funny, but lately I've been trying to break through youtube's algorithm to stop hearing the same dozen tunes repeated endlessly, and I haven't been able to find much that trips my trigger out there either. Guess I'll have to light up one of the radio services, but I don't expect miracles there either.
You tube is the worst for that. I’ve tried Amazon music and Spotify. They’re not as bad but still you get the same 30 songs it seems
Generally I agree with your post, but I wonder if it says something that almost half your list - Pearl Jam, DMB, Widespread, RHCP, Phish, Radiohead - were all popular by 1994 which fall into heelman's bucket.
They prefer... "borrowed" or maybe even "inspired by!"
I think that is the main "problem." Between streaming and YouTube, there's a lot of noise out there getting in the way of good music. You could also make the argument that these music executives have created bland music by sticking to a formula. I listen to a lot of smaller bands/artists that I find on YouTube. Someone with 50k subs can have just as much, or more, talent than some of these bands with millions of subs.
I checked them out earlier. Not conventional but jazzy. Jazzy rock maybe. Not questioning the talent.
I'm subscribed to him. He definitely knows what he's talking about. He's produced for some bigger bands and testified in Congress a couple of times.
Sorry for a TL;DR contribution. But, I have to. I saw this a few days ago.
I saw that one, too. I dunno... bee-AH-toe just gives off a negative sorta vibe to me, most of the time. I agree with him sometimes. He needs to get people to watch his content. That helps him earn a living. That's cool. He's exceptional at doing that. "People don't care about music as much as they used to." And, then he refers to the algorithms to tell him/us what is happening around us with that "data." Social media is ruling the world. I can buy that. It's BRAND NEW! And, our culture is consumed with it. But, his livelihood depends on it thriving, too. He bashes it and then profits from it.
He wasn't trying to say they don't care about it, he was saying it's not valued as much because it's easier to consume. Which is true for anything. The more you have of the same thing, the less each individual thing is valued. Think of it as a supply and demand thing. As a side point, he was also saying it has lead to people not practicing their instruments as much, which is also true. It's funny that you went on a rant about someone being negative by taking the most negative view of the video that you could.
Exactly. He's saying that the musicianship is not there to the same level anymore because even a stiff like me could "make" music "just as good" as my best buddy who's played since we met in elementary school. And, as an end consumer, you don't appreciate the end listening the same way that you did when it was a choice to buy a particular 45 or LP because you could only get one and not, literally, everything. It's kinda like ordering from Amazon or Walmart plus with free shipping, etc. We can have stuff the same, next or in two days. When we were kids, we poured over catalogs, saved our money and decided what we'd get. Then, we finally had our mom write a check and send it off. Two weeks later, after the order had been received, the check had cleared, and they shipped it, our magical box of whatever arrived. We have it pretty good now. Pointing that out isn't being a pessimist as much as it is recognizing the state of things.
exactly, no more and no less. And he did an excellent job of describing the state of things. There's no denying that technology creeps into our lives at an increasing rate, and usually that's good...even though it often brings the other side of the coin with it. I think the other side of the coin needs to be kept in check, and it isn't being kept in check with music to my satisfaction.
Then someone needs to go and tell him because that is exactly what he said... to my ears. That is why I put it in quotes. And, he says that it is a problem. To me, a problem implies that something is wrong.
Context exists for a reason. You can't take a couple of small quotes from a topic he's speaking on for 20 minutes and say that's exactly what he's talking about. You're picking a weird hill to die on.
He's speaking for 7 minutes, total, in this clip, and he even says that it's a "problem" that "people don't care about music as much as they used to." A problem implies that something is wrong/needs to be addressed. Then he uses Google searches to try and prove that the alleged problem, in fact, exists. I'm watching you die on the same hill. His assertion is that something is wrong, bad, getting worse, and so forth. That's fine if he wants to push that opinion. It's fine if everyone wants to agree with whatever they think he's supposed to be saying. His content, from my experience, is always that "there's something wrong, something is going wrong, things are going from bad to worse... let's talk about it."
