Wednesday, 9 December 2009

2000 - 2010: splintering scenes and technology



Panda Bear - Person Pitch, the surprise choice in Pitchforks top 10 albums of the decade

Just reading this Guardian piece debating whether Pitchforks 200 albums of the decade is a significant list that we should take note of. The answer for me from both a music fan and cultural observer angle is yes definitely. Those guys went beyond the guitar based music with the odd exception mindset that the NME and Q had to one where any album, whether it was from a Norwegian disco producer or Brooklyn 4 piece was listened to and assessed on a level playing field.

I've got to be thankful to them for some of my musical highlights: Clipse, Portishead, Grizzly Bear, Hercules and Love Affair, Mark Pritchards incredible 'feel the spirit' folk comp. Their level of music geekery is both completely impartial and unrivalled. They are the guys who spent sunday afternoon making mixtapes with the kind of attention to detail an ipod user wouldn't ever understand.

More intriguing than the who is in/out/massively overrated is the effect technology has had on what we've listened to. There seems to have been a splintering of tastes towards the second half of the decade as the information via digital platforms becase more accessible. This was the decade that the music industry changed from tour to promote cd to recorded music to promote tour and artist as a brand. As it became easier to find out about music beyond mainstream media channels (remember MTV anyone?) people went onto the web and explored - they came across sites like myspace and pitchfork and never looked back. The long tail theory for music at least has most certainly happened. This article in the Economist makes the point much better than I ever could, we've all seen the Kings of Leon reach world domination and know that bands no longer need a deal to get themselves out there, it's now the ones in the middle that face the biggest challenge in a splintering world.

This quote sums it up...

So what was so intriguingly odd about their top 10 albums of the noughties? I was immediately struck by the fact that seven of the albums were from 2000 and 2001, with one other record from 2002 and another from 2004. The only album from after the mid-decade point was Panda Bear's Person Pitch. Now what significance can be derived from this dense clustering (eight of the ten) of "greatest albums" in the first three years of the decade? You could interpret it two ways: firstly, music deteriorated as the noughties went on, or secondly, it grew harder and harder for people to reach consensus about which groups mattered, what records were important. The first scenario seems unlikely, so I'd have to go with the second. It resonates with how the decade actually felt: diasporic, scenes splintering into sub-scenes, taste bunkers forming, the question "Have you heard X?" increasingly likely to meet a shake of the head or a look of incomprehension


So there will always be the big hit making stadium touring mega stars. There is a human need to be part of something with other people and not all of us are prepared to spend hours geeking out online to find that swedish skiffle band to then go and check out in Mile End. We want human interaction, an excuse to be social and something that gives us an identity but there is a limit to the time and effort that we're prepared to put into it.

The big stars deserve every penny they get for holding onto their audience in a time when technology has created a profound change beyond 'the hit' - there is now a massive part of the market made up of splintering sub cultures, niches and groups all of whom can survive with very little corporate involvement of any kind.

Not a great time to be an A&R man, an incredible time to be someone with a good idea and a nack of communicating well with people.

No comments:

Post a Comment