen to, or how you acquire it. I'm the wrong side of 50 and listen to as much music (but more varied now) as I did in my teens, albeit I admit, on cd.

That's not what I meant either. What I meant was that people tend to get less excited about music as the age than they did when they were younger. Despite only being 20, I myself feel that I get less excited about new music than I used to. I can probably count on one hand the amount of albums that I've been dying to be released in the last three or four years. I listen to the same amount, if not more, music than I did when I was 13, but I'm just less excited or enthused about than I was. I don't think that's a product of the MP3 era, I think it's mainly a result of just getting older and seeing music as a less important part of my life.

Rigsby wrote: »

I was around for the advent of cd's, and while it was regarded as a revolution of sorts, it was still fairly low key, if my memory serves. It was basically another format that you had to go and physically buy. It was light years behind what we have now.

Oh, I know the advent of MP3s is a radical change, and the jump from tape to CD certainly wasn't as great as this current jump. All I'm saying is that music has evolved and changed as a result of new formats, but that it's just not a bad thing. Evolution is never a bad thing.

Rigsby

ccosgrave wrote: »

That's not what I meant either. What I meant was that people tend to get less excited about music as the age than they did when they were younger. Despite only being 20, I myself feel that I get less excited about new music than I used to. I can probably count on one hand the amount of albums that I've been dying to be released in the last three or four years. I listen to the same amount, if not more, music than I did when I was 13, but I'm just less excited or enthused about than I was. I don't think that's a product of the MP3 era, I think it's mainly a result of just getting older and seeing music as a less important part of my life.

Perhaps both of us are exceptions to the "age -and -music -enthusiasm" concept, but I can certainly say that I am as enthuiastic about music now, as I ever was. Ordered a cd on line recently and am watching the postman like a hawk. Music is as much a part of my life now, maybe even more so, as it ever was. I dont think you can generalise about this. Music is different things to different people.

Cianos

ccosgrave wrote: »

That's not what I meant either. What I meant was that people tend to get less excited about music as the age than they did when they were younger. Despite only being 20, I myself feel that I get less excited about new music than I used to. I can probably count on one hand the amount of albums that I've been dying to be released in the last three or four years. I listen to the same amount, if not more, music than I did when I was 13, but I'm just less excited or enthused about than I was. I don't think that's a product of the MP3 era, I think it's mainly a result of just getting older and seeing music as a less important part of my life.

I'd agree with this. The importance of music for most people peaks during puberty when they are trying to make sense of the grown up world, are developing a social life and their choice of music reflects their lifestyle and vice versa.

About the MP3 argument, as people have said, it is evolution. Never before have so many people have had such a wide access to so much music. This imo can only be a good thing. In the past, significant musical innovation took a lot longer to happen, because the level of exposure to current styles was nowhere as big.

Today artists have the ability to grab influences from all over. 40 years ago only a handful of Westerners would have had the privilege to listen to traditional African drumming. Now someone big in to creating beats can start exploring it in a matter of minutes. The creativity is given new avenues of representation without monetary or logistical restrictions.

Proclaiming that there is more enjoyment in listening to a CD than an MP3 is stretching the experience beyond what only matters...the actual music. This is more to do with tangential experiences relating to the psychology of consumerism and the verification of choice. Nevertheless, it is true in most cases that people enjoy something more if they have worked to get it. But bringing it back to the very basics, in a vacuum, a song *should* sound just the same no matter where you got it from (disregarding technical factors).

As for the wide range of choice, it relates to an idea called the paradox of choice. The paradox of choice means that it is hard to enjoy what you have when you know you could have something different. To use an example, it sounds appealing to have a choice between 50 different salad dressings. But the more options I have, the less probable it is I will choose the best one. So in knowing this, I don't enjoy the one I do have as much as I could, because I'm always aware that I could probably be eating a nicer salad dressing. Whereas if I only had a choice between 4 salad dressings to begin with, I can be pretty confident I made the best choice, and so the perception of missing out on a better tasting salad dressing is not as relevant.

But I think if you are aware of this, then it is not so much of an issue. It just means you have to change what choice means to you. We are the first generation of music listeners to have such a wide choice, and there will be an adjustment phase required. Right now, we are like children let loose in a sweet shop. When the dust settles I think the positives will outweigh the negatives.

Rigsby

Cianos wrote: »

I'd agree with this. The importance of music for most people peaks during puberty when they are trying to make sense of the grown up world, are developing a social life and their choice of music reflects their lifestyle and vice versa.

That makes me the exception to the rule so. Good to know I'm unique.

Good post BTW.

Aridstarling

I agree with the article totally. I do have to stop myself from just going crazy with the downloads, theres always about 20 new albums everyday that I think I'd love to have! But I'd never get to listen to them, how could you give them the time they deserve?


One thing that I feel has happened over the last while is that often you can't tell anything about the person by looking at their ipods or hard-drives. Not in the way you could with CDs. I mean, if you're in someone's house and you get a chance to peruse their CD (or vinyl) collection, you can probably tell what kind of person you're dealing with. You know if someone has a bunch of clash and Damned cds in their rack, they probably have a touch of the outsider/rebel about them. If its all James Taylor and Leonard Cohen, they are probably a little less wild. Some people of course had loads of different stuff, they were always my favourites. Nowadays you see 40gb of stuff on someone's ipod and you can't tell anything about their personality, Beyonce next to Brian Eno. Check the play count and chances are neither have been listened to, its sad really. People just hear about things but never get really attatched to them.

Someone made a good point that I quite liked, I never download something I really, really want. Like Bon Iver or Mick Flannery from last year, I wanted something tangible to symbolise my love for these artists. Just makes it more real for me anyway.

Scubadevils

I went through a crazy download phase about 2 years ago and had music from endless different artists and genres downloading 24 hours a day. It was like some psychotic need to have every piece of music by a certain artist or label that 3 hours earlier I'd never even heard of before. I ended up with about 1TB of music that there was no way I was ever going to get round to hearing it all, let alone appreciating it fully. In saying that, I did discover a lot of music that I would have never found except this downloading and a large amount now takes pride of place in my collection in CD or vinyl format.

I've since been on a similar hunt for music but reverted back to CD's and vinyl. A much more costly hunt but also much more rewarding for me. I still prefer the physical charm of a CD - the sleeve notes, the artwork, the jewel case or the digipak - waiting for the post for the next delivery from somewhere around the world... be it a new release or one that I've tracked down 2nd hand from a store in Berlin. Wandering into a music shop in some city you are visiting and trawling through their 2nd hand section or just browsing through the A-Z. Trying to decide what CD to listen to in the evening and selecting a shortlist of maybe 15 CD's that make it over beside the stereo or computer... the same for the car, carrying out a full stack of CD's to stick in the glovebox for what might only be a 20 minute journey, but you just need to make sure you have a variety should the mood determine a different genre. It's just not the same for me to browse through folders or a list in iTunes etc.

For me there is no comparison in terms of physical releases versus MP3 etc. I love my MP3 player and it's fantastic for the gym, traveling or in bed with headphones but it will never replace my CD and vinyl collection - it will just sit beside as a nice compliment I suppose.

As for the comment about music becoming less of interest as you get older, all I can really say to that is that you must not be a music lover to start with then - at 32 music is as important in my life as it has ever been and I think that passion only gets stronger with age.

upmeath

Best music-related article I've read in a long time and as a result one of the most interesting threads I've seen on boards for quite some time. Many thanks to the OP for sharing it!
I'm in my early 20s but it may surprise some of you to hear that my music collection does include cassette tapes (a handful). I've an extensive collection of CDs and I've an iPod onto which I've condensed my CD collection.
I add good music as I find it, I often download half a dozen or so albums each week, some new and some not so new, and now have just under 90GB on that. While that might seem like a lot to handle I listen to albums from start to finish, I rarely skip a song.
I still have a few CDs in the car for driving to because the iTrip does a lame job of picking up on split channel effects and the atmosphere that a CD creates. I don't think the physical medium is dead yet, the hard copy, but it really has become something for completists, diehards and people who care about audio quality rather than a medium for the masses as it was for almost two decades.