You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
5
devotech2 on scored.co
7 hours ago5 points(+0/-0/+5Score on mirror)2 children
>Also because technology made it possible for everyone to record an album in their own basement. The market is flooded with musicians who share songs online, but do not actually perform shows.
That's the nature of the beast, but I don't think it should be taken as bands not being formed. Because the bands exist, and can make amazing music, they just don't tour.
A lot of musicians loathe touring. Especially if they come from fairly "anti social" genres. A lot of them love it. Digital media just makes it a lot more easy for bands or people that loathe touring to *not tour*.
Burzum is pretty notable for never touring. Varg even declined six figure offers to do so. He just hates doing it. Still a successful "band". Kate bush almost never toured. Steely Dan very rarely toured. Didn't at all until their late career. The traveling wilburies never toured. It's not completely new, but artists who don't want to tour are able to be more successful than if they chose to not tour 20 years ago and earlier.
7 hours ago4 points(+0/-0/+4Score on mirror)1 child
Interesting. I kind of view putting on live performance as a class of musician of its own. Takes you from bedroom composer to a real performer.
Even i could carefully piece together music over long period of time using computers, software, music instruments, sequencers, sound modules, etc.
But to perform live, on the spot, memorize all the notes and arrangements and whatever lyrics makes you not only a musician but a performer which is high pressure, requires lots of practice, etc. More improvisation.
Though i suppose a hybrid would be someone who doesn't like to physically tour but can live stream and perform music from home?
It comes down to what the people who create it want to do at the end of the day.
But music attracts a lot of people who hate interacting with other people. There's a surprising amount of introversion and stalwart independence in the music scene. Mostly because by design it attracts artsy people who are more likely to be very introverted. I know this because my dad was in the music scene for a while.
So, the logical conclusion is that since digital music is a thing now, the people who are drawn to music are less likely to ever even consider touring and becoming performers.
I suppose live streaming on YouTube or twitch or whatever is indeed an option, but somehow that concept feels... off. I don't know how exactly to put it. It feels like it would be more artifical than just creating music and not touring period. It's easy to hear the talent in recorded music and tell whether or not it's created with real instruments and raw vocals or FL studio and autotune in any case.
It depends on where you start. If you create a brand new band and immediately start trying to get openers with Metallica and travel around the world, you're going to go bankrupt before you even release an EP.
If you start a brand new band and play at bars, local clubs, lounges, and put in for openers at music festivals happening within a reasonable area (and there's always gonna be one at some time or another you can drive a van to), you can save up enough money to tour if you're good enough.
That's the nature of the beast, but I don't think it should be taken as bands not being formed. Because the bands exist, and can make amazing music, they just don't tour.
A lot of musicians loathe touring. Especially if they come from fairly "anti social" genres. A lot of them love it. Digital media just makes it a lot more easy for bands or people that loathe touring to *not tour*.
Burzum is pretty notable for never touring. Varg even declined six figure offers to do so. He just hates doing it. Still a successful "band". Kate bush almost never toured. Steely Dan very rarely toured. Didn't at all until their late career. The traveling wilburies never toured. It's not completely new, but artists who don't want to tour are able to be more successful than if they chose to not tour 20 years ago and earlier.
Even i could carefully piece together music over long period of time using computers, software, music instruments, sequencers, sound modules, etc.
But to perform live, on the spot, memorize all the notes and arrangements and whatever lyrics makes you not only a musician but a performer which is high pressure, requires lots of practice, etc. More improvisation.
Though i suppose a hybrid would be someone who doesn't like to physically tour but can live stream and perform music from home?
But music attracts a lot of people who hate interacting with other people. There's a surprising amount of introversion and stalwart independence in the music scene. Mostly because by design it attracts artsy people who are more likely to be very introverted. I know this because my dad was in the music scene for a while.
So, the logical conclusion is that since digital music is a thing now, the people who are drawn to music are less likely to ever even consider touring and becoming performers.
I suppose live streaming on YouTube or twitch or whatever is indeed an option, but somehow that concept feels... off. I don't know how exactly to put it. It feels like it would be more artifical than just creating music and not touring period. It's easy to hear the talent in recorded music and tell whether or not it's created with real instruments and raw vocals or FL studio and autotune in any case.
Recently I heard someone from Avenged Sevenfold explain this is the main reason they stopped touring even though they were successful in the 2000s.
Or can the entire band ride around in an RV some hippie fixed up for the tour and park it in KOA camps at night?
If you start a brand new band and play at bars, local clubs, lounges, and put in for openers at music festivals happening within a reasonable area (and there's always gonna be one at some time or another you can drive a van to), you can save up enough money to tour if you're good enough.