Topic: There are way too many bands around these days. (Read 8152 times)

Caspian · « **on:** 08 Mar 2009, 19:11 »

This was kind of sparked by those "writing help" threads. It seems that pretty much everyone these days (I'm as guilty as any) is trying to form a band or is in a band. There's just a massive overload of bands these days. I swear there's at least eleventy billion post rock bands out there currently, and hundred bazillion black metal ones. There are way too many bands. The vast, vast majority of these bands are not any good, either.

Is music becoming less something that only the talented and driven can aim for, and something that anyone with a guitar who likes a few bands can achieve? Is there something super wrong with that? I think there is; feel free to disagree/praise my insight. Is anyone else frustrated/bemused with this rather modern phenomenon? With home recording getting easier, I can definitely see the market becoming even more flooded in years to come. Discuss the exponential growth of band numbers.

IronOxide · « **Reply #1 on:** 08 Mar 2009, 19:26 »

There are just the same amount of bands as have always have been, it is just now easier to get exposure for your group and to make recordings.

Next Question.

Caspian · « **Reply #2 on:** 08 Mar 2009, 19:28 »

Nah,there's way more bands now then there were 20/30/40 years ago.

StaedlerMars · « **Reply #3 on:** 08 Mar 2009, 19:37 »

Because now the tools exist for people to record their own music, instead of having to pay lots of money to do so in a studio.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing music and making music that you like. It also means that people who can't throw all their time and money and effort into making music can actually put out something. This isn't a bad thing.

rynne · « **Reply #4 on:** 08 Mar 2009, 20:22 »

Quote from: Caspian on 08 Mar 2009, 19:11

this rather modern phenomenon

The punk bands of the 1970s disagree.

*edit*
...or, for that matter, anyone living before the invention of audio recording. Up 'til the beginning of last century, if you wanted to listen to music and didn't live in a city, you either got a bunch of friends/family together and played songs yourself, or you watched someone else in town who did the same thing.

Cire27 · « **Reply #5 on:** 08 Mar 2009, 21:40 »

Either way, I think it's great. Who cares if there are more bands? It just means people might start getting jaded towards all the shit, and start forming their own opinions. I hope.

Sox · « **Reply #6 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 02:58 »

Quote from: Ptommydski on 08 Mar 2009, 19:43

I could care less

You have the disease.

Hat · « **Reply #7 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 03:30 »

Quote from: Caspian on 08 Mar 2009, 19:11

Is music becoming less something that only the talented and driven can aim for, and something that anyone with a guitar who likes a few bands can achieve?

Yes! Thank god.

Big Happy Captain · « **Reply #8 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 04:43 »

i love the idea of people being able to express themselves artistically easily. i dont think there could ever be too much music in the world.

that being said i dont like any bands who just do it to be cool/get famous. but who am i to judge?

Caspian · « **Reply #9 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 04:58 »

Quote from: Hat on 09 Mar 2009, 03:30

Quote from: Caspian on 08 Mar 2009, 19:11
Is music becoming less something that only the talented and driven can aim for, and something that anyone with a guitar who likes a few bands can achieve?

Yes! Thank god.

How is this a good thing? Seriously. Out of all the parts of my OP that you quote, you quote that bit? Personally, I'm all for music being a little bit difficult; if it filters out the trash then I don't see what's the problem.. I don't know, maybe you guys need to hear a few more bedroom black metal bands.

Hat · « **Reply #10 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 05:05 »

The fact that you think that statement is somehow a scathing insult on the state of modern music is the best part of this thread and that is why I chose it.

Like music is some kind of limited resource and that every bad band is somehow sucking the life and creativity out of a good band.

And if we are actively coming up with reasons why shitty bands can be useful apart from the whole "people can express themselves however the fuck they want, get over it" thing, well you can just think about how every shitty band out there is drawing that dude who yells "PLAY KHE SAHN" away from your precious lesbian xylophone concert or whatever the heck you're into.

pwhodges · « **Reply #11 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 06:04 »

Quote from: Caspian on 08 Mar 2009, 19:11

Is music becoming less something that only the talented and driven can aim for?

Music has never been limited to the "talented", fortunately. Where did folk song come from? Why were there pianos in every nineteenth century parlour? All that has changed is that modern communications have made it easier to be aware of the shitty music that has always been out there - I mean, for every Quarrymen there were crowds of skiffle groups that got nowhere, but still enjoyed it. Even the easy availability of fancy playing and recording facilities is actually rather a trivial change, because real talent has never relied on these things.

And of course this has always meant that most music has been ephemeral, and only the best (in general) has survived (I could expand and qualify this hugely, but a page of that would totally derail this thread!). So this process continues; but possibly with a trace more democracy now, as bands can spread their stuff more widely.

Caspian · « **Reply #12 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 06:13 »

Quote from: Hat on 09 Mar 2009, 05:05

The fact that you think that statement is somehow a scathing insult on the state of modern music is the best part of this thread and that is why I chose it.

It's not. Most of the stuff I listen to is really modern; drone, laptop-y ambient, post-rock etc. I think there's too many bands, yes, but I think a lot of music is in the best shape it's been in a while.

For the record, Khe Sanh is freakin' awesome.

Quote from: theHatman

Like music is some kind of limited resource and that every bad band is somehow sucking the life and creativity out of a good band.

Of course; however I don't see how a huge glut of bad bands can be considered a good thing, in any circumstances?

Quote from: jeans

seems more than a little elitist to me.

..And that's bad because? Besides, I don't mean people have to past a test of some sort; it's just the old methods of promotion- and the lack of home recording equipment "back in the day"- meant that if you were just writing for laughs or what have you, you wouldn't be able to scrape up the money and record your piece of shit music.

iamiam · « **Reply #13 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 06:19 »

I'm still not exactly getting why it's such a problem that people who love music are making music? How does this have a negative impact on anything? Maybe you could clarify?

Johnny C · « **Reply #14 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 08:16 »

I love bands! I love all kinds of bands. Every one of them should keep going! It's cool. Everybody make art all the time.

benji · « **Reply #15 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 08:44 »

I don't just want to repeat what everyone else has been saying, so I'll just say:

Quote from: Caspian on 09 Mar 2009, 04:58

I don't know, maybe you guys need to hear a few more bedroom black metal bands.

I really don't, and that's the point. Black Metal isn't my thing anyway, but if it were, I'd probably find some reliable sources (blogs, friends, whatever) who could tell me when something interesting was on the scene that I should pay attention to. In the mean time, if a bunch of kids want to get together in their garage, make a recording, and post it on some website somewhere, what's the harm? I don't have to listen to it. If the kids had fun, impressed their girlfriends, maybe got a couple of fans out their on the web, and then went off to study English at some state college, they've probably achieved their goals and it probably hasn't cost me a thing. If you're worried about having to listen to the crap, find sources that you think are reasonably likely to point you in the direction of stuff you'll enjoy and ignore the rest. If you absolutely have to be the first one listening to something, learn to deal with listening to crap.

el_loco_avs · « **Reply #16 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 09:05 »

The more bands there are... the more chances we have to get good music.

The key is filtering out all the crap.

pwhodges · « **Reply #17 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 09:20 »

Or even enjoying the crap. There's no reason that things have to be "good" or "lasting" before you can enjoy them at all. Just throw it out when you're done.

ThePianoMan · « **Reply #18 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 14:31 »

I don't see why it's a problem that there are tons of bands out there. Making music has never been a good financial decision, so it's not like there's a problem with a glut of bands bringing down wages. If it's a matter of filtering, that's also easier than it's ever been. You can complain about Pitchfork, Stereogum, TMT, or whatever music news site it's trendy to bitch about lately, but they make it outrageously easy to find good stuff - and combine that with the proliferation of online messageboards like this one and you really shouldn't have any trouble finding interesting stuff. a lot of the bands I listen to are bands that wouldn't have existed if recording music wasn't as easy as it is - major labels aren't signing bands like Autechre and Neutral Milk Hotel and the like lately, and I'm glad these bands can keep making music without their support. As for bedroom black metal bands, it doesn't take more than a mouseclick to get the hell away from them.

J-cob9000 · « **Reply #19 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 15:09 »

If recording was limited to recording studios who would only record when they liked the way you sounded, where would we get things like prog and experimental albums? Would the whole 'indie-scene' even exist? Most of indie music isn't really record sales breaking stuff simply because its different. Wouldn't this make studios less likely to record them?
Perhaps the availability of personal recording stuff is good.
Perhaps this only makes sense in my head.

Caspian · « **Reply #20 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 17:47 »

Quote from: Midnight Umbreon on 09 Mar 2009, 15:09

If recording was limited to recording studios who would only record when they liked the way you sounded, where would we get things like prog and experimental albums? Would the whole 'indie-scene' even exist? Most of indie music isn't really record sales breaking stuff simply because its different. Wouldn't this make studios less likely to record them?

What? Studios don't care what type of music you record, as long as you can pay the rate.

Quote

Perhaps this only makes sense in my head.

I'm starting to think that might apply to what I've been going on about, too.

KickThatBathProf · « **Reply #21 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 18:52 »

Quote from: Caspian on 09 Mar 2009, 17:47

What? Studios don't care what type of music you record, as long as you can pay the rate.

That is untrue in several cases

Avec · « **Reply #22 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 19:45 »

Just a matter of picking out the gems. I don't think you should be concerned for the bands striving for publicity, most are rubbish anyway. I believe that the Independent music scene will coincide in society's mind as long as there are those that truly follow it, understand it, and live it.

Caspian · « **Reply #23 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 19:50 »

Quote from: KickThatBathProf on 09 Mar 2009, 18:52

Quote from: Caspian on 09 Mar 2009, 17:47
What? Studios don't care what type of music you record, as long as you can pay the rate.

That is untrue in several cases

Really? Maybe that's a strange American thing, I've worked in a bunch of studios in Perth and no one's been prohibited from recording anything.

KickThatBathProf · « **Reply #24 on:** 09 Mar 2009, 22:00 »

Sorry, what I said was pretty vague. It's not that some studios will prohibit an artist from recording. They'll just be selective in the types of artists they'll record.

Abigmoron · « **Reply #25 on:** 10 Mar 2009, 10:45 »

Quote from: Caspian on 09 Mar 2009, 06:13

Of course; however I don't see how a huge glut of bad bands can be considered a good thing, in any circumstances?

As a former member of a bad band, they are good things because the kids in the bad bands have a heck of a lot of fun.

casull · « **Reply #26 on:** 10 Mar 2009, 12:46 »

I think rynne really hit the nail on the head. Seeing the goal of playing music as making something new, groundbreaking, and original just doesn't take the whole picture into account. Lots of musical traditions have very little regard for making something new and groundbreaking- I play old-time and texas-style fiddle, for instance. Most of the musicians that play this kind of music seek not to innovate, but simply to perform it live, often at a square dance or somesuch. The same is true for many kinds of music. There are lots of bands out here in the midwest who just perform classic rock hits in bars for the free beer. They're not amazing musicians, but they are usually friends, and they have fun.

MOST bands feel no need to artistically justify themselves, I think. We just happen to follow the ones that do, because we like being on the bleeding edge.

Anyway Caspian, for every ten (ok, maybe 100) shitty bands, a good one will come together, giving us something new and original. It's not that hard to filter out the bad bands, is it? It's not like there aren't enough people on the internet jonesing to tell you what's worth listening to and what isn't.

IronOxide · « **Reply #27 on:** 10 Mar 2009, 17:40 »

Quote from: Caspian on 09 Mar 2009, 06:13

Of course; however I don't see how a huge glut of bad bands can be considered a good thing, in any circumstances?

I think the problem with this statement is that, objectively, there is no such thing as a "bad band" in the words of the immortal sage, Steve Albini:

Quote from: Steve Albini, in an interview with Mark Prindle

Well, I think I've been in enough situations to realize that every band has an aesthetic. It may not be an aesthetic that I find particularly laudable or whatever, but it might just be that I don't get it. Before he died, John Peel said something that I thought was really profound. He said when he gets a record from somebody and he doesn't like it, he assumes that it's his problem and that the band would not have made that record if there wasn't something valuable about it. And I kinda feel like that's an appropriate perspective. Like this band wants to make this record - for some reason, they really want to do this - and they can get a lot of satisfaction out of it.

I think the point is that music can be a selfish thing, and even if it doesn't come out with a broad appeal, there's a value of it existing. Not everything is a classic, but hey, it exists and it should exist. You'll find a gem in somebody else's pile of shit, or vice versa.

KickThatBathProf · « **Reply #28 on:** 10 Mar 2009, 18:45 »

If we're gonna play it like that, there are several bands too many

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: There are way too many bands around these days. (Read 8152 times)