Slashdot Mirror
Elton John Says Internet is Destroying Music
Jared writes "Elton John says that the internet is destroying good music and "stopping people from going out and being with each other, creating stuff." He laments the way that the internet and the emerging industry of digital music has created a cold and impersonal world for artists to create new music in."
And Video killed the Radio star too, eh?
"Oh, it's the Internet that sucks, and not you, right? RIGHT?"
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
In other news Music has stated that Elton John is destroying it.
Sir Elton may be right, but fundamentally, the Internet is far more valuable than the transient phenomenon of pop music. Most of yesterday's tastes are outdated now, and as for what survives, it's enough to tide us over until the Internet and the creative classes evolve to a more beneficial relationship with each other.
Are we not fawning over "celebs" enough? Not constructing enough temple record stores, to be preached to in a condescending manner if we pick up the wrong album? Are we actually daring to put their music in the same store as a lesser known artist? Or, perhaps his music might even be sharing the same server on itunes as one of us common ruffians?
What's been lost is trivial to what's been gained. I had a grin a mile wide when I realized that some of my favorite artists, talented but not at all well known or mainstream enough to get a label's attention, could be purchased from the same itunes interface as the latest plastic pop idol.
Everything will be taken away from you.
Antisocial people can make music by themselves without the need for the Internet. Sociable people will make music together with or without the Internet and may even use the Internet to help communicate when collaborating on a project. Technology is a convenient scapegoat, as usual.
though i think the riaa has had a pretty good crack at destroying music.
There's _ALOT_ more out there, and now there is selection where once there was only Elton John and other mass distributed mediocraty. You want to make a change, you do something about it. If you cant, work with it and stop bitching about things you don't improve. Bitching is noise. Progress is beautiful.
Maybe Elton John just doesn't get the new ways to create, play, and distribute music? To be fair, Elton John's generation and those before destroyed live music in the household, as who needs Joe-Fred johnson to strum his banjo when you can hear professionals first on record, then radio, then TV, etc... So why shouldn't we move the music to another "space"?
I wonder if someone were to give Elton John an internet literacy test how he would do. Considering the British judge Justice Opensha had to ask what a website was while presiding over an internet "terrorism" case, I wouldn't be surprised if Elton John considered the internet nothing more than a Kazaa screen.
www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
There's so many bands I wouldn't have started listening to if I hadn't heard samples or web broadcasts of them on the net. It's certainly broadened my musical taste having digital distribution of music so easily available.
Seriously I'm seeing acts both prosper and thrive due to the internet. Even the more established groups like They Might Be Giants have done well thanks to the internet in reaching their fans. If anything there's probably a larger danger of background noise in the amount of chaff produced, but seeing various internet "memes" pop up from time to time I'm confident that the good stuff will always rise to the top.
Taking an even more commercial example, I wouldn't have heard much about pop-artists like Rogue Traders unless I'd seen an excerpt of Dr. Who from the UK which lead me to wiki the Aus act and find more info than a lone single - which is only reaching US market AFTER 2 YEARS - would provide. The single is available from iTunes - but I'll eagerly await the full album.
In the retro column, 80s artist Thomas Dolby released a live set recorded in front of a live audience in San Francisco onto iTunes a while back. He's got several businesses and projects going but it's nice to see him quickly produce and bring to market (thanks to the internet) some new material. This wouldn't have gotten the time of day by the traditional business model.
Good riddance I say.
BTW - check out SeeqPod. It's cooler than snail snot and the mobile client is SWEET. I've not only found hard to finds, and music out of circulation, but excellent mash-ups that would NEVER BE ALLOWED TO BE DISTRIBUTED BY THE CURRENT OUTDATED RIAA BUSINESS MODELS.
That's all well and good if you happen to be in or very near one of the small handful of cities that are 'music centers', but for would-be musicians who aren't in those places and have no reasonable means to get there, the music industry was just as cold before the internet as it is now, if not colder.
Unpleasantries.
Blaming the transmission medium for making the environment "cold and impersonal" is like blaming high HIV transmission rates on semen. fairly silly. The environment is what you make of it.
the two guys who created the Spice Girls that killed good music, and that was before teh Intarweb had gained rampant popularity. It's all been downhill from there.
Try creating music that people like
;)
And sadly like most SlashDot nerds, you still sign along to the Lion King even though it makes you want to cry.
Sadly kiddies on SlashDot have no clue of the impact Elton has on Music.
Let's see, hmm, a true music writer with perfect pitch, ya that just doesn't work in today's Britney, lipsync crowd.
what is he talking about
just because he doesn't understand how to use the internet to meet people, doesn't mean he can make stupid statements like this
I have an entire network of friends who, using only their computers, instruments of choice, and the internet, make great music between each other
we're literally friends, and this is real music
if anything the internet is what will finally set music free
giving everyone an equal chance to put their stuff up
it may dilute it all a bit (an effect I hope for with a lot of genres)
but in the end we'll have more options as listeners
and musicians will have more options for making money
North Carolina-raised MC Phonte, one-third of Little Brother, and Dutch producer Nicolay formed the duo and crafted the ethereally lush hip-hop album without ever meeting face-to-face. Using the marvels of modern technology, the group traded verses and tracks over the Internet.
Your move, Elton.
Next week on slashdot: sculptors suggest we rip out highways so that people can better appreciate sculptures and fountains.
I think the lad's gone old on us.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Of course, making the top ten isn't exactly an indicator of "quality material."
Elton's never done anything even remotely of the quality of Tommy; he's an aging pop personality looking for air time, that's all.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Right Sir Elton, i'd love to be able to afford to see my bands live, but most of them are assholes like you and charge $150 a ticket, hence it's not possible to see more then a couple a year at best.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
But at the time all I could do to distribute my music was to manually duplicate cassette tapes. I just gave a few to friends and family. CD burners were still horrendously expensive, as were CD-R blanks.
When I got my own website, I offered some free downloads in Sun's old .AU format. I think it's 8-bit, so it didn't sound that good, and the downloads were quite large. But MP3 and psychoacoustic compression was still a ways off.
The copyright on my music said "All rights reserved" at first, and I specifically forbid sharing my songs over the Internet, but instead requested that those who wanted to share my music direct others to my website.
But I had always been a big fan of Richard Stallman and Free Software, and I knew that the right thing to do would be to copyleft my music.
I'm not signed with any record label, not even an indie one. I'm completely on my own. But my music gets downloaded by hundreds of people each month, with the downloads growing over time.
By learning to play by ear, I didn't learn to read sheet music. But for several years now I've been taking piano lessons and learning to read music, with the aim that when I can pass the entrance audition, I will enroll in music school to major in musical composition. I want to compose symphonies someday.
The Internet is, frankly, a miracle to me as it is enabling people throughout the world to get to know me and my music. When the time comes that I play professionally - or hopefully, symphony orchestras play myy compositions - I expect that there will already be a base of fans who will buy tickets to my performances.
Please download, share and enjoy:
- Geometric Visions: The Rough Draft
I call it "The Rough Draft" because I always intended to compose more pieces for at, and when the time came, to re-record it and to have a "glass master" CD pressed.The lot of it is under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 2.5 license. There are various formats as well as sheet music in PDF and Lilypond (source code) format. (I would be honored if any of you learned to play my music.)
I've been playing at Open Mics for a couple years now. I recently moved to Silicon Valley, and often visit Santa Cruz on the weekends. If you'd like to hear me live, check my live performance schedule. (It presently says I'm in Vancouver, but I'll update that in the next day or so.)
I'm also planning to buy an amp so I can play my keyboard on the street. When I do, I'm going to have a sign hanging off of it advertising "Free Music Downloads", and will have a box of my free music download handbills.
Last weekend I spent four hours walking up and down Santa Cruz' Pacific Garden Mall passing out the handbills. I got many reactions - most people think it's too good to be true, that there is some kind of catch, but most who accept the handbill are quite delighted.
You could really help me out if you shared my music over the Internet.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Hey, Elton's actually made music that isn't the same canned love-song crap. The songs he writes are autobiographical, about people important to him, about things important to his lyricist, etc. And he's an amazing live performer. Yep, I'm a big fan of his and I'm continually amazed by his live work.
But "close down the internet"? That's just ridiculous. Not happening, and I don't agree. Sure, sometimes you get a lot of "me too" art of all sorts (drawings, music, whatever) but I think the fact that anyone can publish and create anything they want more than makes up for that.
If it weren't for the big name behind this silliness, I doubt anyone would pay it any mind. And I think it's silly and not worth the electrons it's "printed" with.
i am a soviet space shuttle
so his issue is more a demarcation dispute?
Elton played the Pinball Wizard in Tommy -- all he asked in exchange for doing the role was getting to keep the shoes.
i am a soviet space shuttle
"Sadly kiddies on SlashDot have no clue of the impact Elton has on Music."
I would say had an impact. But today his impact resonates the same message as, "Get off my lawn!".
today's Britney crowd
In my opinion, the new music world should be about choice The internet creates choice. And if that internet destroys the musicindustry(I'm talking about formatted music like britney's) GOOD: bring on all the new types of music!
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
People who "try" to commit suicide and fail that badly (can't gas themselves, don't cut their wrist in the right place, whatever) are generally doing it to try to get attention and try to get help with some issue they can't just outright tell people about, not to actually kill themselves.
... so I can't really jeer at it that easily.
Sadly, I've known people who cut themselves up for attention-whore purposes
I like a lot of his newer stuff, but then, musical tastes are very much an individual thing.
i am a soviet space shuttle
Check the Sun article
Now, where did I hear something like that before? Oh, yes: Spider Robinson's 1983 Hugo Winning Short Story, "The Melancholy Elephants"—
Sir Elton John's musical talent may be argued either way, but it doesn't change that he still is an Ignorant Idiot.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
I think we need to stop calling music 'content' - that's the RIAA's language.
Very; he is especially qualified to comment about Internet affairs. Elton demonstrates many hacker type qualities. Especially his code re-use skill. He was able to use the same bit of code for songs about two different celebrities that had almost nothing in common. Brilliant!
In the same way a judge was once ridiculed for asking "Who are the Beatles", but it was necessary because again they were being talked about in a trial, but anybody subsequently reading the trial report would not get a clue what "Beatles" were. Because of the way the British legal system works, on case law and precedent, judges have to assume that a judgement may be brought up many years in the future - when, say, the word "website" will be long gone but the thing itself still exists.
Incidentally, in that case the question did show that the lawyers on both sides were themselves unclear what they were talking about - not unusual in these cases.
Pining for the fjords
You mean Bernie Taupin writes songs that are autobiographical, about people that are important to him. It's Taupin that wrote all those love song lyrics of the past...usually written to his girlfriend at the time. Elton put them all to extremely beautiful music.
I know, you did say "things important to his lyricist"...but I just wanted to make sure Bernie Taupin's name got out there.
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Yep. Sorry about that; I should have credited him outright! You and I know all about him, fortunately.
Some of the songs are from Elton's perspective (Someone Saved My Life Tonight is an example) but yes, many are Bernie's, such as Saturday Night's All Right For Fighting, which is about Bernie's time in bars when he was younger.
Thanks for following up.
i am a soviet space shuttle
If only there was a period in history when the internet didn't exist, so we could make a comparison to it.
Sir, do not trivialize this. Surely, you must understand that
MUSIC IS GOING DOWN THE INTERTUBES!
...Time on the 'net could be time spent with you
Clicking on banners, searching for lovers
Sneaking my laptop under the covers
And I guess that's why they call it the blues
Ah, Elton, always on hand with crappy lyrics badly modified for current events...
And by old, I mean, pre-1976
Tiny Dancer
Levon
Madman across the Water
Goodbye Yellow Brick Road
Crocodile Rock
Don't Let the Sun Go Down on Me
Someone Saved My Life Tonight
and I'll take Mona Lisas and Mad Hatters up against any song the Who ever did, period.
This is my sig.
FTFA:
And there's the problem. He's stuck in his ways, and the internet is a threat to those ways. Lets be clear - the internet is helping new artists make music and distribute it (for free and for money) without requiring a restrictive contract with a record company.
Consider The Boy Lacks Patience. He's an amazing performer, and he is all the things that you said Elton John is. Yet, despite that I lived in the same city as him for about five years, I would never have heard of him if it wasn't for the internet.
A couple of months ago, a freebie brochure-cum-mini magazine fell out listing all of the rock music festivals going on in-and-around Europe over the summer - no lies, but there were *at least* 70 music festivals!
I guess one reason for this is the ludicrous prices of concert tickets and the rip-off sellers like Ticketmaster that charge *extortionate* booking fees simply for putting a couple of tickets in the post - the fact is that a festival is going to give you "more bands for your money".
I don't like a lot of the modern music but I don't see any shortage of live gigs to go to and the whole live music scene is very vibrant - hell, even heroes of mine like Uriah Heep and Magnum, all of them approaching their 60s, are touring quite regularly *and* charging reasonable amounts for tickets.
The sad fact is that Elton John is a "has-been" and has now become more media celebrity than musician - these days, he's more known for his gay marriage to his partner, wild parties & sucking up to Disney to write film soundtracks rather than the classic music he did during the 70s like "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" and "Captain Fantastic".
Nope, I can't stand music downloads & most modern music either but the fact is that I can still buy CDs at reasonable prices (not in rip-off stores like Virgin or HMV) and there is more than enough live music for me to go and see - so what anyone else does is up to them, I'm in my 40s and well catered for...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Rap,
I thought we were talking about music here.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Clearly Elton John hasn't listened to the radio for the past fifteen years. Ignorance is bliss.
But for the internet, I'd never have discovered the amount of music I have that actually has real art value.
- So who did?
- Yes!
(Sorry.)
Let's just all be quiet and hope he goes away.
Don't be too critical of Sir Elton...
Transformative technology doesn't unfold smoothly. The dominant paradigm is shattered, twisted, shocked by the changes inflicted upon it. To the person born to and comfortable with the dominant paradigm, it would look like the death of everything they know and love. They would be quite rightfully frightened and saddened by what they see. But that is born of their devotion to the past, and their inability to see the future. To the catepillar, butterflies look like the end of all things.
In this messy, rattle-trap process of revoltion, evolution, many new things pop into and out of existence overnight and the new stable state, the new paradigm begins to develop. It is not a pretty process, and the along the way, it's easy to become judgemental and lose sight of why people moved down this path to begin with.
I can only imagine what it will be like when great artists can meet together virtually, collaborating with hardly more than a moments notice, anywhere in the world. What amzing art they will make for the ears, and the eyes, and all the senses, and the spirit, and the mind. What will be the possibility of an artist who can sing neural songs of profound thought and experience, and what will be possible for our children's childen when they have access to every beautiful thing ever devised at almost infinite speed and resolution. The internet of today is a tinker toy. It's an externalization of the human brain, still in it's most primative state. Nobody is surprised that a salamander or even a gopher is not sufficiently sophisticated to be a channel of great artistic beauty. Why should it be any any wonder that as amazing as it is, our ability to truly connect is stil l terribly limited, that our ability to "ART" is constrained by this tiny, narrow channel. The possibility however, that is something an artistic soul should rejoice in.
Relenquish nothing, instead we need to push forward faser, harder, we need to stop thinking small. Watching the enterprise of of today's technology wasting precious time and energy polishing turds and calling it business... this is the real trajedy. Let's build something worthy of human artists, worthy of the art of being human. That would be the fulfillment of real transformation. That would be a worthy aspiration for a true network of human beings.
he songs he writes are autobiographical, about people important to him, about things important to his lyricist, etc.
where does Crocodile Rock fit into this, exactly?
Besides, Trent released a couple of tracks in a format that alows anyone (ANYONE) to mix it, remix it, cut it, mash it, to basically get a taste of what it feels like to play with the "source code" of music. Trent even said that the draft of the album was made up while they were touring, with a laptop, on buses and planes and all.
Heck, they even "leaked" selected tracks via USB pen drives on bathrooms on concerts, and I think that the objective was to spread them, using (you guessed!) the internet!
Now, could any of this be possible without the internet? Maybe, but the thing is that the internet is a new "tool", to wich the artists either adapt, or will violently bash against (like in the case of Sir Elton).
5 years without internet... the thing is that a lot of people (like Sir Elton) just don't get it, today the internet is becoming more and more a "essential" service on the civilized world, much like telephone, gas, electricity and the likes.
"A sysadmin is a cross between a detective, a police officer, a gardener, a doctor and a fireman"
When someone like Mr. John here admits he's making an uninformed opinion, "I don't have a mobile phone or an iPod or anything", its kinda hard to give his words any weight no matter how much of an icon he is in the music industry.
Just because he personally doesn't use a tool doesn't mean it needs to be completely done away with. I could point to many uses of the internet as a means for musical collaboration. For applications there's Ninjam for one, FL Studio has Collab, and there's also many online communities of artists working together and feeding off each other's inspiration and creativity.
The candle hasn't burned out long ago, Elton. There's just more sources of light that you haven't bothered noticing.
-2B
The rebirth of music, created by real human beings to be shared with real human beings, music that only represented the minority of content readily available in the 20th century will again become the majority and the only people to miss the parasitic music publishers will be the parasitic publisher executives.
Elton is just isolated by wealth and mass media manufactured fame, and is lamenting his lost ability to share the creative process with the grass roots artists, as he approaches his end of times. The Internet will usher in a new era of live music in preference to dead recordings.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The cause and effect he imagines just isn't there. The 'cold place' he sees was just hidden during the past. He never had the chance to meet the mobs of people out there without the power of the Internet before, except when he traveled on tour. And I am sure he stopped to talk to them all. The new technology merely allowed him to know about the world he never saw before, and any existing problems he never realized.
Yes, the Industry is "colder" today, for him, as that is just in his own frame of mind. The Industry has always been a cutthroat place where contracts rule, not the artist. The "people" don't make it colder, they just make it possible for a sinking artist like him to make a living and get their interviews published on the Internet, and to drive up sales.
Is this news? An ageing, and increasingly irrelevant musician is upset that the industry is our pacing his technical understanding and/or taste. I know someone out there is a fan of Mr. John's music, I'm not, none of my friends are. My parents hate his music and are from the generation that launched Elton's career. I've always wondered who was buying his CDs. It's a matter of opinion. I think EJ had done more to make music crap than the Interweb could.
Have not the record companies failure to build a truly kick-ass online business model, combined with there terrible taste in music lead to a decrease in the overall quality of music? I'm not a music geek, but I never listen to top 40 radio. I'm tuned to public (CBC) and college, mostly because of the whole quality thing. I'm not a musician. Maybe that's the problem?
Sure. Mozart had an impact. Then he died when he was thirty five. We'll never know if he was really any good because we'll never know whether the stuff he would have produced when he was fifty or sixty would be just as good.
Elton John is saying something much more interesting than the usual "file sharing is killing the music industry" line, and it's silly to dismiss him because he hasn't moved with the times onto hip-hop or something like that.
What he's saying is that the music industry is in a creative crisis, and that the source of that crisis is a kind of breakdown in communication between artist and artist and artist and audience. This really is a different take on the problem. What makes it an interesting (not necessarily correct) viewpoint is that our tools for communication are better than ever. However the time-shifting convenience of those tools make the communication less immediate, less in the moment. It's like a chess grandmaster who stops playing tournaments and stays at home playing against a computer. He can spend every waking moment now playing chess, but he is no longer contributing to chess culture.
Personally, I'm not sure I buy this. Have artists stopped playing in clubs? Or giving concerts?
I think the biggest problem in music, at least in the US, is the end of independent ownership and management of radio stations. Radio is the most important tool for disseminating musical innovation, and once the distribution channels are centrally controlled, innovation is squashed by corporate gatekeeper. There is less room for individual advocacy, as local management and jobs disappear to be replaced by robot stations playing a predetermined format. Go any place in the country, turn on the radio, and you get just varying proportions of the following formats: Pop hits, oldies, country, sports talk, right wing talk, Christian radio. It's like every restaurant in the country had to be a McDonalds, Red Lobster, KFC, or Chili's.
In this context, the crushing of Internet radio is the worst thing imaginable, because it is crushing the last legitimate outlet for individuality in music distribution. File sharing may be a problem for the music industry, but unauthorized sharing is really the only outlet left for individual music advocacy.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
He has something right about blogging - the current state of affairs was made possible by the Internet. People think that they protest by expressing thoughts online, commenting and writing. Newsflash - you don't protest by blogging, or commenting, or making videos. You protest in the streets.
The reason why you have less angry people on the streets, protesting and marching against RIAA, against the Wars, against bad leaders, is because the Internet creates an illusion of "we are doing something by getting together and expressing it everywhere". It's just an illusion. People that would otherwise make a huge difference by marching, protesting, suing, find it much more comfortable to Blog, which is just meaningless masturbation.
My Starcraft 2 Blog
I'm tired of whiny (star) musicians being all like "Wah, the internets ate my moniez". If they really loved music, they'd make it even if they had to pay for it, like most of us who like to program/mess with computers and do it even if it costs us money (open source/new gadgets/etc). This just shows me that they're in it for the cash and have no regard for the music they make.
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
Elton has a lot of leather shoes.
--> Insert Funny Sig Here
I don't think for a minute that it's destroying music or the personal feel of it. It's giving people a chance to find their OWN idea of good music instead of being spoon fed packaged stars through the label-to-media system. The UK has definately had a noticable change of taste in the last 5 years and I have to think the internet has had a significant part in this. People have been able to hear things they normally wouldn't. Artists have found platforms that were impossible to stand on before. If anything, I'd say the amount of music people listen to and the time they spent with it is much higher than before because it's so accessable and easy (iPod etc). As far as I know, concerts are also still selling out and a night out to see a band/artist is still as popular as ever. The numbers are spread to more areas than before. Music hasn't been hurt, it's the old dinosaurs with the loud voices and their model of how things should be that has been hurt. Music's evolved, come with us - you might like it! :P
I'd say it's more than just that. The biggest problem in music is the end of independent ownership and management of everything related to music on any kind of large scale. You name it, it's either owned or controlled by the RIAA mob, or it's basically irrelevant to the majority of the industry. Plenty of small-scale stuff happens, all the way down to people just talking to each other about it, but none of it reaches the necessary critical mass for any of the ideas generated to travel far beyond the (social) vicinity of the place where they started.
The root cause of all this is obvious: whenever anything significant starts to happen, people start thinking about how they can make money from it, and then they start thinking about how to maximise their profits from it, and then the RIAA mob makes them an offer.
I agree - I can browse through and LISTEN to music on Amazon on iTunes and then, if I like anything, either buy the CD or just get the tracks I want from iTunes or similar.
Internet radio offers far more variety than the local radio stations here in the UK - I've lost count of the number of CDs I've bought after hearing them through Pandora or other more traditional online stations. I can easily find a station playing the music styles I want to listen to, rather than .
Maybe Elton should consider the benefits the Internet can offer, rather than concentrating on the negatives such as illegal p2p filesharing that the record companies spoonfeed everyone.
As a musician myself (piano/keys in a jazz quartet and also a corporate/party band) I really appreciate what the internet has done for us: we get lots of our gigs through people finding our website (or being directed there from other sites / recommendations / business cards) and downloading / listening to the live demo tracks. Granted, the site needs a major update, but without the internet I'd be stuck running off demo CDs and leaflets and posting them to agents / venues.
Not all Hip Hop is bad. Check out The Hiphopapotamus
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
He's not commenting about music distribution, or about music cartels that manufacture awful music and buy radio stations to reduce people's choice.
What he's saying, in his own opinion, is that he thinks musicians are communicating less because the recent technology has been making it so much easier for people to produce things on their own. He thinks this is having a negative effect on the quality of music being produced, because the composition process has changed in such a way that musicians aren't getting as much feedback from each other. Celebrities, temple record stores or more competition between artists really have nothing to do with what he said.
I'm sure he couldn't care less if artists still used the Internet to distribute their work, if they worked together more frequently when producing it in the first place. (Actually I'm sure many already do, but clearly Elton thinks that many aren't.) Saying the Internet should be shut down for five years is just a provocative statement to get attention. It's a random idea to get people to think about how things might change if they ditched some of the technology they're using in their creative process.
By the way, by "gay" I am not referring to sexual orientation. If I have any respect for Elton John at all it's because he was one of the first big pop stars who was man enough to come out of the closet.
His music, not so much. I had a girlfriend who liked Elton John, and this is when I was deep into my Raw Power period. She was fine, but ultimately, I had to keep my priorities straight and kick her to the curb. A guy can only take so much, and having to maintain an erection while "Tiny Dancer" is playing on the stereo is beyond the pale. Soon after, I met someone better at a Mott the Hoople show at (get this) the Aragon Ballroom.
She gave me a dose, but it was worth it.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You don't have to be particularly clever to be a pop star...
The thing to keep in mind is, the internet is much more important than popular music. The music industry as it is today could suffer a horrible, painful death and we would still be better off than before the internet came around. Music was around long before "the industry", and it'll be around long after.
Nein--Inch Nails!
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
This story reminds me of a BBC panel show I heard a couple of years ago when they played a recording from the '60's (?) of a music expert complaining about what things would happen if cassette tapes became widely available.
I also remember when video players first came out, it was said that people would quit going to movie theaters and that would in turn make people socialize less.
Wow, two knighted musicians with completely different views of this new fangled contraption.
Sir Paul McCartney, you might remember him as the one with weird haircut from the Beatles, thinks record companies don't get the internet and are killing music. He's abandoned his label and is pushing forward on his own.
Sure. Mozart had an impact. Then he died when he was thirty five. We'll never know if he was really any good ...
Mozart created a body of music that has survived over 200 years after his death. And you still won't say whether he is any good?
DAMN your tough!!!
Download my free songs!
Nope.
Street marches have the data content of an Atari 2600. You get about 20 signs, 5 leaders who know their stuff, and a whole lot of extraneous violence which requires real police to break up. Then that day's rally is over, and no one cares *any more*.
A sharp, accurate protest blog backed by just a little luck and money can take down titans. Sony is one example. Don Imus is another.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
My first reaction when I read about that judge was to think 'what a plank' (British English euphemism for the stupid or ignorant).
However the more I thought about it the more I realised it was a very good question. Just think about some boundary cases. A mirrors. Two different domains on the same IP. Two subdomains on the same host or different host machines. Two different domains with different NIC/IP on the same host machine. Two different user domains on the same host. Wiki's, forum, static and dynamic content on the same domain, on different sub-domains, or on different hosts and/or NIC/IPs. A web front end to usenet, chat, aggregator or RSS feeds.
I would moderate the Judges Question insightful.
It's an incredible experience to you play with others and to actually build on each other's sound. There is an immediate sense of fulfillment. Also the audience loves to see people struggle to make their sound. It gives a good show. A digital solo at 220 BPM is nothing like a live solo. Nobody cares about the digital solo because nobody sees any skills in that while a guitar player, and even some bass players, can actually show what they are doing while dancing and moving around.
With the current level of technology, you don't need the guitar, bass, drum, orchestras etc. You could have an orchestra of synthesizers and the keyboardists could do the same thing and even more for less money. Yet, I think everybody would be bored and would wonder why they didn't simply listen to it on their computer. Eventually though, all of the instruments might become simple toys to play around a fire. A bit like how the harmonica was quite popular and practical once and now nobody cares about it.
Your view is a bit apocalyptic. While it's true radio USED to be most important distribution channel, it no longer is considering the internet's ability to make music available. Crushing internet radio? Only if the music is licensed by ASCAP, BMI or other RIAA sanctioned licensing entities is affected. If a musician chooses not to license through the standard licensing outfits, his/her music can be performed publicly without compensation. There's no income from it, but that model is still being born. It's just not ready to stand on its own yet.
Within a few years, music (or 'record') stores will cease to exist. Hundreds have already closed; more will follow. The internet will be the source and some brilliant person will eventually develop a business model that benefits the artists. It just won't be me 'cause I'm just not that smart.
== First cross river, then insult alligator.
Everything I've seen with him in the media over the past several years shows me he's turned into a bitter old man. He had the immature rant at the airport, had it out with Tina Turner (the dude is called a "diva"), and broke down in public at one point. He's entitled to his opinion, but other classic artists have embraced and revered changes due to the Internet. He's deciding to see the glass half empty, as it appears he's done in general anyhow....
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
How can the young music industry be worse in a day when any average Joe can make their music instantly accessible to millions or potential listeners? Gone are the days of making hundreds of demo tapes and hoping one will end up in the right hands
People who want to create still create. People who just want to listen to music (and have no business playing, like myself) can make their own CD's and playlists/mixes from other's work.
Funny, Elton... Backpage and Craigslist helped a buddy and me find a bass player, a drummer and a singer. We now have a band with our tunes on MySpace which gives us more exposure than we could ever have without the net. So, find new members, share your music, find the best deals on musical gear, tout your gigs, reach the world, download software to help recording... How is that killing music Sir Platform Heels and Funny Glasses?
Sig Registration Form 34c_766(a) submitted to Ministry of Signature Management. Approval pending.
Making the top 10 used to mean something, back when pinball wizard was popular. Or maybe not. It's the same with having a New York Times best selling book. The fact that your book is on there, doesn't really mean it's top quality literature, just that it has mass appeal. Millions of people buy the newspaper every day. That doesn't mean it's intriguing. A lot of people buy books by Stephen King, Dean Koontz Tom Clancy, Janet Evanovich, J.K. Rowlings, and a bunch of other authors. That doesn't mean that they are literary masterpieces. They are just books that are fun to read, and don't make you think a whole lot. I think the same holds true for music. The stuff at the top 10 is just stuff that most people don't mind hearing on the radio, as background noise, played in malls, with a catchy tune you can humm to yourself.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I can't fault his observations, except that he's not observing everything. Recording companies already took most of the profit for artists out of selling records, so that performing live has been their means of making money. Now free sharing and the splintering of the market has finished record profits off, so that the only means of making money is performing live. So I think that on balance the end result will be more live performances rather than fewer, and in smaller, more intimate venues. What's not to like, unless you're hell bent on becoming a zillionaire? Smaller venues smell more like art to me.
Best music is done by people who just want to play. It may well be destroying it commercially, but who ever said it was good for companies to own our culture?
Alternately:
Lyrics: xkcd
The creator of this post (Jacob Smith) hereby releases it, and all of his other posts, into the public domain.
I would think shows like american idol are destroying the music industry. They are putting out so many new artists each year of mediocre talent. All the ones that are runner ups have albums, and the winners get albums, etc. And even the winners are questionably deserving. Sure there's been Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood... but to get those two talented people we've seen well over 80+ american idol's being pushed in the market place. This distracts from other musical artists.
While I disagree with Elton, you guys are completely missing the point of his statements. Its like you never even read what he purportedly said. He is not talking about the market, or sales, etc. He is claiming that with the rise of the internet, people have stopped (reduced) communicating in person. And that will theoretically prevent good bands from forming, because music is created best in groups jamming out together. He is not saying that the internet is killing music because bands cant make money. He is saying that the internet is killing music because there wont be too many bands and/or they wont communicate with each other personally (which would help raise the quality of music) because they are too busy sitting on their computer blogging or creating music alone. Personally, while he may be right in a couple of cases, there are far more cases where a band has improved because of some obscure music they listened to on iTunes which they would never had access to earlier. I agree with other commenters here that the lack of quality music in the airwaves (TV or radio) is the real discouragement for new good music. I personally believe that the internet will actually help music get better for the many reasons stated in this thread. But dont dismiss Elton's (supposedly) comments as a selfish artist's greedy rants, because it is not that at all.
Read his remark: "it would be an incredible experiment to shut down the whole internet for five years and see what sort of art is produced over that span." Do you think that's a serious call to shut down the Internet? I don't. I think it's an off-the-cuff call for musicians to interact more with each other and audiences. Do I personally agree that the Internet will turn all musicians into Moby? Nah. Then again, Elton John might just have insight into the musical world that you and I do not.
And I say Elton John is a shill. :P
The internet has not 'destroyed' music, nor will it ever 'destroy' music -- unless the music is bad or the band/artist does something horrendously stupid. The internet allows people to come together to share and create new mediums - exactly the kind of thing he's saying it prevents or limits. Suffice it to say I'm very confused. It may be preventing people from 'going outside' or whatever the hell he said, but we're still mixing creatively and there are definetely more choices now than there ever were.
Then again maybe that's the real problem he has with it. There are more choices and he's worried that his dated styles will be chosen less and less than the newer styles. *shrug*
If you were offended by anything I said... No, I'm not sorry. Please lighten up.
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Elton has a bias against technology. He says so in the article. He doesn't use it. So how can he possibly know what its affect on music is? His reputation carries a big weight because of his past brilliance, but we have to be careful that we understand the limits of his insight.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
I totally agree with this. Even most of indie labels are partially (and indirectly) controlled by their distributor which is, more often than not, owned by a major. The indies basically become a springboard for bands to get to the majors.
--- these days, what with business and stuff, you gotta get your emails...
I still depend upon broadcast radio because the majority of my day is spent in places that I flat out don't have access to Internet radio. Internet access at work is heavily filtered and is it nonexistent when I'm traveling from place to place through public transit or in my car.
When Internet access becomes ubiquitous, yes, you can say that it is the most important channel for distribution. Until then, however, radio is still the most important (and most accessible) form of access to music.
He will moan about the internet and music but he will praise the Internet when he's hunting for young lads to bugger.
Elton is past his prime and thinks he can actually have a say in the world. he better of sticking to the BBC gay parades that nobody watches.
So Elton if your listening take you candle from the wind and shove it where it fits (and it it needs to be sideways then so be it)
Linux user #349545 (GNU/Linux)iD8DBQBAzWjX+MZAIjBWXGURAmflAKCntuBbuK
I don't know how reliable the SUN is.
Not particularly. A similar level of sensationalism to Fox I believe. Highly sensationalist and very much inclined to take things out of context. Elton probably commented in an offhand way that he didn't really like the internet much and the Sun decided to extrapolate.
Elton John has the gall to say there's a breakdown between artist and audience when he's charging $150 per ticket to see him? Fuck the arrogant bastard.
Absolutely, record companies used to be run by people who loved music. Now they're multi-million dollar conglomerates and its all marketing. Chess records changed the music seen by introducing the blues to Europe. Sam Phillips brought rockabilly music. Motown etc. Unfortunately those days are history. Now corporations like Sony sell music. And market there crap along with MTV, TV series and Wrestling.
Read his remark: "it would be an incredible experiment to shut down the whole internet for five years and see what sort of art is produced over that span." Do you think that's a serious call to shut down the Internet?
It might be a great experiment to remove copyright, makes songs free on the Internet, and have musicians only make money by performing. Musicians would be a lot poorer, but the listeners might find more music to listen to.
"I don't know how reliable the SUN is."
The only reliable thing about The Sun is the fact that every issue will have some pictures of topless women. This is also the only thing that makes it remotely worth looking at for anyone with an IQ that can't be expressed on the fingers of one hand.
I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
Sir Reginald is totally displacing here. The Internet is not the problem with modern music; on the contrary, it's the only thing keeping music alive. The large record companies are killing music by providing an endless supply of "marketable" pop claptrap. All of the musical innovation today comes from independent artists who have virtually no chance of ever getting a lucrative record contract. Guess where these indies distribute their music? Guess where they collaborate?
When it comes down to jamming, they still do it in basements and garages, like they've always done, but the sharing of ideas is possible like never before because of the "problem" that Elton is complaining about.
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
It may wind up killing the species of "musician" who get unbelievably filthy rich off a couple of hits and then can sit around the rest of their life commenting on how technology is destroying the vehicle they rode to their destination. But that's a small price to pay for the swell of music now available at humanity's fingertips.
You hit the nail right on the head.
Who has been agitating for more and more protectionism for a small group of tycoon musicians? Why, the tycoon musicians, of course! Most musicians do NOT make it into that small charmed circle in which people like Sir Elton and Sir Cliff live. Most musicians work day jobs and try to sell recordings on merch tables at small clubs.
The Internet and sites like CD Baby are allowing musicians who would otherwise labor in obscurity a bit of international visibility. It might hurt a few who played the game and won the RIAA lottery but the vast majority of musicians actually benefit by the low barriers to entry and possibility of making modest income.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Musicians certainly do get together in order to record music. If he's only thinking of the single musicians that work in their studios, he's not really exploring the internet. The band that I'm in has released over 200 songs for a project called Song of the Day. We're releasing one song for every day of 2007. And we've collaborated with over 30 musicians to do it. My band gets together at least a few times a week just to write and record music.
We would never have taken on this project if we didn't have the internet to distribute it. In fact, that's all the internet has done: it has made worldwide distribution possible for every artist. It lets fans decide what they want to hear, rather than music executives.
We released what we think about file sharing and worldwide distribution on our website here, which I am copying below, because it's what I would say to Elton if I had the chance to talk to him.
I mean, the biggest act of GenX - Nirvana, was an overrated distortion band built around the central premise that Daddy was too mean in my posh suburb and so I had to go and shoot myself.
[citation needed]
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
"...around the central premise that Daddy was too mean in my posh suburb..."
I'm not sure where you came up with that. The only member of Nirvana that might have grown up in a "posh suburb" was Dave Grohl, and he just pounded the sticks.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
It's interesting to hear this from the perspective of a very mainstream composer. Fascinating that he feels so disjunct from his listeners. Because for most independent and small artists, the Internet has brought them much CLOSER to their audiences. The increased communication, sense of community, and the niche culture of the Internet has been hailed as a boon by small artists. Suddenly the major label barriers to audience access have fallen down.
Perhaps what Elton is really describing is the disconnect of the artist who does not concertize. Smaller, independents described above make the majority of their income in live performances. Online communities and media all drive these artists' fans towards the concert hall. Elton is still operating in the paradigm where the album is the primary unit of communication with your audience. You do concerts and tours, but really only to promote a new album. Fans' reactions are taken on a per-album basis. There's no question that this model is getting less effective, and that can feel like a disconnect if you're stuck operating that way.
And BTW, Elton may be a real composer, but let's not compare him to Mozart. In his short life, Mozart revolutionized music. A poster here commented that he never got old enough for us to see if he was "really any good." As a classical musician, I can tell you that 600 compositions is MORE THAN ENOUGH to tell if a composer is "really any good". And Mozart was one of the greatest.
**** You never REALLY learn to swear until you own a computer. ****
I play a certain style of music, which up until the internet started, was very hard to access, since it is European, and in about 1998 the style exploded because of the internet. If it wasn't for the internet , in bringing a previously separated group of people together, this style of music, called Gypsy Jazz, which died in the late 50's, might never have re-emerged from the dark ages. Countless guitar players cite Django as an influence, especially once Django became popular.
-- Betting on the survival of the media industry is a serious risk. I advise investing elsewhere.
If you get any significant number of people to get off their ass and protest something, you get press. Certainly much easier than trying to make the press take interest in your blog, if you're trying to do something locally. No, it's not exactly very high data content, but it's a fairly effective way to broadcast a simple and clear message the press can parrot for you.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
No, by "kick her to the curb" I mean I told her I was working undercover for the National Security Agency on a project so sensitive that I could no longer allow my feelings to interfere with my work. I told her that I just cared too much for her to put her in danger by letting her get close to me, and that perhaps, when all the world was free and I was no longer bound by my oaths of allegiance to my agency and the country, I would look her up, but until then, it was best for her own safety to not see me any more.
Being an Elton John fan, she believed me entirely of course.
Isn't anyone going to respond to my initial assertion that the Who contributed more great music before they recorded Tommy than Elton John did in his entire career? Townsend, Entwistle and Keith Moon were gods of Rock's Second Era, and Elton John was a schmaltzy singer-songwriter whose work was just a few steps above Christopher Cross or Morris Albert. Bernie Taupin was a skilled lyricist, but even he knew when it was time to hang 'em up.
And now Elton John is pissed and is blaming the Internet because he's not still able to support his lavish lifestyle from royalties on stuff he recorded 35 years ago. Boo friggin' hoo.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"What he's saying is that the music industry is in a creative crisis"
Oh please. Music sucked just as much in the early 70s as it does now. It's just that people selectively forget all of the utter shite, and then pine for the "good old days."
I've got news for ya. There never were any "good old days."
And people, PLEASE stop exaggerating Elton John's influence on music. I don't recall any band that ever claimed him as an influence. Of course, I think his music is crap, so I don't imagine that I would listen to a band that sounded even remotely like him...
What does Sir E.J. have against people putting together their own music? Just because he thinks they should go out and buy somebody's CD sold by a big record company instead? I thought pop music was about entertaining the people (``pop'' meaning popular, of course), not about making somebody else wealthy or wealthier. If people are entertaining themselves with their own music, isn't that more creative not less creative? And if someone is entertained by an amateur's YouTube video how is that necessarily less legitimately enriching than being entertained by a commercial artist?
As for going out and playing with other people, that's great, but who here imagines Sir E.J. goes to a local bar to jam with the average joe as the average joe's equal on Blue Mondays? When he plays with other people they're usually under his direction which, with respect to musical communication, means he's essentially playing by himself. So then he says he doesn't have an iPod or mobile phone as if that means no one else should have or even want them. Well, I don't have a mansion and wouldn't want one even if I could afford it so I don't think he should have one.
As for protesting versus blogging, couldn't you put together a much more coherent argument for your point of view in a blog than you could on a protest sign? And who ever said a blogger is less likely to protest than anyone else?---Oh yeah, Elton John did. That means a lot.
As for the blogger writing to say Sir E.J. has a good point, how many negatives is enough? ``Regardless'' is good enough for me, but if you're going to use ``irregardless'' why not use ``not irregardless'' or better yet ``not hardly irregardless''? Anyway, not hardly never irregardless of whether Sir E.J.'s music is good, bad, or indifferent, after all the attention his music got in the past, I think he's looking to blame something for the relative lack of attention his music gets now.
Don't listen to popular music! There's plenty of good music available today - Opeth and Dream Theater and Pelican if you like metal, or a million different indie bands if you like that, or Gov't Mule and Phil Lesh & Friends and Widespread Panic if you like jam bands. Most cities also have local blues and jazz bands that you can watch any day of the week if you feel like it. And, a lot of older acts are still going - ZZ Top, Megadeth, Ozzy Osbourne, Heaven and Hell, The Who, Roger Waters, Eric Clapton... the list goes on and on. If you can't find good modern music you're not looking very hard.
ResidntGeek
10-Yes, I do know Who actually wrote it
20- So who did?
30- Yes!
40-I don't think that was a 'yes' song.
50- I wasn't. It was Who.
60-Who?
70-Yes.
80-You're a dick. Do I have to guess who did it?
90-'Guess Who' didn't do it.
100-Who?
110-Yes!
120-What? You said it wasn't them!
130-It definitively wasn't 'Them'.
140-So, who was it?
150-Correct.
160-you actually don't know who wrote that song!
170-go to 10
from the Beeb: Pop superstar Sir Elton John once spent £30m in just under two years - an average of £1.5m a month, the High Court in London has heard. The singer's lavish lifestyle saw him spend more than£9.6m on property and £293,000 on flowers between January 1996 and September 1997. Time's is hard, 'ay Elton? Flowers and knightships don't come for cheap!
COMPLETELY agree. I know a number of other folks have made similar remarks, but this one caught my eye. The internet didn't have nearly the popularity it does today when the boy bands originally surfaced, and I'd say that was largely the beginning of the end. If you wanna blame someone or something for death of musical innovation, blame the folks who want to sell CDs and merchandize, and not art. Most everyone I know locally who is in a band locally got hooked up over the internet. CL ads, forums, mailing lists. It's not like you can go hang out at the local record store to meet music aficionados anymore, and the music gear megastores are too few and far between for younger people to get to & hang out. Internet-distributed indie groups, (dare I say it) MySpace, and internet radio (which is being killed) are what's keeping the good parts of the business alive. In fact, I'd say the internet is the only thing that allows individuals to be competitive anymore in *anything*.
The point is, you didn't have to look at all a few decades ago. Good music was pervasive. Now the music that is pervasive is Britney Crapola, and the good stuff is underground or Indy. If the likes of Phil Lesh and other good bands were actually what the music industry pushed - then, I doubt people would feel so negatively about a recording industry that really was once held in much higher esteem. Back in the day, you could feel like a record producer was a part of the revolution, and now he or she is just another suit of "the Man".
So basically, RIAA really ticks people off because they've come to represent music that honestly isn't worth paying for anyway. I mean, give Britney Spears money? Heck, I could bore you for a longer time with my lousy game. Give me $15 instead. Or you could just wait a month until I port it to Linux and open source the thing anyway.
So yeah, screw RIAA.
This is my sig.
Elton John says:
I say, "I do think it would be an incredible experiment to shut down the whole entertainment industry for five years and see what sort of art is produced over that span."
See, posts like that... that's why we need more mod options. Like "Unintentionally funny because the poster is such an obvious dork" and "It would be funny if the poster hadn't revealed such deeply rooted and disturbing psychological problems" or "It would be funny if I hadn't had exactly the same experience with a girl who loved getting stuffed to "Tiny Dancer". Of course, then mods would be forced to choose the best of several options. I suppose the current way is better, after all. Troll it is, then.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
whee.