I believe that many people are not looking for new music in the places where it's being made and sold. The few major labels that survived the 1990s have cut back on their output ruthlessly - like Columbia's axing of its entire jazz division and roster of artists at the end of the 90s.
People have to release their music themselves, or work with small labels that simply aren't on many people's radar, albeit the places where new music is sold (speaking of jazz, for one) are easy enough to find. Ted Gioia is about the same age as me; where he sees a very bleak landscape, I believe that there's an exciting scene (well, scenes) for new music of many kinds. I think many people are looking for a return to the status quo that existed prior to the advent of music downloads and streaming. It's not going to happen. The business models per music distribution changed so quickly in the late 90s-early 00s that many people still have the equivalent of whiplash.
I'm not trying to defend onerous practices like completely inadequate compensation of artists by streaming services. But I am saying that the proliferation of many small, independent outlets for buying and listening to new music + the discovery of new artists is how and where things are happening - and Gioia and others like him just don't talk about these places. Sometimes it seems as if they aren't even aware of them. That accounts for their pessimism and "the sky is falling" attitude.
It's been over 2 decades since I last reviewed music for now-defunct print outlets, so I'm no longer getting promos from anyone... and yet, I believe there's such an explosion of creativity in so many non-mainstream genres that I'm literally years behind in finding and listening to new music. To be clear, I never covered genres that sell big - my focus was on jazz and so-called "world music." And yet, I cannot keep up with current releases of merit. Probably because I know that they're not being issued by major labels.
Another thing to keep in mind: that major US newspapers, like the NYT and WPost have relentlessly cut back on coverage of the arts and letters. Critics dismissed (b/c of payroll cuts), budgets cut back to nothing, no real coverage of new books (looking at the NYT and WPost in particular), let alone new and innovative music. I guess it 1st became real to me when Don Heckman, who covered jazz + many other genres, was "let go" by the LA Times. (Back when I had a music blog, Heckman somehow found it and added me to his list of links. I did zero PR as such, except for getting an aggregator, The Hype Machine, to pick up my feed. The Hype Machine is still a good source for new music, even as music blogging has fallen off since the late 00s-early teens.)
Many people are looking at things like Amazon's sales figures to "prove" that music and other arts have stagnated. That's exactly where they *shouldn't* be looking, in my opinion.
Granted, my views might seem very left-field, but that's partly due to the fact that the ways of finding new music have shifted irrevocably. Some labels (owned by megacorps now) have always relied on reissues to generate sales. Deutsche Grammophon, EMI's classical divisions, and formerly independent labels - like Blue Note - are more about back catalog than anything else, but that's been true since the 1980s.
While I realize there's much buzz about "the algorithms," if one does enough searches on sites like Spotify and Tidal, all sorts of new and interesting artists and releases start showing up. (Although it's taken me a few years to get the kinds of results I'm looking for on Spotify; Tidal's results are still very off, but I think their search engine isn't nearly as refined as Spotify's.) My "trick" is to click through the "similar to/related" artist results on those sites + Bandcamp. Plug away at that for some time, and what shows up is *far* more interesting than many people are willing to believe possible.
I think Millenials and other, even younger people have created their own infrastructure for music, and many critics are simply not looking at those sites/places, etc. This has been the case since the early 00s, really. Many critics also restrict themselves to artists (and song lyrics, if any) from the English-speaking world. So they don't see or hear a great deal of good new music. And yet.
As a P.S., if someone like me - a Cold War baby - can find these things, then so can anyone who has access to a decent search engine. They have to be willing to do some digging on their own, though, b/c nobody's getting spoon-fed by major labels anymore. (I'd argue that what people my age think of as "major labels" are largely extinct and have been for some time now.)
As for coverage of new books, music, etc., I now look to European papers (in English, mainly). There's a whole universe out there, and I hope more people realize it soon. (Though I have my doubts on that.)
Anyway! My apologies for the long comment.
P.P.S. I am wary of becoming stuck with arts coverage on any single platform - like this one. It turns into a recursive thing very fast. So yes, some people on Substack seem to be "leading" critics and historians, when in truth they're just one of many voices competing for our attention. Wider reading can be very rewarding, imo. (I wasn't even aware of TG's blog on Substack until about 9 months ago, FWIW. I'm betting there are other writers, on Substack and similar platforms, who are doing good coverage but aren't generating much, if any, buzz, not least b/c they might not *want* to attract that kind of attention. )
Thanks for your comment, lagz9. As I mentioned in the piece, I regularly find very good music and my post previous to this focused on just that. In fairness to Gioia, I think the same can be said of him. He listens to small labels, reads niche media, and promotes obscure artists.
I agree with no return to the status quo, which wouldn't be possible, and neither would be desirable; we have an amazing new technological infrastructure that offers the possibility for a genuinely more democratic music world. However, as things are, the 'spoonfeeding' of major record labels seems to have been replaced by the 'spoonfeeding' of a few algorithms, and there is not even an attempt to pretend these tech platforms care about music. Spotify will sooner or later guide you to passive listening, much of which is quite possibly AI-generated. I have a 14-year-old niece who, despite living in a musical region, was clear to me that none of her friends listen to albums, only playlists, and beyond Taylor Swift and Beyonce, they are not even aware of artists. Of course, other young people are, but I would not take for granted the ubiquitous importance of music in the lives of young people; it is something that needs to be cultivated, and that requires work, infrastructure, and education.
It's for reasons like this that I avoid the 'positive' outlook of 'just look harder', which tends to ignore the economic and political reality where the music is coming from. I know there are excellent artists, but in a neoliberal age, virtually all their forms of funding have dried up, meaning that for many - and even some of the world's best - music has become an elaborate hobby. The last form of funding that is still somewhat there is arts/government funding, but with squeezed economics and authoritarian governments taking power, that might dry up too (look to Britain and the London Sinfonia / ENO cuts). From this perspective, being positive strikes me as having the potential to overlook a whole series of problems, which if they are not addressed, will only get worse. Therefore, while I am not 'positive' about the current state of things, I am hopeful about how things could be if we dare to imagine something better.
I guess I'd like to see writers actively engaging with younger people, on music and any number of subjects. Am saying this in part b/c a lot of highly creative young people, from the early 00s-now, have found ways to discuss the creative projects they're passionate about - even collaborate - via the internet. And while i have little love for FB (and don't use or follow any other platforms), it isn't *all* bad.
At any rate, it would be nice to hear new voices in these kinds of discussions. And that might avert a lot of alarmism. (At the same time, I'm alarmed by certain things, too, but that can expand to a point where people completely overlook positive aspects of things.)
I'm from the US. Funding for the arts here is so.very.bad. It has been for years.
As for playlists, I don't necessarily think they're a bad thing, especially not when people create their own, which they can easily do on streaming services. (Am embarrassed to admit how many I've got on both Tidal and Spotify; probably hundreds. I'd like to start something on Mixcloud, and playlists are necessary for any form of broadcast, whether over the air or online. I like to juxtapose things that are seemingly unrelated, but have a lot of common ground if/when one hears them back to back, and so on.)
I'm in my late 60s and tend to get very annoyed with people my age and older who tend towards negativity - sometimes cruelly so - in regard to people who are younger, by one or many generations. We all have blind spots - me, too - but I do feel like I've been hearing the same kind of thing for over 25 years now. Take the book titled The Shallows, which came out in the mid-00s. It had people panicking. Then, all the uproar over e-readers + the supposed disappearance of physical books - didn't happen. Or, when I was a teen, the way older people inveighed against psychedelic rock, Bob Dylan, and who knows what all else. (It wasn't evil and it didn't "corrupt" anyone.)
I'm not entirely sold on arguments against algorithms, although I'm not fond 9f them, either. I see what you're saying, but how much different is a playlist than turning on the radio and listening to someone spin discs, really? If anything, the music industry's control of the airwaves (in the US) seems much more sinister to me than playlists do. I mean, maybe I'm wrong and i hope I'm the 1st to admit it if so. But at this point, I'm not on the bandwagon. I think we underestimate younger people in many ways as well.
Just musings here - nothing definitive! Though I do see some Luddite-ism in many of the dire predictions about young people and tech. And b/c most radio here i
s commercial, out situation is different than yours, to a degree. Sadly, automated radio stations have existed since the 80s (here), and the only broadcasting system where a huge variety of "classical music" (generic term) was played - NPR - stopped most all classical programming in favor of news and talk, back in the 90s. It was up to individual stations, but they all seemed to shift. Now, the best outlets for new music of most any kind are college radio stations, Pacifica stations (a small group of allied independent stations), and a handful of "freeform" stations - over the air, that is.
I think you are misconstruing an argument about political and economic ideology for one that is either generational or technological. I'm unsure how one could blame young people for an ideology conceived in the early 20th century and implemented in the late 20th century.
In terms of algorithms. My last album, The Code, was composed entirely from an algorithm I coded. I'm in no way 'against' algorithms. Being against algorithms is like being against knives - it makes no sense. Similarly, with young people, my first release, Geometric, was a collaboration with a 20-year-old cellist who was superb. I've recently done some recordings with a 19-year-old percussionist who was a sublime player. With musicians, I have yet to meet anyone enthusiastic about Spotify - young or old - but I want to avoid going there because it's something of a distraction.
What I am describing is not about generation or technology but a series of ideas and values that have become dominant. They might have technological and generational effects, but I do believe these are effects not causes. These ideas need to be examined and confronted and by doing so, we can be more creative and imaginative about the future (including technology). If I am wrong about this - and I could be - it's simply due diligence, which is no bad thing, but I am aware the climate crisis got so bad partly due to excessive optimism and a lack of willingness to be critical of problems that were only going to worsen.
I actually wasn't thinking of political/ideological points. Just aesthetic ones, and things that I see happening here in the US, where people of my generation are really not kind to Millennials (etc). About their supposed selfishness, poor taste, etc. (And suppposed lack of work ethic, and on and on - all while people are struggling to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt, for undergrad and grad school - while people of my generation had student loan debt, it wasn't anything like as punishing as what younger people are dealing with now. And so on.)
Over here, young singer-songwriters get their work onto Spotify ASAP, because people *hear* it. I know about this only b/c a friend's son, who is quite talented, got signed by an indie label via Spotify He's been on several tours already (mainly East and West Coasts) as a direct result of his work being available there. For singer-songwriters, Bandcamp isn't a good option, unless they're very avant-garde or "niche" in some way or another. Although this isn't exactly my cuppa, i can't deny that it's working for my friend's son and others. And Spotify does have "live in studio" sessions featuring many up and coming artists who are independent, either releasing their work themselves or else via small indie labels. I can see why this kind of thing isn't on many peoples' radar, but nonetheless, there are a good many listeners, in this country, at least.
Funny thing: a lot of "specialized" playlists on Spotify seem to be put together by employees who know the music they're dealing with. There are the superficial and obvious Top 40 playlists, and then there are the more interesting ones, which cover everything from the spiritual jazz of the 60s-70s to Sami music from Norway, Sweden and Finland, and so on. I've also seen many playlists created by artists (mostly jazz and "roots" music folk from here, Europe, and Latin America). Now *those* playlists are well-thought out, often focusing on music and musicians who've influenced the artists who create them. And there are others that actually promote (unofficially, no money involved) their peers.
The streaming service I greatly preferred, Rdio, crashed a long time ago. They just couldn't compete with Spotify, even though their UI was better, and it seemed like they cared about non-commercial music in ways that Spotify never has. Their search engine was far superior, in that it was truly possible to pull back catalog titles from individual labels in ways that can't be done on the current crop of streaming servIces. Their UI wasn't perfect, but still - seeing all of ethomusicologist Hugh Tracey's field recordings of popular and folkloric music from Africa scroll up on a single page was a revelation. (Also true for many African-owned and run labels, all the field recordings on VDE-Gallo, Auvidis, etc. - and so many indie jazz labels from all over the world, etc.)
Even now, there's (for example) a pretty incredible selection of music released by Hungaroton that's available on Spotify; both classical and Hungarian field and studio recordings of folk music. (Sadly, while Kodaly's field recordings are on Spotify, Bartok's aren't, but... if you want Hungaroton's Finno-Ugrian boxed set, it's there.)
No doubt few listeners mine "esoteric" back catalog, but I figure I'm not the only one doing it. (Also on Tidal.) There is really too much to comprehend. But at least folks who want to listen to new and hard to get import releases from all over the world can hear those titles. (I'd buy a bunch of things - CDs - if I could.)
Please forgive my rambling: it's late and I now realize that I didn't take the political and economic aspects of your post into consideration. Our countries are light years apart in many ways, especially when it comes to radio broadcasting (overwhelmingly commercial here; always has been), just to name one area where the UK and the US diverge.
I hope this makes sense and/or is helpful rather than confusing.
I appreciate you sticking up for millennials, especially as I am one! I completely agree with the unpleasantness directed towards young people - their work ethic, etc. ageism, whichever direction it is pointed in is just as toxic as any other 'ism'. It achieves nothing.
Also, I am sitting about 1ft away from a Hugh Tracey kalimba! A fellow fan.
Your attitude strikes me as being one of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. That's very important. I am critical not to pour scorn on things, but to attempt to imagine something better. After all, nothing stays the same. One only has to look at what is happening in politics and in the environment to see something is seriously wrong, and I think this has had an impact on music.
If you are getting a lot from Spotify, and your friend's son is realising his dreams through it, that's a good thing. I don't want to ruin anyone's enjoyment of music or subtract from the things that are working. I appreciate your replies. The point of this article was to stimulate conversation, not just put across a view.
Hey, thanks, Dom. I remember how harshly many people (my parents' generation) criticized my generation when we were young, and frankly, what I hear/read per my generation commenting on younger people is... the same words, phrases, characterizations, etc. that *we* endured. I think it's something we all have to reckon with as we age, and it's not easy to overcome. The pitfalls are many, but it's possible to navigate them reasonably well. (Knowing that I've thought and said some very unfair things myself.)
I don't love or even particularly like Spotify, Tidal, et. al., and think their design and UIs are poorly designed and completely impersonal.What I like about these companies is that I can, with a bit of time spent doing searches, find a *lot* of good music that I'd never know about otherwise. It's certainly no substitute for browsing in a good record store, though in some ways, it's more thorough. (Now that lists of many artists' credits are being added to the database.) It's certainly far more comprehensive that Discogs, if only b/c users submit info. to Discogs in most cases, and there are big gaps where I'd never have expected to find them.
The point, though, is that what flashes up in front of me when I do searches is work by musicians who could be my kids or grandchildren. That's as it should be! Some of the apparent blind alleys I've followed in the past year led me straight to a number of younger musicians from DC and the surrounding area who are top-notch but have yet to gain traction outside of the area. (I lived there for many years.) It's a great town for music (jazz, classical, music from other cultures), but finding local artists requires a bit of legwork. There's little publicity. That said, I found some excellent work (inevitably, by folks younger than myself) in a variety of genres. I'd never have heard of them otherwise. This is also true of many younger artists from other countries (non-English speaking, for the most part).
I used to be a researcher (visual art/art history), which is much the same as looking for music. You never know what you'll stumble on until you start looking.
There's a lot of serendipity involved. My current find is by a group called the Russian Guitar Quartet. Initially, they played 7-string, 19th c. Russian guitars exclusively. There's a lot of repertoire (more than anyone might guess), and I'm aware of it solely b/c a DC-area classical label issued some titles in the 90s. I was looking for those recordings when I found the group. Their 1st CD was all transciptions of works by 19th c. composers, the ones everybody knows, but with a focus on those composers' attempts to evoke music from the Caucasus and Central Asia. (You know, like Borodin's Polovtsian Dances, but more obscure to Westerners.) The guitars have always been played in non-standard tunings, which are (along with that extra string or strings) very amenable transciptions of solo instrument and orchestral music. (The group still exists, but with new personnel, 6-string classical guitars, and a far more Western repertoire.) So... there's just one disc by the original members - and the transcriptions and playing are truly marvelous. (Info. - https://tidal.com/album/282588821?u )
I'd never have found this recording any other way. (Well, not unless I lived in Manhattan and had plenty of time to browse at certain used record stores.)
I admittedly prefer Bandcamp + actual CDs for many reasons, but streamers have hidden depth to their catalogs, and persistence is rewarded. That said, I prefer purchases if possible. And I like knowing that the money I spend on Bandcamp goes directly to the artists. (Am an amateur musician - various non-Western percussion instruments - so I can appreciate the whole Bandcamp setup.)
It's ironic: streaming services are very impersonal by nature, and yet, I believe they can be rewarding for discovery of music + as listening services. (Tidal's audio is by far the best I've heard per streamers; Spotify's files are very compressed by comparison and just don't sound right to me.)
One last thing: I've studied and played with people a good deal younger than myself in beginning to learn music from (mostly) Guinea and Mali, and it's refreshing! Back when I was helping comp for dance classes, I loved seeing the way students (mostly teenagers) would gradually find the music and movements to be increasingly natural to them - and then their own styles started to become visible. It was delightful, though exhausting (for me), mainly due to the tempi we had to maintain. Great training for musicians, and really, the way that music is meant to be played - for others to dance, improv on both the dancers' and the lead drummer's part, etc. (Plus ensemble playing - the melody is played on the bass drums used, and that's where I like to be.)
Thanks for being kind about my rambling, but I did want to highlight a few ways in which streamers have worked well for me, in hopes that others might try that approach for themselves. *Caveat: if the streamers only had pop and whatnot from English-speaking countries, I doubt I'd bother with them. But there's so much "niche" music that it's worthwhile, if far from ideal. (I used to be hypercritical myself, and still can be, which is why I somehow or other started seeking out the good, vs. the perfect.)
Excellent analysis. Well done. Thanks for this.
Thanks for your kind comment, Eduardo.
I believe that many people are not looking for new music in the places where it's being made and sold. The few major labels that survived the 1990s have cut back on their output ruthlessly - like Columbia's axing of its entire jazz division and roster of artists at the end of the 90s.
People have to release their music themselves, or work with small labels that simply aren't on many people's radar, albeit the places where new music is sold (speaking of jazz, for one) are easy enough to find. Ted Gioia is about the same age as me; where he sees a very bleak landscape, I believe that there's an exciting scene (well, scenes) for new music of many kinds. I think many people are looking for a return to the status quo that existed prior to the advent of music downloads and streaming. It's not going to happen. The business models per music distribution changed so quickly in the late 90s-early 00s that many people still have the equivalent of whiplash.
I'm not trying to defend onerous practices like completely inadequate compensation of artists by streaming services. But I am saying that the proliferation of many small, independent outlets for buying and listening to new music + the discovery of new artists is how and where things are happening - and Gioia and others like him just don't talk about these places. Sometimes it seems as if they aren't even aware of them. That accounts for their pessimism and "the sky is falling" attitude.
It's been over 2 decades since I last reviewed music for now-defunct print outlets, so I'm no longer getting promos from anyone... and yet, I believe there's such an explosion of creativity in so many non-mainstream genres that I'm literally years behind in finding and listening to new music. To be clear, I never covered genres that sell big - my focus was on jazz and so-called "world music." And yet, I cannot keep up with current releases of merit. Probably because I know that they're not being issued by major labels.
Another thing to keep in mind: that major US newspapers, like the NYT and WPost have relentlessly cut back on coverage of the arts and letters. Critics dismissed (b/c of payroll cuts), budgets cut back to nothing, no real coverage of new books (looking at the NYT and WPost in particular), let alone new and innovative music. I guess it 1st became real to me when Don Heckman, who covered jazz + many other genres, was "let go" by the LA Times. (Back when I had a music blog, Heckman somehow found it and added me to his list of links. I did zero PR as such, except for getting an aggregator, The Hype Machine, to pick up my feed. The Hype Machine is still a good source for new music, even as music blogging has fallen off since the late 00s-early teens.)
Many people are looking at things like Amazon's sales figures to "prove" that music and other arts have stagnated. That's exactly where they *shouldn't* be looking, in my opinion.
Granted, my views might seem very left-field, but that's partly due to the fact that the ways of finding new music have shifted irrevocably. Some labels (owned by megacorps now) have always relied on reissues to generate sales. Deutsche Grammophon, EMI's classical divisions, and formerly independent labels - like Blue Note - are more about back catalog than anything else, but that's been true since the 1980s.
While I realize there's much buzz about "the algorithms," if one does enough searches on sites like Spotify and Tidal, all sorts of new and interesting artists and releases start showing up. (Although it's taken me a few years to get the kinds of results I'm looking for on Spotify; Tidal's results are still very off, but I think their search engine isn't nearly as refined as Spotify's.) My "trick" is to click through the "similar to/related" artist results on those sites + Bandcamp. Plug away at that for some time, and what shows up is *far* more interesting than many people are willing to believe possible.
I think Millenials and other, even younger people have created their own infrastructure for music, and many critics are simply not looking at those sites/places, etc. This has been the case since the early 00s, really. Many critics also restrict themselves to artists (and song lyrics, if any) from the English-speaking world. So they don't see or hear a great deal of good new music. And yet.
As a P.S., if someone like me - a Cold War baby - can find these things, then so can anyone who has access to a decent search engine. They have to be willing to do some digging on their own, though, b/c nobody's getting spoon-fed by major labels anymore. (I'd argue that what people my age think of as "major labels" are largely extinct and have been for some time now.)
As for coverage of new books, music, etc., I now look to European papers (in English, mainly). There's a whole universe out there, and I hope more people realize it soon. (Though I have my doubts on that.)
Anyway! My apologies for the long comment.
P.P.S. I am wary of becoming stuck with arts coverage on any single platform - like this one. It turns into a recursive thing very fast. So yes, some people on Substack seem to be "leading" critics and historians, when in truth they're just one of many voices competing for our attention. Wider reading can be very rewarding, imo. (I wasn't even aware of TG's blog on Substack until about 9 months ago, FWIW. I'm betting there are other writers, on Substack and similar platforms, who are doing good coverage but aren't generating much, if any, buzz, not least b/c they might not *want* to attract that kind of attention. )
/rant
Thanks for your comment, lagz9. As I mentioned in the piece, I regularly find very good music and my post previous to this focused on just that. In fairness to Gioia, I think the same can be said of him. He listens to small labels, reads niche media, and promotes obscure artists.
I agree with no return to the status quo, which wouldn't be possible, and neither would be desirable; we have an amazing new technological infrastructure that offers the possibility for a genuinely more democratic music world. However, as things are, the 'spoonfeeding' of major record labels seems to have been replaced by the 'spoonfeeding' of a few algorithms, and there is not even an attempt to pretend these tech platforms care about music. Spotify will sooner or later guide you to passive listening, much of which is quite possibly AI-generated. I have a 14-year-old niece who, despite living in a musical region, was clear to me that none of her friends listen to albums, only playlists, and beyond Taylor Swift and Beyonce, they are not even aware of artists. Of course, other young people are, but I would not take for granted the ubiquitous importance of music in the lives of young people; it is something that needs to be cultivated, and that requires work, infrastructure, and education.
It's for reasons like this that I avoid the 'positive' outlook of 'just look harder', which tends to ignore the economic and political reality where the music is coming from. I know there are excellent artists, but in a neoliberal age, virtually all their forms of funding have dried up, meaning that for many - and even some of the world's best - music has become an elaborate hobby. The last form of funding that is still somewhat there is arts/government funding, but with squeezed economics and authoritarian governments taking power, that might dry up too (look to Britain and the London Sinfonia / ENO cuts). From this perspective, being positive strikes me as having the potential to overlook a whole series of problems, which if they are not addressed, will only get worse. Therefore, while I am not 'positive' about the current state of things, I am hopeful about how things could be if we dare to imagine something better.
I guess I'd like to see writers actively engaging with younger people, on music and any number of subjects. Am saying this in part b/c a lot of highly creative young people, from the early 00s-now, have found ways to discuss the creative projects they're passionate about - even collaborate - via the internet. And while i have little love for FB (and don't use or follow any other platforms), it isn't *all* bad.
At any rate, it would be nice to hear new voices in these kinds of discussions. And that might avert a lot of alarmism. (At the same time, I'm alarmed by certain things, too, but that can expand to a point where people completely overlook positive aspects of things.)
I'm from the US. Funding for the arts here is so.very.bad. It has been for years.
As for playlists, I don't necessarily think they're a bad thing, especially not when people create their own, which they can easily do on streaming services. (Am embarrassed to admit how many I've got on both Tidal and Spotify; probably hundreds. I'd like to start something on Mixcloud, and playlists are necessary for any form of broadcast, whether over the air or online. I like to juxtapose things that are seemingly unrelated, but have a lot of common ground if/when one hears them back to back, and so on.)
I'm in my late 60s and tend to get very annoyed with people my age and older who tend towards negativity - sometimes cruelly so - in regard to people who are younger, by one or many generations. We all have blind spots - me, too - but I do feel like I've been hearing the same kind of thing for over 25 years now. Take the book titled The Shallows, which came out in the mid-00s. It had people panicking. Then, all the uproar over e-readers + the supposed disappearance of physical books - didn't happen. Or, when I was a teen, the way older people inveighed against psychedelic rock, Bob Dylan, and who knows what all else. (It wasn't evil and it didn't "corrupt" anyone.)
I'm not entirely sold on arguments against algorithms, although I'm not fond 9f them, either. I see what you're saying, but how much different is a playlist than turning on the radio and listening to someone spin discs, really? If anything, the music industry's control of the airwaves (in the US) seems much more sinister to me than playlists do. I mean, maybe I'm wrong and i hope I'm the 1st to admit it if so. But at this point, I'm not on the bandwagon. I think we underestimate younger people in many ways as well.
Just musings here - nothing definitive! Though I do see some Luddite-ism in many of the dire predictions about young people and tech. And b/c most radio here i
s commercial, out situation is different than yours, to a degree. Sadly, automated radio stations have existed since the 80s (here), and the only broadcasting system where a huge variety of "classical music" (generic term) was played - NPR - stopped most all classical programming in favor of news and talk, back in the 90s. It was up to individual stations, but they all seemed to shift. Now, the best outlets for new music of most any kind are college radio stations, Pacifica stations (a small group of allied independent stations), and a handful of "freeform" stations - over the air, that is.
I think you are misconstruing an argument about political and economic ideology for one that is either generational or technological. I'm unsure how one could blame young people for an ideology conceived in the early 20th century and implemented in the late 20th century.
In terms of algorithms. My last album, The Code, was composed entirely from an algorithm I coded. I'm in no way 'against' algorithms. Being against algorithms is like being against knives - it makes no sense. Similarly, with young people, my first release, Geometric, was a collaboration with a 20-year-old cellist who was superb. I've recently done some recordings with a 19-year-old percussionist who was a sublime player. With musicians, I have yet to meet anyone enthusiastic about Spotify - young or old - but I want to avoid going there because it's something of a distraction.
What I am describing is not about generation or technology but a series of ideas and values that have become dominant. They might have technological and generational effects, but I do believe these are effects not causes. These ideas need to be examined and confronted and by doing so, we can be more creative and imaginative about the future (including technology). If I am wrong about this - and I could be - it's simply due diligence, which is no bad thing, but I am aware the climate crisis got so bad partly due to excessive optimism and a lack of willingness to be critical of problems that were only going to worsen.
I actually wasn't thinking of political/ideological points. Just aesthetic ones, and things that I see happening here in the US, where people of my generation are really not kind to Millennials (etc). About their supposed selfishness, poor taste, etc. (And suppposed lack of work ethic, and on and on - all while people are struggling to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt, for undergrad and grad school - while people of my generation had student loan debt, it wasn't anything like as punishing as what younger people are dealing with now. And so on.)
Over here, young singer-songwriters get their work onto Spotify ASAP, because people *hear* it. I know about this only b/c a friend's son, who is quite talented, got signed by an indie label via Spotify He's been on several tours already (mainly East and West Coasts) as a direct result of his work being available there. For singer-songwriters, Bandcamp isn't a good option, unless they're very avant-garde or "niche" in some way or another. Although this isn't exactly my cuppa, i can't deny that it's working for my friend's son and others. And Spotify does have "live in studio" sessions featuring many up and coming artists who are independent, either releasing their work themselves or else via small indie labels. I can see why this kind of thing isn't on many peoples' radar, but nonetheless, there are a good many listeners, in this country, at least.
Funny thing: a lot of "specialized" playlists on Spotify seem to be put together by employees who know the music they're dealing with. There are the superficial and obvious Top 40 playlists, and then there are the more interesting ones, which cover everything from the spiritual jazz of the 60s-70s to Sami music from Norway, Sweden and Finland, and so on. I've also seen many playlists created by artists (mostly jazz and "roots" music folk from here, Europe, and Latin America). Now *those* playlists are well-thought out, often focusing on music and musicians who've influenced the artists who create them. And there are others that actually promote (unofficially, no money involved) their peers.
The streaming service I greatly preferred, Rdio, crashed a long time ago. They just couldn't compete with Spotify, even though their UI was better, and it seemed like they cared about non-commercial music in ways that Spotify never has. Their search engine was far superior, in that it was truly possible to pull back catalog titles from individual labels in ways that can't be done on the current crop of streaming servIces. Their UI wasn't perfect, but still - seeing all of ethomusicologist Hugh Tracey's field recordings of popular and folkloric music from Africa scroll up on a single page was a revelation. (Also true for many African-owned and run labels, all the field recordings on VDE-Gallo, Auvidis, etc. - and so many indie jazz labels from all over the world, etc.)
Even now, there's (for example) a pretty incredible selection of music released by Hungaroton that's available on Spotify; both classical and Hungarian field and studio recordings of folk music. (Sadly, while Kodaly's field recordings are on Spotify, Bartok's aren't, but... if you want Hungaroton's Finno-Ugrian boxed set, it's there.)
No doubt few listeners mine "esoteric" back catalog, but I figure I'm not the only one doing it. (Also on Tidal.) There is really too much to comprehend. But at least folks who want to listen to new and hard to get import releases from all over the world can hear those titles. (I'd buy a bunch of things - CDs - if I could.)
Please forgive my rambling: it's late and I now realize that I didn't take the political and economic aspects of your post into consideration. Our countries are light years apart in many ways, especially when it comes to radio broadcasting (overwhelmingly commercial here; always has been), just to name one area where the UK and the US diverge.
I hope this makes sense and/or is helpful rather than confusing.
I appreciate you sticking up for millennials, especially as I am one! I completely agree with the unpleasantness directed towards young people - their work ethic, etc. ageism, whichever direction it is pointed in is just as toxic as any other 'ism'. It achieves nothing.
Also, I am sitting about 1ft away from a Hugh Tracey kalimba! A fellow fan.
Your attitude strikes me as being one of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. That's very important. I am critical not to pour scorn on things, but to attempt to imagine something better. After all, nothing stays the same. One only has to look at what is happening in politics and in the environment to see something is seriously wrong, and I think this has had an impact on music.
If you are getting a lot from Spotify, and your friend's son is realising his dreams through it, that's a good thing. I don't want to ruin anyone's enjoyment of music or subtract from the things that are working. I appreciate your replies. The point of this article was to stimulate conversation, not just put across a view.
Hey, thanks, Dom. I remember how harshly many people (my parents' generation) criticized my generation when we were young, and frankly, what I hear/read per my generation commenting on younger people is... the same words, phrases, characterizations, etc. that *we* endured. I think it's something we all have to reckon with as we age, and it's not easy to overcome. The pitfalls are many, but it's possible to navigate them reasonably well. (Knowing that I've thought and said some very unfair things myself.)
I don't love or even particularly like Spotify, Tidal, et. al., and think their design and UIs are poorly designed and completely impersonal.What I like about these companies is that I can, with a bit of time spent doing searches, find a *lot* of good music that I'd never know about otherwise. It's certainly no substitute for browsing in a good record store, though in some ways, it's more thorough. (Now that lists of many artists' credits are being added to the database.) It's certainly far more comprehensive that Discogs, if only b/c users submit info. to Discogs in most cases, and there are big gaps where I'd never have expected to find them.
The point, though, is that what flashes up in front of me when I do searches is work by musicians who could be my kids or grandchildren. That's as it should be! Some of the apparent blind alleys I've followed in the past year led me straight to a number of younger musicians from DC and the surrounding area who are top-notch but have yet to gain traction outside of the area. (I lived there for many years.) It's a great town for music (jazz, classical, music from other cultures), but finding local artists requires a bit of legwork. There's little publicity. That said, I found some excellent work (inevitably, by folks younger than myself) in a variety of genres. I'd never have heard of them otherwise. This is also true of many younger artists from other countries (non-English speaking, for the most part).
I used to be a researcher (visual art/art history), which is much the same as looking for music. You never know what you'll stumble on until you start looking.
There's a lot of serendipity involved. My current find is by a group called the Russian Guitar Quartet. Initially, they played 7-string, 19th c. Russian guitars exclusively. There's a lot of repertoire (more than anyone might guess), and I'm aware of it solely b/c a DC-area classical label issued some titles in the 90s. I was looking for those recordings when I found the group. Their 1st CD was all transciptions of works by 19th c. composers, the ones everybody knows, but with a focus on those composers' attempts to evoke music from the Caucasus and Central Asia. (You know, like Borodin's Polovtsian Dances, but more obscure to Westerners.) The guitars have always been played in non-standard tunings, which are (along with that extra string or strings) very amenable transciptions of solo instrument and orchestral music. (The group still exists, but with new personnel, 6-string classical guitars, and a far more Western repertoire.) So... there's just one disc by the original members - and the transcriptions and playing are truly marvelous. (Info. - https://tidal.com/album/282588821?u )
I'd never have found this recording any other way. (Well, not unless I lived in Manhattan and had plenty of time to browse at certain used record stores.)
I admittedly prefer Bandcamp + actual CDs for many reasons, but streamers have hidden depth to their catalogs, and persistence is rewarded. That said, I prefer purchases if possible. And I like knowing that the money I spend on Bandcamp goes directly to the artists. (Am an amateur musician - various non-Western percussion instruments - so I can appreciate the whole Bandcamp setup.)
It's ironic: streaming services are very impersonal by nature, and yet, I believe they can be rewarding for discovery of music + as listening services. (Tidal's audio is by far the best I've heard per streamers; Spotify's files are very compressed by comparison and just don't sound right to me.)
One last thing: I've studied and played with people a good deal younger than myself in beginning to learn music from (mostly) Guinea and Mali, and it's refreshing! Back when I was helping comp for dance classes, I loved seeing the way students (mostly teenagers) would gradually find the music and movements to be increasingly natural to them - and then their own styles started to become visible. It was delightful, though exhausting (for me), mainly due to the tempi we had to maintain. Great training for musicians, and really, the way that music is meant to be played - for others to dance, improv on both the dancers' and the lead drummer's part, etc. (Plus ensemble playing - the melody is played on the bass drums used, and that's where I like to be.)
Thanks for being kind about my rambling, but I did want to highlight a few ways in which streamers have worked well for me, in hopes that others might try that approach for themselves. *Caveat: if the streamers only had pop and whatnot from English-speaking countries, I doubt I'd bother with them. But there's so much "niche" music that it's worthwhile, if far from ideal. (I used to be hypercritical myself, and still can be, which is why I somehow or other started seeking out the good, vs. the perfect.)
Hey Dom, where’s the Graeber quote from, do you have the reference?
Pretty sure it's from The Utopia of Rules (his best book in my opinion!)
Ta Tim, and hello!
Tim is correct. In fact, it was Tim who brought my attention to David Graeber in the first place.