 |
  |
| Are bands dead? |
| Track this thread | Email this thread | Print this thread | Download this thread | Subscribe to this forum |
 28th May 2024, 06:04 AM
Post
#41
|
|
 BuzzJack Platinum Member
Pronouns: He/Him
Joined: 28 July 2013 Posts: 5,115 User: 19,614 
    |
Global smash hit vs. just barely charted in 2 countries
 (won't be long until that 30 million gap swings the other way around). Like charts are interesting but we've got to stop discrediting anything that didn't do the formal dance around in the top 40 for a couple of months. |
 |
 
|
|
31st May 2024, 11:08 AM
Post
#42
|
|
|
BuzzJack Regular
Joined: 29 July 2014
Posts: 202 User: 21,106
 |
Clearly, when one looks beyond the now-reduced-in-relevance metric of the weekly singles charts, and even beyond the increasingly-small albums equivalent, and takes into account wider internet appeal, success in live performances, sales of merchandise, support from other media such as radio and television, bands are not dead, or even dying.
Granted, their profile on the current singles chart is more minimal than it probably ever has been in pop history, which is what's making observers feel as if the concept itself must be old-fashioned, increasingly irrelevant, or at worst on its death bed. But that trend is due in part to the wider reasons that explain why the now-dominant consumption method of music - streaming - tends to favour genres and acts that are not guitar/rock-based, and that consumers of the latter tend to be less-streaming-led and more sales-driven. And the majority of bands, whether they be pure guitar or more mixed in their sound, tend to fall into those categories, whereas those genres which (rightly or wrongly) tend to do well in streaming (and therefore in the singles sector) such as rap/hip-hop/drill etc and to a surprising extent dance, are more-often-than-not acts made up of a singular or perhaps dual-person production-based outfit, with varying vocal collaborators, which can't really be categorised as a 'band'. It is certainly true that these don't dominate in quite the same way in the albums market, which is less-streaming-influenced in overall numbers and reflects the more traditional sales-led market - that market is evidently steadily shrinking, but it is very responsive to one-week wonders where even a relatively modest fanbase of a fairly niche artist can briefly score very highly with a new long-player. And in that regard, it's clear bands still have considerable traction. They won't make anywhere near as much money from that source as they once did. But as I said earlier, there is the live performance and merch streams to consider, which are now probably bigger revenue sources even for small-time starter groups, as well as the longstanding big-time outfits (although the latter type will often have hugely successful back catalogues from the sales-dominated era and have such cross-generational familiarity that even their weekly streaming keeps delivering decent-enough dollar for them - hardly the case for new acts alas). As said above, we do probably need to free ourselves from the once-fairly-sound presumption that for a certain type of act, style, genre, whatever to be regarded as broadly successful in the commercial music markets, there'd need to have been at least a few prominent bona fide 'hits' on the singles side in order for us to legitimately consider them to be categorised that way. Even then, there have been scores of acts who were never commercially successful in single or album terms, yet live long in memories and hearts due to their particular context and cultural impact they had at the time of their creative peaks. But when measuring by commercial impact alone, some sort of singles success needed to be evidenced, even if there'd been only modest incursion into the albums charts. Now, in the age of mass-streaming across millions of different titles and artists, packaged over numerous different album, single and mini-album/EP bundles, clearly it's far more conceivable to have a very impactful success over many months/years on streaming and yet never achieve any great dents in the weekly tallies. It's true that most streaming is of the titles beneath the Top 100, and the proportion of the streaming total each week made up by those 100 is now vanishingly small. This isn't due to the three-track-per artists cap or ACR rules either - the 'real' combined Top 200 weekly tracks chart is even more clogged and slow-moving than the manipulated published variant and doesn't see songs from more niche genres score higher peaks - indeed they are far lower, as all the mass-streamed old hits are given a chart position and so squeeze down the lower-profile and newer releases even more. As this is now a far more meaningful measure of 'success' or of 'hit' status than in the sales era, it should now be given due prominence when properly assessing an act or a title's impact overall, or indeed the relevance of a certain style of music or configuration of artist. I concede that moving people away from the singles chart as the main means of ready measurement of 'success' or 'relevance' will be a tough ask, especially among casual listeners and older demographics for whom that has been the primary point of reference for discerning 'hits' all their lifetimes. But evidently if one is to offer a more sound commentary on this issue, one needs to look far less carefully at singles chart history (or lack of) and much more at the overall streaming tallies to date, and perhaps what the average typical streaming numbers look like over time, especially for those uncharted-yet-enduring songs. Personally, I have never logged-on to TikTok, and as a non-social media user in general I am perhaps instinctively somewhat suspicious of its increasing dominance in influencing younger consumers' musical listening choices, and the way it seems of late to be an almost essential element for a song if it is to achieve a more persuasive and long-term crossover success and make a profound impact on the singles charts. Yet I am bound to agree with someone who earlier on in this thread made the point that while the process can be somewhat random as to what gets picked up and made viral through the site, it does at least seem genre and act-agnostic when one looks at the surprising breadth of artists, types, and ages of song that it has helped propel towards the charts, which has surely assisted in creating a little more diversity of music in a singles scene that pre-TT was looking worrying stagnant, predictable, limited and repetitious. Alas I believe all those descriptions still apply to the chart each week, but sudden take-offs of any kind of song or act you could think of through TT, or in alignment with a big commercial TV production perhaps, that don't conform to the usual sort of dross that routinely makes the published charts, do help punctuate things, whether or not I personally like the titles in question. And it is through these means, if no other, that we can at least occasionally see bands as well as solo/duo/mixed collaborating acts get a chart berth. Thank God they aren't solely reliant any more on achieving that though, as there's no question it's harder for a new outfit of any sort to attain a singles chart profile without some kind of outside and often unplanned media/internet support - and yes, being a band or group rather than a solo act probably will make it harder-still. Like may on this thread, I really hope that with the passage of time, and inevitable shifts in the consumer market and the shape of the wider scene, this changes for the better. Where would we have been without those now-hugely-heralded bands of the past? |
|
|
|
|
31st May 2024, 11:38 AM
Post
#43
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 22 December 2009
Posts: 30,930 User: 10,275
     |
Also one has to point out, that a band with, let's say 100k hardcore fans in the UK might have reached top ten on singles chart in 2005 but now would never go top 40 - instead might debut at #1 on album chart. Think about acts like Rooster, Feeder, The Futureheads, Razorlight... Does that mean that the band X is struggling more or has the industry just changed to reflect the listening habits of general public?
This post has been edited by Sour Candy: 31st May 2024, 11:40 AM |
|
|
|
|
31st May 2024, 11:40 AM
Post
#44
|
|
|
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 1 January 2021
Posts: 6,072 User: 120,499
  |
I miss Little Mix.
|
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 22nd June 2024, 07:07 AM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
