That’s what some dude on talk radio said, and I believe everything I hear on the AM dial.
The usual culprits are brought up, mainly Napster and Itunes. But then the guy made a comparison between Green Day then and now, noting that American Idiot is one of the huge sellers of 2005, yet it only sold a third of what Dookie did.
The difference there, it seems to me, is obvious and unmentioned. It’s MTV.
When Dookie came out, MTV still played music videos most of the time. MTV and KROQ and mainstream culture and alternative culture were at a brief moment of unprecedented crossover, and Green Day were perfect representatives of that. My thoroughly unconformist punk rock friend Dave Roche owned a Green Day shirt, and so did many fratboys and teenage girls.
Now? MTV doesn’t play videos except late at night, when its target demographic is probably either sleeping or studying for tests. M2 plays videos, but who gets that channel? I don’t, and I live in the entertainment capital of the world.
Without TV pushing bands on the audience via videos, sales will go down. It’s not the same watching stuff on computer, because then you have to go looking for what you want, and taking the time to download. At its best, MTV introduced people to new bands, even as it pushed familiar ones forever and ever.
Now MTV pushes reality TV. And hey, reality TV is huge. What does that tell you?
The twist, in my opinion, is that there is a constant influx of great new music coming down the pipe. But I try to keep my ear close to alternative outlets. There were a great many fabulous new CDs and bands to come along this year, and this has been the case for awhile. Independent music is alive and well. But you’re not going to get it on MTV or KROQ, certainly. Bands today know their gig is to take the music live, be not just brand names but solid musicians with literate themes to the work, bands who tour and make a case for themselves in person. There’s a lot of grassroots success stories. So many of the “big” bands from the 90s say were kind of illegitimate successes, though I must admit I bought into a good deal of it. But independent music, like independent cinema, is stronger now than ever.
And the traditional music industry, as it were, has been ripping people off for so very long, as well as putting out so much crap, that I have no sympathy for the teetering giants.
I agree. To me, music has never been better in my lifetime than it is right now. I’ve seen some mind-blowing shows at places like the Echo and Spaceland in the past year. In a lot of ways it feels like music has gone back to its working-class roots. The only problem is that I need more money to buy more cds.
Shitheel, on all accounts, exactly.
I agree as well but, let me take it down a notch. KROQ sounds corporate and mainstream and MYV…well, I don’t know what happened to MTV. Both the music and record industries has been going downhill since I can remember. And, lastly and sadly, small independent record stores are being swept away from the larger megastores. I’m so sad that my longtime record store since the early 1980’s when it used to be on Melrose is closing down: Aron’s Records.
I tend to steer towards small records stores for my musical exploration and journey. Listening to KCRW and Indie 103.1 are the only radio stations I go to. And, also to some online sites for new music (and later, seeing them live) Not into the Pod thing (yet).
So, I really don’t succumb to the constant push of “new music” the industry forces onto me. I could care less. I go where my taste flows.
On a side note, the CD industry is already grappling on the possible format change where there is battle between Super Audio CD (SACD) and DVD-Audio (DVD-A). They have a lot on their plate in recent years…
kxlu is a great local station.
I get most of my new music from Rhapsody’s ARtist of the Day feature… KROQ seems to have nothing but commercials whenever I tune in, and I wrote off MTV a long time ago…
Jesus, Luke, I’m trying to foster a reputation as a sophisticated hardcore punk connoisseur and you go and tell the whole world about my pop punk past. If you reveal any more of my secrets I’ll fly to Los Angeles, gag you with my NoFX long sleeve shirt and ram my old Mr. T Experience cds up your ass.
But as to the slump in cd sales, I think it’s obvious that God is smiting the industry for being run by a cabal of homosexual abortionists who are trying to divide God’s land and brainwash our children into believing our great-grandfathers were monkeys. But aside from that, doesn’t the overall state of the economy play into it? Maybe I’m talking out my anus here, but with with the increase of the population living under the poverty line and the squeezing of the middle class, it seems like there’s less disposable income going around. I know when “Dookie” came out I didn’t have a problem shelling out $15, but now I’m pulling scams on Trader Joe’s just to pay my gas bill.
I fail to see how it significantly effects the music industry as a whole, though. The fact that the major record labels are a bunch of babies who cry foul at any perceived threat (the old, free Napster, the rise of used cd stores in the 90s), but haven’t come out against iTunes makes me think it can’t be hurting profits. Does anyone know how bands and artists fair with iTunes? My guess is they’re getting screwed, but I really have no idea.
No, they’re not getting screwed with iTunes. My friend is an accountant in the music industry, working on royalty payments, and they get the same reporting from iTunes sales as they do with store sales.
But I think Luke’s point is off the mark. Music sales were fine before videos existed, so the fact that MTV doesn’t air videos to promote artists is not what’s hurting CD sales.
CD sales suck because no one wants to pay $15-20 for an entire album that only has three songs they want, when they can now buy those three songs online for $3. If CDs had 7-9 really great songs, people wouldn’t be as hesitant to fork over their cash. Too many mediocre artists, or decent artists with mediocre efforts, flood the product aisles.
It’s the same with movies–”Oh, no, attendance is down, it’s cable/DVD’s fault.” No, a lot of people are just rejecting crap. I think our consumer mentality is starting to be informed by a little bit of taste. There are always those who will buy into whatever crap is available, because they either have no taste, or they’re willing to settle for whatever mindless ‘entertainment’ is newest on the market.
But I think, overall, people want more quality for their money. I don’t even think it’s that they’re less willing to spend money, because everyone I know spends plenty of cash on entertainment. It’s just that they want a better value. I know a lot of people who are going to more live performances, whether music concerts, plays or musical theater. Those are more expensive than a CD, but they’re willing to pay because generally the quality is there.
Well, Peggy, I don’t dismiss those as factors, or even as the major factors. I’m just bringing up a significant one people don’t think of.
But out of curiosity, do you know what the sales stats were before videos? And then after? I do know that pre-Soundscan they were notoriously inaccurate.
“no one wants to pay $15-20 for an entire album that only has three songs they want, when they can now buy those three songs online for $3″
This was true before, though. They were called singles. CD singles were never economical to produce, but cassette and vinyl singles were. The only difference is now you can download any album track, rather than just the hits.
“a lot of people are just rejecting crap.”
Why didn’t they reject it before, like in the last boy-band cycle? My theory goes back to flashy video promotion 24-7. If you can’t see their cute faces or watch the flashy FX in their videos, there’s not much left to appeal.
The last time I remember MTV playing videos prime time was when I first saw the video for Andrew W.K.’s “Party Hard.” I bought the CD shortly after. Haven’t experienced anything like that since, and I’ve pretty much only been buying CDs since from bands I already like. Haven’t discovered a new artist I love in YEARS. And that saddens me.
You may scoff that I could ever find such a band on MTV. But some of the bands I have gotten into because of MTV include Type O Negative, Milla, Gary Young, Outkast, and even, to a point, Johnny Cash. They weren’t always played round the clock…but they were played.
Welcome Dave! How’s your collection of R.E.M. CDs doing these days?
[covers ass, runs]
DAVE ROCHE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
finally, a real player makes his presence felt.
dave, you are a beautiful specimen.
I don’t think he was in the industry pre-video, so I don’t know how to get the stats. I think video has predominantly enhanced bubblegum pop–if you seem some ugly ass group with mediocre songs, you aren’t going to buy their albums. But Britney? Hell, yes, visual exposure gave her a career. And DO NOT try to convince me that she is anything other than mediocre. I’m not blaming you for liking her, but she is NOT a gifted singer.
I used to buy 45’s when I was young because I never had enough cash at once to buy the whole album. I doubt that vinyl or cassette singles were economical to produce–they didn’t sell very well to my recollection, and I used to work in a music store, right on the cusp of the CD revolution.
Now, you can not only buy the individual songs online, you can also often hear the songs in the store. Most large stores have listening centers of some sort, so you can get a good idea of the album before shelling over the cash. And people are probably NOT buying the whole CD when they hear the rest of the crap that hasn’t been released on radio.
Also, according to Weird Al, since videos get so little play now, many artists aren’t producing them, since they ultimately pay the cost for them. It’s probably Catch-22–MTV plays them less, so artists produce less, so MTV has less to play, so they play less…..ad nauseum.
“I doubt that vinyl or cassette singles were economical to produce–they didn’t sell very well to my recollection”
But you could buy ‘em for a buck. Never the case with CD singles, that were usually at least $5.
“Now, you can not only buy the individual songs online, you can also often hear the songs in the store.”
Not new — ever since I came to L.A. in ‘92 you could do that, and probably before.
Look, the bottom line with my point is this — do commercials work?
Most likely they do, since they seem to be big business. Music videos are commercials for albums.
Therefore, if people are voluntarily watching commercials for albums several hours a week (then), as opposed to not at all (now), are they more likely to buy the album?
Common sense seems to dictate to me that the answer is yes.
That doesn’t mean it’s the only thing, but to deny that it has an effect seems like willfully ignoring.
I don’t deny that it has an effect. But albums sold before videos, so blaming the dearth of video-playing avenues cannot be entirely the fault of low album sales. Commercials on TV, the radio and in print are still viable alternatives to promote an album. In fact, I seem to have seen more TV commercials for music albums in recent years than I ever did before.
knowing.univalve stampeding wriggled,Braun providence searing coyotes sketchily!
basalt rephrased covering Giacomo Christoffel – Tons of interesdting stuff!!!