Originally Posted by Percy Thrillington (Post 951126)

If i was 14 and just getting into music Id feel ripped off by todays music, and Im pretty sure millions of teenagers agree with me and thats why it'll change, .

Originally Posted by Percy Thrillington (Post 951168)

I think the main difference would be that bands in the 60s and 70s had to go out and play gigs instead of the internet. These bands came though didnt they, the internet isnt a life saving tool when it comes to getting your music heard, at some point you need to develop an audience that will pay money to see you or to buy your album in order to carry on making music professionally.

Getting 1,000 plays a day online doesnt pay the studio does it, if they had to pay to listen how many plays would they get then? Doesnt matter if you want to conquer the world or just have a career in music to a small audience either way you have to create an income or you cant do it. Talent is the key, and talent is a rare commodity it needs to be found and given time to develop and the audience naturally grows with it giving you an income.

I have yet to see any cast iron evidence that the internet has improved the music industry for the talented, which in turn means its improved for the listener aswell.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 951172)

You're shifting the goal post here. The conversation isn't about what's the best business model, the conversation is about whether or not the 1970s was more musically diverse than the present. I think it's been pretty clearly demonstrated that it wasn't.

Originally Posted by Percy Thrillington (Post 951179)

I dont think theres more diversity in music now that the 60s or 70s or the 80s or the 90s. All i hear these days is substandard pop and metal that all sounds the same and fake R&B type stuff. Sure theres always a diamond to be found somewhere in all genres then it gets copied by a bazillion other bands for 10 years, what so diverse about that?

Originally Posted by mojopinuk (Post 951173)

But bands do play gigs. Bands do tour. Thanks to the internet I now have the facility to listen to a band and then go and PAY to see them play. In the 70's if they werent on the radio and couldn't get their music to me then I wouldn't go and see them play and ultimately they would be unable to survive, unless they played a style of music that would be accepted by a large commercial audience.

The internet can help these bands survive.

Also whats your definition of talent? Isn't that down to the individual? Isn't it down to the listener? Without the internet how could a band who play to niche markets survive on the scale they do today?

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 951182)

All you hear isn't all that exists. We could actually turn this into a little game if you'd like: You name a style of music from the 70s and we'll see if it exists today, then I'll name a style of music that exists today and we'll see it was around in the 70s.

Originally Posted by Percy Thrillington (Post 951188)

So in bygone eras no bands ever sold an album or toured because the internet hadnt been invented yet so they couldnt do it? Is that what your saying. There were more great bands around back then than there are now, if there wasnt then what are todays fakes trying so hard to tap into their audience. Im sure at some point in the future the internet will find its proper use within the music industry but it hasnt yet.

It might come as a shock to you but niche markets have always existed, and so have artists that appeal to niche markets, the internet didnt invent niche markets. Rock n Roll was a niche market in the early mid 50s, long before the internet.