The traditional music industry has been going to hell on a handcart since the advent of the Internet. However we cannot deinvent( if that's a proper word) the wheel. Most young people have not grown up with the concept of actually paying for music- and a certain natural rebelliousness will blind them to any argument that they should.

I'm not as au fait with the indie scene as I once was, but in the eighties and nineties and early noughties things seemed pretty stable.I get the impression that lots of bands come along now and have one hit record but cannot build on that success through lack of sales, whereas in the past they would have generated enough money to stay afloat. One of the better indie bands of the last few years Golden Silvers just released one album despite lots of music press praise. If they had been around in the nineties I think cd sales would have been much better and they would have  lasted much longer.

I think a lot of the old punk generation  of musicians, including the Rats are glad they were around when people actually bought records. It's the reverse of the old footballers who regret they missed out on all the Premership money.

Despite this some bands seem more able to thrive than others, but it must be hard for any new indie or metal or whatever type band to succeed in the musical wild west we live in. Whoever said pop will eat itself was right.

ArrGee wrote:

---

Music industry is savage.  Always has been.  Bands end up broke despite selling millions of records.

As for the demise of this record label, it's so easy to see why.  Where is your nearest record shop?  HMV doesn't really count as it tends to sell DVDs and electronics these days.

 

---

 Agreed, and I knew bands were always commodities to line the pockets of the suits at the label, but what's troubling me is the apparent self-destruct mentality, where the big fish gobbles up ALL the smaller fish and ultimately deprives itself of any sustenance. Surely the industry needs its food chain?

The article mentions stuff about local presence (i.e. there is a world outside the States) and how vital that is, for bands to tap into and for them to be promoted properly. I realise t'internet is www, but as we've seen with Rats the industry like it or not relies on decent promotion of bands old or new, by experienced pros with a network of contacts. The quality of the artist is only half the story. The relationship with label is surely symbiotic, so again without a label that specialises or 'gets' them the bands will be starved to death. I just can't see how a massive office somewhere in USA can hope to find, promote and ultimately fleece its bands, thereby eventually killing itself.

As for us being to blame, there's some truth in that. It's symptomatic of C21 culture that everyone wants everything now, for as little as possible (where 'free' is just utopia). Only the other day I pulled a CD off shelf and found myself shocked I'd paid £14.99 for it (price label still on jewel case) and it wasn't even a chart CD or huge artist at the time. I'd baulk at that now, no question. Even when we bought 7" singles it was say £1-£2, 30 years ago (what does that equate to now?), whilst kids today begrudge 69p for a download and seek out the free versions, or just pirate them. Who wants to save up, or even needs to, to invest in someone else's talent, thereby nurturing and nourishing that talent?

I find myself feeling sorry for my kids that they'll in all likelihood be forcefed a diet of short-lived manufactured dross music, captured in some intangible format, and available live only if a) the band can actually play at all b) they can afford about £80 for a seat 100 yards from the stage in a soulless stadium.

Not saying the relationship was ever a match made in heaven http://www.lyricsfreak.com/c/clash/complete+control_20031887.html  but seems a very real danger there will be no relationship at all before too long.