Music critics were much more needed when music was expensive and required effort to acquire. When you were plunking down $15 for a CD you wanted to know if it was any good, hence listening stations in CD stores and reviews to give you some idea of what something sounded like and if it was worth hearing before you put down possibly non-refundable money.
Since everything is available instantly and for free now, the need to pay someone else to show the way has diminished tremendously. Plus, artists can now speak directly, in real time to their fans, so much less (if any) need for a "professional" to interview them.
I think the real reason pitchfork is having problems is because they embraced poptimism over their core indie audience. Not to pick a side here but the writing was much more interesting when they were sniping at the mainstream as opposed to being just another cheerleader for it.
I've been watching this happen for years. It's so disheartening.
I'm a small time concert promoter in the Northern California wine country. The majority of the musicians in this area play "Happy Hour" music or are cover bands. I keep trying to break new acts in the area, and it's damn near impossible to get anyone in the area to pay attention.
There is no Alt-weekly in my area. No one, but me is writing about music and my forehead is permanently bruised from banging my head against the wall.
The only way to promote music is the socials and Algorithms hide everything that's remotely promotional, as well all know.
I don't think my venue is much longer for the world. I really want to start an alt weekly for the area. A nonprofit organization that publishes a regular music magazine, and also promotes events. I want to put something tangible out into the world to promote discoverability. Because, how can people discover new music? But man oh man. Can i make enough of a living doing this? It's terrifying that everything I've ever done my entire adult life and making a living at is going away.
So thank you for posting these great essays on the music world. This was very needed today. Very hard news, but i think i need to go for it. Focus on local and building community. I think that's what we need to do, as well as get off the platforms.
I'm going to think about this a lot today. Thank you for the article and the place to vent a little.
Amen to that. My band won’t be streaming our upcoming album. From our point of view, there really isn’t a business anymore. We know we are tilting at windmills now. But then--not accepting things as they are is the root of all suffering, right?
Coming from a totally different perspective, this also means the collapse of a supporting industry, that of music public relations. I've been doing it for about 40 years, and it has become increasingly difficult for me to justify - both to myself and to my clients - the value of hiring someone to introduce an artist's work to...well, that's exactly it, isn't it? I work hard to reach out to editors and freelance writers to alert them to new music, but there's no guarantee that whatever coverage I might be able to generate will reach an audience of eager consumers. And why would anyone want to read a review of an album now that they can purchase individual tracks, anyway? It's a completely different ecosystem now, but there are SO many musicians who just don't get that and want to keep on doing what they've always done. All of this has nothing to do with any specific publication or coverage of any specific genre. Things have been headed in this direction for quite some time, but suddenly the full repercussions of this huge shift are quite obvious.
As usual you are so right on with your views, your predictions, your insights. As a four-decade music writer, I'm hanging in there for the music...and writing about it monthly in my column JAZZ & BEYOND INTEL where I converse with artists who are not part of the 1 percent but have so much to offer. Thanks so much!
It’s difficult for me to separate your specific complaint about “not discovering new artists” from the reasons I stopped caring about art critics - music, moves, books - in general: their refusal to dislike anything popular, a myopic devotion to history’s dullest political movement, and a general sense that none of them were cool anymore. What killed criticism - structural factors and poor decisions of the music industry or shit content? I think the later mattered more. After all you’ve found success by virtue of not being shitty. We know it’s at least possible.
Mustard could not agree more. Every week they try their best to highlight and interview independent musicians from all over the world on this platform. These artists are so passionate and driven to get their music heard. While it isn't perfect they hope to see more artists transfer/upload their work to Bandcamp instead of being so reliant on pre-saves and streams.
Mustard appreciates and thanks you for speaking about this.
The average quality of most record/CD/whatever reviews I've seen in the past 20 years has been pretty poor. As someone noted below, when I can hear music myself to try it out for free, the reviews are less necessary. And I still consume a lot of "reviews" - mostly from friends saying "hey, check this out". And I can and do - and if I like it, I buy it. I think the "reviewer" job has gone away, but reviewing is still happening - just in a decentralized way. Plus, the writing quality of a lot of reviews is terrible (as an earlier comment said, there was a lot of 12 letter words being used when a 6 letter one would be fine). So Pitchfork going out of business seems pretty "meh" to me - all my friends who listen to interesting music are still listening to interesting music and recommending it to me. (And for older stuff, I am discovering all sorts of cool stuff via Andrew Hickey's marvelous A History of Rock Music in 500 Songs podcast and the equally fabulous country music one by Tyler Mahon Coe, Cocaine and Rhinestones. Now, if Ted would just take on doing one on jazz of similar caliber.......
Maybe it’s a good thing that the “business” is collapsing. Paper fanzines now have a new opportunity. Besides, it has come double full circle in that the great John Phillip Sousa, who toured his band around the world and became the first music pop star at turn of 20th century, always hated the very idea of recorded music. He felt it was highly inferior to live music. And of course he was right. His influence was so great that every tiny town in American West had a band. People learned to play instruments because that was their only way to hear music. Remember The Music Man musical? Composer Meredith Willson became piccolo player in Sousa’s band. And he was from Mason City, Iowa. So these modern developments should lead to re-discovery of playing live music. And that will not only help the brains of people but strengthen communities too.
What I have noticed in my local paper, you may have heard of it, The New York Times, is no reviews of concerts and club dates that would have had a regular review years ago.
Regular reviews of musicians at The Village Vanguard would be common. If a major jazz artist like The Keith Jarrett Trio was at Carnegie Hall there would be a review a few days later.
Now there is nothing. Those reviews would encourage me to go hear a band or just inform me of what was happening. And if the review was of a concert I had attended the review would offer a different perspective on the music.
In the last month I saw, Kris Davis, Jason Moran, and Joe Lovano and not a single review of any of them. And this has been going on for years.
It seems they all have podcasts and year end lists, and write about cultural impacts, but nothing about live performances.
Upcoming concerts will be Vijay Iyer, then Ulysses Owen Jr. and Caetano Veloso in April and I'm pretty sure there won't be a review of any of their performances.
Let's not forget the economics of music journalism--there is none. It's almost impossible to make any money writing about music or musicians (unless it's the lifestyle/scandal angle), there is little continued presence of print music journalists outside the few remaining music mags or the NYTimes. I have written about music for years but now find I prefer to do it as a labor of love and support for the musicians; money doesn't even come into the equation. Without any financial underpinning writers are too hassled and hustling, without the time to develop an audience, explore new music and expose it, as well as the musicians making it every day.
Band t-shirts are not tacky, sir. How dare you insult band t-shirted people… okay, all kidding aside, in a streaming world the most direct and best way to show bands your appreciation and keep them going is 1. Go to their shows. 2. Buy their merch, i.e., t-shirts! (It also helps fans to meet and bond with one another.)
I hope that in the future Substack will become a place for critics to group themselves under one banner-- something that used to be called a magazine-- so that readers don't have to hunt through the haystack and only come up with one point of view, or even one genre. I also hope that Substack will enable "batch subscriptions" so that I can pay a monthly fee for a handful (five?) of different writers of my choosing, rather than individual subs which are more financially intimidating. And finally I hope that Substack will improve its feeble search and browse functions, so that a) I don't have to click through authors named Jazz, for example, as I look for authors writing about Jazz; and b) have some dim hope that listeners seeking new music will stumble upon mine, which currently lies on the cold, dark floor of the digital sea.
I miss the NME and Melody Maker from the 1970's.Serious music journalism. PitchFork et al were always far too middle class and far too smug in their writings,preferring to use a 12 lettered word when one of six could easily have been used. Then came the internet and the digital " revolution" and the subsequent new business models. Today we have so much ( too much) music available which in earlier times would have been quickly culled as the barrier to entry then was far more difficult ( and expensive). It's the same with the film industry for exactly the same reasons. Far lower costs of production and every Tom,Dick & Harry thought and think, they too can be a musician and/or a filmmaker. The result being we're inundated with so much dross in both areas.
Music critics were much more needed when music was expensive and required effort to acquire. When you were plunking down $15 for a CD you wanted to know if it was any good, hence listening stations in CD stores and reviews to give you some idea of what something sounded like and if it was worth hearing before you put down possibly non-refundable money.
Since everything is available instantly and for free now, the need to pay someone else to show the way has diminished tremendously. Plus, artists can now speak directly, in real time to their fans, so much less (if any) need for a "professional" to interview them.
That said, I still miss Musician magazine.
I think the real reason pitchfork is having problems is because they embraced poptimism over their core indie audience. Not to pick a side here but the writing was much more interesting when they were sniping at the mainstream as opposed to being just another cheerleader for it.
I've been watching this happen for years. It's so disheartening.
I'm a small time concert promoter in the Northern California wine country. The majority of the musicians in this area play "Happy Hour" music or are cover bands. I keep trying to break new acts in the area, and it's damn near impossible to get anyone in the area to pay attention.
There is no Alt-weekly in my area. No one, but me is writing about music and my forehead is permanently bruised from banging my head against the wall.
The only way to promote music is the socials and Algorithms hide everything that's remotely promotional, as well all know.
I don't think my venue is much longer for the world. I really want to start an alt weekly for the area. A nonprofit organization that publishes a regular music magazine, and also promotes events. I want to put something tangible out into the world to promote discoverability. Because, how can people discover new music? But man oh man. Can i make enough of a living doing this? It's terrifying that everything I've ever done my entire adult life and making a living at is going away.
So thank you for posting these great essays on the music world. This was very needed today. Very hard news, but i think i need to go for it. Focus on local and building community. I think that's what we need to do, as well as get off the platforms.
I'm going to think about this a lot today. Thank you for the article and the place to vent a little.
“Put faith in the music, not the business.”
Amen to that. My band won’t be streaming our upcoming album. From our point of view, there really isn’t a business anymore. We know we are tilting at windmills now. But then--not accepting things as they are is the root of all suffering, right?
Sorry. I should have said tapes. CDs didn't come out until 1982. It's amazing what 50 yrs. can do to one's memory.
Coming from a totally different perspective, this also means the collapse of a supporting industry, that of music public relations. I've been doing it for about 40 years, and it has become increasingly difficult for me to justify - both to myself and to my clients - the value of hiring someone to introduce an artist's work to...well, that's exactly it, isn't it? I work hard to reach out to editors and freelance writers to alert them to new music, but there's no guarantee that whatever coverage I might be able to generate will reach an audience of eager consumers. And why would anyone want to read a review of an album now that they can purchase individual tracks, anyway? It's a completely different ecosystem now, but there are SO many musicians who just don't get that and want to keep on doing what they've always done. All of this has nothing to do with any specific publication or coverage of any specific genre. Things have been headed in this direction for quite some time, but suddenly the full repercussions of this huge shift are quite obvious.
As usual you are so right on with your views, your predictions, your insights. As a four-decade music writer, I'm hanging in there for the music...and writing about it monthly in my column JAZZ & BEYOND INTEL where I converse with artists who are not part of the 1 percent but have so much to offer. Thanks so much!
It’s difficult for me to separate your specific complaint about “not discovering new artists” from the reasons I stopped caring about art critics - music, moves, books - in general: their refusal to dislike anything popular, a myopic devotion to history’s dullest political movement, and a general sense that none of them were cool anymore. What killed criticism - structural factors and poor decisions of the music industry or shit content? I think the later mattered more. After all you’ve found success by virtue of not being shitty. We know it’s at least possible.
"Put faith in the music, not the business."
Mustard could not agree more. Every week they try their best to highlight and interview independent musicians from all over the world on this platform. These artists are so passionate and driven to get their music heard. While it isn't perfect they hope to see more artists transfer/upload their work to Bandcamp instead of being so reliant on pre-saves and streams.
Mustard appreciates and thanks you for speaking about this.
The average quality of most record/CD/whatever reviews I've seen in the past 20 years has been pretty poor. As someone noted below, when I can hear music myself to try it out for free, the reviews are less necessary. And I still consume a lot of "reviews" - mostly from friends saying "hey, check this out". And I can and do - and if I like it, I buy it. I think the "reviewer" job has gone away, but reviewing is still happening - just in a decentralized way. Plus, the writing quality of a lot of reviews is terrible (as an earlier comment said, there was a lot of 12 letter words being used when a 6 letter one would be fine). So Pitchfork going out of business seems pretty "meh" to me - all my friends who listen to interesting music are still listening to interesting music and recommending it to me. (And for older stuff, I am discovering all sorts of cool stuff via Andrew Hickey's marvelous A History of Rock Music in 500 Songs podcast and the equally fabulous country music one by Tyler Mahon Coe, Cocaine and Rhinestones. Now, if Ted would just take on doing one on jazz of similar caliber.......
Maybe it’s a good thing that the “business” is collapsing. Paper fanzines now have a new opportunity. Besides, it has come double full circle in that the great John Phillip Sousa, who toured his band around the world and became the first music pop star at turn of 20th century, always hated the very idea of recorded music. He felt it was highly inferior to live music. And of course he was right. His influence was so great that every tiny town in American West had a band. People learned to play instruments because that was their only way to hear music. Remember The Music Man musical? Composer Meredith Willson became piccolo player in Sousa’s band. And he was from Mason City, Iowa. So these modern developments should lead to re-discovery of playing live music. And that will not only help the brains of people but strengthen communities too.
What I have noticed in my local paper, you may have heard of it, The New York Times, is no reviews of concerts and club dates that would have had a regular review years ago.
Regular reviews of musicians at The Village Vanguard would be common. If a major jazz artist like The Keith Jarrett Trio was at Carnegie Hall there would be a review a few days later.
Now there is nothing. Those reviews would encourage me to go hear a band or just inform me of what was happening. And if the review was of a concert I had attended the review would offer a different perspective on the music.
In the last month I saw, Kris Davis, Jason Moran, and Joe Lovano and not a single review of any of them. And this has been going on for years.
It seems they all have podcasts and year end lists, and write about cultural impacts, but nothing about live performances.
Upcoming concerts will be Vijay Iyer, then Ulysses Owen Jr. and Caetano Veloso in April and I'm pretty sure there won't be a review of any of their performances.
Let's not forget the economics of music journalism--there is none. It's almost impossible to make any money writing about music or musicians (unless it's the lifestyle/scandal angle), there is little continued presence of print music journalists outside the few remaining music mags or the NYTimes. I have written about music for years but now find I prefer to do it as a labor of love and support for the musicians; money doesn't even come into the equation. Without any financial underpinning writers are too hassled and hustling, without the time to develop an audience, explore new music and expose it, as well as the musicians making it every day.
Band t-shirts are not tacky, sir. How dare you insult band t-shirted people… okay, all kidding aside, in a streaming world the most direct and best way to show bands your appreciation and keep them going is 1. Go to their shows. 2. Buy their merch, i.e., t-shirts! (It also helps fans to meet and bond with one another.)
I hope that in the future Substack will become a place for critics to group themselves under one banner-- something that used to be called a magazine-- so that readers don't have to hunt through the haystack and only come up with one point of view, or even one genre. I also hope that Substack will enable "batch subscriptions" so that I can pay a monthly fee for a handful (five?) of different writers of my choosing, rather than individual subs which are more financially intimidating. And finally I hope that Substack will improve its feeble search and browse functions, so that a) I don't have to click through authors named Jazz, for example, as I look for authors writing about Jazz; and b) have some dim hope that listeners seeking new music will stumble upon mine, which currently lies on the cold, dark floor of the digital sea.
I miss the NME and Melody Maker from the 1970's.Serious music journalism. PitchFork et al were always far too middle class and far too smug in their writings,preferring to use a 12 lettered word when one of six could easily have been used. Then came the internet and the digital " revolution" and the subsequent new business models. Today we have so much ( too much) music available which in earlier times would have been quickly culled as the barrier to entry then was far more difficult ( and expensive). It's the same with the film industry for exactly the same reasons. Far lower costs of production and every Tom,Dick & Harry thought and think, they too can be a musician and/or a filmmaker. The result being we're inundated with so much dross in both areas.