I'm a librarian and space is such an issue for archives. Also, like the library as a whole, it's an afterthought. We were going to get brand new expanded, state of the art space in the library for our archives & special collections, but after years of planning and fund raising, the university administration decided to turn that space into offices. That's why you encounter burnout among archivists or seemingly disorganized spaces, or sheer panic at the thought of incoming materials.
Hearted for UCSC. They've lots of good stuff I never had a chance to poke around in. Mostly I pored over their early 20th century aerial photography...
Librarian/archive job market is tight. Only a few completely library school find jobs. Only those in library school who already work in libraries aren’t lost in library school itself.
Rock music isn’t dead. It disappeared from the mainstream music scene when album radio died in the ‘90s.
Once that format for exposure of rock music died, so did the next generation’s consciousness of rock and roll.
But the Foo Fighters are alive and rocking, and bands established online, like Greta VanFleet, are doing well.
The fact that so many heritage rock artists are still selling albums (Zeppelin, Stones, The Who, Van Halen, etc) proves there’s an audience for rock music. It’s just increasingly difficult for rock artists to get established in today’s world of mostly disposable pop music.
Yeah it's hard to know where one starts and the other ends. Is the lack of industry interest the reason there haven't been many breakthrough rock acts? Or is the industry just reacting to the market? Either way, the conditions seem right for somebody to break out.
As you've noted, some bands still draw enormous crowds and continue to acquire new fans, but almost none in that class debuted this century. All the major groups with the largest fanbases were beneficiaries of the type of marketing reach available to major label acts when they started 25+ years ago, so their music still has a meaning to their old fans and it's reputation and quality attracts younger fans. One wonders why this level of marketing behind new rock acts disappeared. I see teenagers every day wearing Nirvana and Guns N Roses shirts as fashion, Spotify suggests a number of legacy rock artists have followings among young listeners larger than they had in their primes, and every concert I go to of a group from my youth is packed with people in their teens and 20s (My last 3 concerts were L7, Bikini Kill, and Le Tigre - playing venues larger than the ones they headlined in the 90s and at least 40% of the audience were people 25 and younger unaccompanied by anyone older).
So there seems to be an appeal beyond nostalgia from old fans. The sound, attitude, visual presentation, fashion, etc. still has an instrinsic value that can reach people. So why aren't any of the breakthrough music acts of the last 15 years rock bands? I wish I knew the answer.
The reason so many young people are attending concerts by heritage acts, is the same reason old music outsells new music: the songs have withstood the greatest test of all; the test of time.
Once album radio disappeared, record labels just focused on what was selling, and they sacrificed artist development for image marketing.
Hear, hear! If anything, the Nostalgia Industrial Complex wants folks to *think* rock is dead, so their legacy properties (like the discographies of most 60's, 70's, and 80's bands) are the only things rock fans pay any attention (not mention $$$) to.
I didn’t say rock is dying, I said it fell out of mainstream consciousness when album radio disappeared. Yes, there’s plenty of rock on the Internet and elsewhere, but it’s not as popular sales wise as it once was.
And yes, music evolves as a living art form. But the quality that all great art has in common, is that it withstands the greatest test of all: the test of time. And that is why so many rock songs by heritage artists are still listened to.
Tony Bennett dies...and the music world stops and genuflects for a couple of days. Andre Watts dies...and hardly a blip. No knock on the singer, but are instrumentalists condemned to secondary status forever? Or does this reflect the 3-to-4 minute attention span of most non-serious music listeners and their sway in media?
A little bit of acculturation and a little bit of attention span imo. The way music scenes are treated in America by many listeners (as well as performers) reflects a fixation on lyrics, especially in groups that operate in Pop or Pop-adjacent genres. This may be influenced by the retreat of classical instrumental styles into the academy as much as it does from folkstyle revivals or the cultural trappings of individualism and emotionality expressed in formal languages. The culture industry then has a strong incentive to perpetuate this, despite America’s vibrant instrumentalist history.
Consider someone like Jimmy Hendrix, how do contemporary or historic instrumentalists get lionized in American culture for what they play, compared to what vocalists have to sing about?
Thanks for introducing me to Andre Watts. The fact that I never heard that name shows my ignorance in classical music, I only know a few of the very famous interpreters. I really got into classical in the past 10/15 years but it's a very vast world spanning centuries, it takes a while to get to know it. What Bernstein did for educating young people to classical should be expanded and built upon.
Re: Andre Watts, the fact that Columbia rushed him and Leonard Bernstein into the studio after his sensation on a televised Young People's Concert and replacing Glenn Gould at the last minute for a series of NY Philharmonic and rushed an album into stores day later surely is a sign of how our culture has truly changed.
You indicate unequivocally that you do all your research and writing yourself. So, how do you do it? What's your method? I read elsewhere that you read for an hour in the morning and an hour before you go to bed, and at meals occasionally. So, how do you generate all of the text you publish? When and where do you write? What is are your writing instrument(s)? Word processor, typewriter, digital dictation, legal pad? How do you organize and store your research? How do you keep on schedule, and how do you keep track of deadlines, etc?
Call me crazy but I think bands like Polyphia are still adding new sounds to the canon. Animals as Leaders, Periphery, and Meshuggah before that. I think there are still innovations happening in rock music.
One reason that you neglected to mention for the demise of 'Rock Music' is the appearance of 'Rap.' I like, to the point of revering, the same types of music as you; Jazz, Classical, World. And thinking of myself as a good soul (don't we all?) I have tried to be tolerant of music others like but I don't. Rap doesn't qualify as music, but it has replaced music as a form of entertainment. And it has kidnaped the generation of youth who would probably be creating and listening to Rock. How has this happened? If they asked me I could write a book!
You are completely welcome to dislike any kind of music or any piece of music. I'm not here to dictate to you what to like and not like.
AND, when you say "X isn't music", it doesn't make any sense. You didn't say this, but I've heard elsewhere, for instance, that "if it doesn't have a melody, it isn't music." That statement crosses off a bunch of stuff - percussion ensembles, the works of John Luther Adams, the music of Paul Winter and Oregon, a really great drum line and so on.
Maybe you just meant to convey the intensity of your dislike? That hasn't quite seemed to match with other places where I've seen that claimed.
It's all music. You don't have to like any of it, though.
Traditionally, music was defined as consisting of melody, harmony and rhythm. I don't think all three are necessary; not even two. But you've gotta have at least one - otherwise it is sound. My feeling is that Rap hasn't got any of the three, not even rhythm. Instead of rhythm, it has a repetitive, static, mechanical sound. Anyone who understands and appreciates rhythm wouldn't be attracted to Rap. And the lyrics - brotha, please!
Jay, you say 'it's all music.' If I were asked to make that type of statement I would say 'It's all entertainment, but not all of it is music.'
¨Traditionally, music was defined as consisting of melody, harmony and rhythm.¨¨ In the western world perhaps. But there is a wide world of music out there - like, world music - and it doesn't conform to and nor should it conform to traditional European values. Hip-hop has produced some of the greatest, most important, vibrant music in the history of recorded sound. Rock has produced its fair share of utter and complete dreck. All I have to say.
I couldn't agree more, with both of your comments. I'll also add that the "lyrics" of rap (or hip hop, or whatever, I can't discern any difference) tend to be simply foul. My wife and I play tennis at a nearby city park that has hoops courts sharing a fence. The people playing basketball (of ALL ethnicities) bring their boom boxes and play their "music" at high volume, so we are well-informed of the vile language that is a basic part of rap. We're not prudes, my wife cusses like a sailor when she's letting me have it (LOL), but what we hear is simply vile, and I rue the day that Blondie brought it into mainstream music (even thought I'm sure it would have come along anyway).
I'd settle for simple musicianship making a comeback, where the performers, including the star, are serious about the quality of the music, and their own playing, instead of merely the potential for making a hit. I continue to listen to the pop music of the 60's and 70's because there were so many great songs written during that period, along with new and interesting progressions, songs that provide even someone such as myself, with extensive formal musical training, an additional source of appreciation and inspiration. And by "interesting," I don't necessarily mean complex, because sometimes simplicity is what makes a musical statement complete and effective.
You mentioned you are a introvert who avoids social gatherings but also that you are a award winning speaker. I am somewhat introverted but got much better in casual social interactions. Still, it seems like I need to build my confidence of speaking in front of an audience by increasing its size one person at a time. It is still shocking to me, how I can make a fool out of my self in front of 50 people in one moment. And trust me, I made it happen.
There's plenty of rock music coming out now. Yes, most of it doesn't reach the mainstream, but even new sounds (ie: not retro bands like Greta VanFleet or 30-year-old bands like Foo Fighters) are reaching a level of notoriety that enables artists to maintain a healthy living.
I could go on. Rock is not dying. It's evolving, just like jazz, hip hop, and the rest of them. The most clear evidence of life is change. To find the newest sounds, you have to look past the mainstream. This has always been true. Don't let the rare moments when the counterculture broke into the mainstream (the mid- to late '60s, early '90s, late. '00s, etc.) cloud your vision. Counterculture is out there. You just have to look a little harder to see it most of the time.
One of the reasons your subscriber list is growing is the sadomachistic killing of Twitter coupled with Austin Kleon (himself a good Twitter replacement) linking to you coupled with the discovery of you having real thoughts while The Rest of the Internet is crumbling into empty “content”.
Ted, here in Washington DC, there seems to be an active Open Mic scene with standout artists like Eli Waltz and Tessa Elaina making unique and compelling music. I assume something similar is happening in NYC, LA, Nashville, etc. Do you have any insight into what's going on in these "minor leagues" and what it portends for the future?
Your answers to the first two questions encourage because: 1) only the narrowing of tastes, thoughts, and culture generally offers any chance of AI taking over everything since creative work needs more than algorithmic calculation; and 2) doing everything yourself works fine (obviously for you) and for many other creative folks. Thanks for encouraging by word and deed.
I think rock came to something of an end with OK Computer (at least for me). Hard to know what's left to do after that album, and incentives in the music industry do not favour investing in rock bands any more. I wouldn't claim it has ended for good, but it seems to be on a long hiatus - maybe a little like old-fashioned rhythm and blues is. There's a long past, but what future?
Rock music isn't dead. I would encourage people to seek out Japanese Metal bands. These young musicians are SERIOUS musicians with crazy skills. Take a look at Band Maid (the drummer is otherwordly), Versaille and Unlucky Morpheus.
I'm a librarian and space is such an issue for archives. Also, like the library as a whole, it's an afterthought. We were going to get brand new expanded, state of the art space in the library for our archives & special collections, but after years of planning and fund raising, the university administration decided to turn that space into offices. That's why you encounter burnout among archivists or seemingly disorganized spaces, or sheer panic at the thought of incoming materials.
Oh no, don't say it. I'm starting library school in August!
There are certainly exceptions though. Look at The Dylan Archives in Tulsa and The Grateful Dead at UC Santa Cruz
Hearted for UCSC. They've lots of good stuff I never had a chance to poke around in. Mostly I pored over their early 20th century aerial photography...
How's the job market for archivists? I'm interested in that field but Youth/teen is always hiring around here.
Librarian/archive job market is tight. Only a few completely library school find jobs. Only those in library school who already work in libraries aren’t lost in library school itself.
Rock music isn’t dead. It disappeared from the mainstream music scene when album radio died in the ‘90s.
Once that format for exposure of rock music died, so did the next generation’s consciousness of rock and roll.
But the Foo Fighters are alive and rocking, and bands established online, like Greta VanFleet, are doing well.
The fact that so many heritage rock artists are still selling albums (Zeppelin, Stones, The Who, Van Halen, etc) proves there’s an audience for rock music. It’s just increasingly difficult for rock artists to get established in today’s world of mostly disposable pop music.
Yeah it's hard to know where one starts and the other ends. Is the lack of industry interest the reason there haven't been many breakthrough rock acts? Or is the industry just reacting to the market? Either way, the conditions seem right for somebody to break out.
As you've noted, some bands still draw enormous crowds and continue to acquire new fans, but almost none in that class debuted this century. All the major groups with the largest fanbases were beneficiaries of the type of marketing reach available to major label acts when they started 25+ years ago, so their music still has a meaning to their old fans and it's reputation and quality attracts younger fans. One wonders why this level of marketing behind new rock acts disappeared. I see teenagers every day wearing Nirvana and Guns N Roses shirts as fashion, Spotify suggests a number of legacy rock artists have followings among young listeners larger than they had in their primes, and every concert I go to of a group from my youth is packed with people in their teens and 20s (My last 3 concerts were L7, Bikini Kill, and Le Tigre - playing venues larger than the ones they headlined in the 90s and at least 40% of the audience were people 25 and younger unaccompanied by anyone older).
So there seems to be an appeal beyond nostalgia from old fans. The sound, attitude, visual presentation, fashion, etc. still has an instrinsic value that can reach people. So why aren't any of the breakthrough music acts of the last 15 years rock bands? I wish I knew the answer.
The reason so many young people are attending concerts by heritage acts, is the same reason old music outsells new music: the songs have withstood the greatest test of all; the test of time.
Once album radio disappeared, record labels just focused on what was selling, and they sacrificed artist development for image marketing.
Hear, hear! If anything, the Nostalgia Industrial Complex wants folks to *think* rock is dead, so their legacy properties (like the discographies of most 60's, 70's, and 80's bands) are the only things rock fans pay any attention (not mention $$$) to.
I didn’t say rock is dying, I said it fell out of mainstream consciousness when album radio disappeared. Yes, there’s plenty of rock on the Internet and elsewhere, but it’s not as popular sales wise as it once was.
And yes, music evolves as a living art form. But the quality that all great art has in common, is that it withstands the greatest test of all: the test of time. And that is why so many rock songs by heritage artists are still listened to.
Tony Bennett dies...and the music world stops and genuflects for a couple of days. Andre Watts dies...and hardly a blip. No knock on the singer, but are instrumentalists condemned to secondary status forever? Or does this reflect the 3-to-4 minute attention span of most non-serious music listeners and their sway in media?
A little bit of acculturation and a little bit of attention span imo. The way music scenes are treated in America by many listeners (as well as performers) reflects a fixation on lyrics, especially in groups that operate in Pop or Pop-adjacent genres. This may be influenced by the retreat of classical instrumental styles into the academy as much as it does from folkstyle revivals or the cultural trappings of individualism and emotionality expressed in formal languages. The culture industry then has a strong incentive to perpetuate this, despite America’s vibrant instrumentalist history.
Consider someone like Jimmy Hendrix, how do contemporary or historic instrumentalists get lionized in American culture for what they play, compared to what vocalists have to sing about?
Thanks for introducing me to Andre Watts. The fact that I never heard that name shows my ignorance in classical music, I only know a few of the very famous interpreters. I really got into classical in the past 10/15 years but it's a very vast world spanning centuries, it takes a while to get to know it. What Bernstein did for educating young people to classical should be expanded and built upon.
Re: Andre Watts, the fact that Columbia rushed him and Leonard Bernstein into the studio after his sensation on a televised Young People's Concert and replacing Glenn Gould at the last minute for a series of NY Philharmonic and rushed an album into stores day later surely is a sign of how our culture has truly changed.
QUESTION FOR FUTURE INSTALLMENT:
On average, how long do you listen to a song and/or artist before deciding whether they merit more time? Has this changed over time?
A lot less than I used to.
The haystack has got bigger and the needle is harder to find.
You indicate unequivocally that you do all your research and writing yourself. So, how do you do it? What's your method? I read elsewhere that you read for an hour in the morning and an hour before you go to bed, and at meals occasionally. So, how do you generate all of the text you publish? When and where do you write? What is are your writing instrument(s)? Word processor, typewriter, digital dictation, legal pad? How do you organize and store your research? How do you keep on schedule, and how do you keep track of deadlines, etc?
Call me crazy but I think bands like Polyphia are still adding new sounds to the canon. Animals as Leaders, Periphery, and Meshuggah before that. I think there are still innovations happening in rock music.
One reason that you neglected to mention for the demise of 'Rock Music' is the appearance of 'Rap.' I like, to the point of revering, the same types of music as you; Jazz, Classical, World. And thinking of myself as a good soul (don't we all?) I have tried to be tolerant of music others like but I don't. Rap doesn't qualify as music, but it has replaced music as a form of entertainment. And it has kidnaped the generation of youth who would probably be creating and listening to Rock. How has this happened? If they asked me I could write a book!
You are completely welcome to dislike any kind of music or any piece of music. I'm not here to dictate to you what to like and not like.
AND, when you say "X isn't music", it doesn't make any sense. You didn't say this, but I've heard elsewhere, for instance, that "if it doesn't have a melody, it isn't music." That statement crosses off a bunch of stuff - percussion ensembles, the works of John Luther Adams, the music of Paul Winter and Oregon, a really great drum line and so on.
Maybe you just meant to convey the intensity of your dislike? That hasn't quite seemed to match with other places where I've seen that claimed.
It's all music. You don't have to like any of it, though.
Traditionally, music was defined as consisting of melody, harmony and rhythm. I don't think all three are necessary; not even two. But you've gotta have at least one - otherwise it is sound. My feeling is that Rap hasn't got any of the three, not even rhythm. Instead of rhythm, it has a repetitive, static, mechanical sound. Anyone who understands and appreciates rhythm wouldn't be attracted to Rap. And the lyrics - brotha, please!
Jay, you say 'it's all music.' If I were asked to make that type of statement I would say 'It's all entertainment, but not all of it is music.'
¨Traditionally, music was defined as consisting of melody, harmony and rhythm.¨¨ In the western world perhaps. But there is a wide world of music out there - like, world music - and it doesn't conform to and nor should it conform to traditional European values. Hip-hop has produced some of the greatest, most important, vibrant music in the history of recorded sound. Rock has produced its fair share of utter and complete dreck. All I have to say.
I couldn't agree more, with both of your comments. I'll also add that the "lyrics" of rap (or hip hop, or whatever, I can't discern any difference) tend to be simply foul. My wife and I play tennis at a nearby city park that has hoops courts sharing a fence. The people playing basketball (of ALL ethnicities) bring their boom boxes and play their "music" at high volume, so we are well-informed of the vile language that is a basic part of rap. We're not prudes, my wife cusses like a sailor when she's letting me have it (LOL), but what we hear is simply vile, and I rue the day that Blondie brought it into mainstream music (even thought I'm sure it would have come along anyway).
I'd settle for simple musicianship making a comeback, where the performers, including the star, are serious about the quality of the music, and their own playing, instead of merely the potential for making a hit. I continue to listen to the pop music of the 60's and 70's because there were so many great songs written during that period, along with new and interesting progressions, songs that provide even someone such as myself, with extensive formal musical training, an additional source of appreciation and inspiration. And by "interesting," I don't necessarily mean complex, because sometimes simplicity is what makes a musical statement complete and effective.
Greta Van Fleet, Blackberry Smoke and Whiskey Myers are all high quality rock bands. They do not sell like pop acts, but rock surely lives on.
You mentioned you are a introvert who avoids social gatherings but also that you are a award winning speaker. I am somewhat introverted but got much better in casual social interactions. Still, it seems like I need to build my confidence of speaking in front of an audience by increasing its size one person at a time. It is still shocking to me, how I can make a fool out of my self in front of 50 people in one moment. And trust me, I made it happen.
There's plenty of rock music coming out now. Yes, most of it doesn't reach the mainstream, but even new sounds (ie: not retro bands like Greta VanFleet or 30-year-old bands like Foo Fighters) are reaching a level of notoriety that enables artists to maintain a healthy living.
Examples:
Pinegrove - https://open.spotify.com/track/7cv8pIeOu1pkwCXW9D4Oef?si=4e3db4acee4b4a78
Big Thief - https://open.spotify.com/track/0ToG55iJZCOzZkcpWbXxpW?si=8246a3530f9d4d42
Blessed - https://open.spotify.com/track/2eCtOHnjLydSU56f4peoO2?si=9292314213eb499c
boygenius - https://open.spotify.com/track/38xXr3MkiKNzNDv4JDJagF?si=dae329b53e89488f
Algiers - https://open.spotify.com/track/4MGMHnYXV1sWJLXpkw7n4z?si=b614bed692f7426f
I could go on. Rock is not dying. It's evolving, just like jazz, hip hop, and the rest of them. The most clear evidence of life is change. To find the newest sounds, you have to look past the mainstream. This has always been true. Don't let the rare moments when the counterculture broke into the mainstream (the mid- to late '60s, early '90s, late. '00s, etc.) cloud your vision. Counterculture is out there. You just have to look a little harder to see it most of the time.
One of the reasons your subscriber list is growing is the sadomachistic killing of Twitter coupled with Austin Kleon (himself a good Twitter replacement) linking to you coupled with the discovery of you having real thoughts while The Rest of the Internet is crumbling into empty “content”.
Ted, here in Washington DC, there seems to be an active Open Mic scene with standout artists like Eli Waltz and Tessa Elaina making unique and compelling music. I assume something similar is happening in NYC, LA, Nashville, etc. Do you have any insight into what's going on in these "minor leagues" and what it portends for the future?
Your answers to the first two questions encourage because: 1) only the narrowing of tastes, thoughts, and culture generally offers any chance of AI taking over everything since creative work needs more than algorithmic calculation; and 2) doing everything yourself works fine (obviously for you) and for many other creative folks. Thanks for encouraging by word and deed.
I think rock came to something of an end with OK Computer (at least for me). Hard to know what's left to do after that album, and incentives in the music industry do not favour investing in rock bands any more. I wouldn't claim it has ended for good, but it seems to be on a long hiatus - maybe a little like old-fashioned rhythm and blues is. There's a long past, but what future?
If you're going to play music of the past, you have to make it new, or there's no point in doing it.
Rock music isn't dead. I would encourage people to seek out Japanese Metal bands. These young musicians are SERIOUS musicians with crazy skills. Take a look at Band Maid (the drummer is otherwordly), Versaille and Unlucky Morpheus.