May 10, 2008 Aging with music
First of all, I feel I should apologise. I’ve kind of been like an absent parent with Music Think Tank recently, and it seems to have grown up an awful lot in my absence. Mostly I’ve been speaking about this kind of stuff in real life and doing a lot of writing and the background invisible work - but I’m back now, and like any parent that abandons his child for a period of time, I’m going to assuage my guilt by showering gifts - or at least blog posts.
I’ve been thinking a lot about music consumption recently, and the ways in which the music industries understand music consumption. It occurs to me that a lot of thought goes into the teen audience, and what will attract their attention.
Historically, this is good thinking. Teenagers and the popular music industry go hand in hand. Rock and Roll was at the birth of the teen phenomenon when the first wave of babyboomers wanted to distinguish themselves as something other than just slightly smaller and more youthful versions of their parents. Performers from Jerry Lee Lewis to Marilyn Manson have understood that the best way to appeal to the teen crowd is to at least alienate - if not terrify and mortally offend - their parents.
But since the birth of rock and roll, the popular music industry has been overwhelmingly geared towards the teen audience on the simple understanding that this is where the majority of the market resides. I’m not sure I believe that’s true any more. In fact, I suspect (though cannot currently prove) that not only does the overwhelming majority of music purchasing take place by people over the age of 30 - but that this is a cultural, rather than a technological shift.
That is to say - the reason that more adults than teens buy music is not because the teenagers are all stealing it. It’s because the adults have grown up in a world where the consumption of popular music has become so normalised, it’s no longer part of the teen rebellion experience.
I’d be interested in the thoughts of the Tank here. Would the record industry be better off taking the focus off the dwindling teen market and focusing on recorded music as something aspirational that you grow into instead? My suspicion is that the resulting investment in acts of ‘quality’, rather than acts of immediate and fleeting fad appeal will contribute to the overall economic health of the sector.
But I could just be selfishly insisting that people make records that I like now that I’m 40.
Thoughts?
Reader Comments (19)
I think you're right in the sense that the teen market was the low hanging fruit of earlier days. They were the head of the "long tail", and now that head is smaller and the tail is getting more attention.
I also think it is now much easier to capitalize on the market of older people, who are less likely to consume mass quantities of music, but will not be afraid to throw down over $100 on something that they love (particularly if they loved that music when THEY themselves were teens...)
I attended the SF Music Tech Summit this week and it seems to me that a great amount of discussion revolved around the idea of branding and selling music in ways that are not as direct as before. With this, I'm thinking that the creators of music, while they are able to sell directly to the fan, will start to opt to sell to middle men who can sell to whatever type of company wants to use music for marketing.
But that's just one segment of a multi-headed hydra... the music market is (and probably will be) much wider than it was before. And many companies, marketing to many unique taste will be a good thing for music fans all around.
The question remains whether or not that wider market generates more vs less money for those involved (creators, distributors, etc)... Lately,the major labels seem to be relying more on suing internet startups to drive their earnings than they are on creating, marketing and actually selling music. So who knows if they even think about what their consumers want... but at least there are independent labels, who are doing a good job of getting out music that I, as a mid-thirties music lover, am finding enjoyable...
I think it's both. I'm in my late 40's and have played and listened to music as long as I can remember. However at some point the music industry seems to have let go of us older listeners to concentrate mostly on younger listeners.
I've always thought this was a mistake. Not that the industry shouldn't market to teenagers. I think music plays a big role in helping a young person define themselves and find meaning in their lives.
But for us 'older' folks, particularly those of us from the so-called baby-boom generation, music still plays a major role in our lives. Since the rock and roll era began in the 50's music has played a huge role in the lives of teenagers. Heck, I can still remember watching Paul McCartney sitting on the Ed Sullivan show stage singing 'Yesterday'. I may have been 4 or 5 at the time, but it's still a vivid memory.
Music still holds a huge place in the hearts and psyches of us mid-lifers, but the industry doesn't seem to be cranking out much that I find compelling and interesting, at least in the pop realm. Radio is almost an afterthought any more.
The industry should put more effort into producing music that appeals to us folks in our 40's and beyond. We've got the means to buy. We've got credit and debit cards and aren't afraid to use them!
Thanks, Michael. I think that clarifies quite a bit, because it is quite a complex beast (a multi-headed hydra, as opposed to the far less common single-headed ones) - and shifting the focus entirely from a teen audience to an older audience would be just as much a mistake as ignoring that older market entirely.
There are clearly music-orientated youth cultures still going strong. Emo is a good example of this - and don't we parents love fretting about that? :) The record industry would be making an enormous mistake to turn away from that clearly lucrative market sector.
Which raises another issue: do you think teens mind that something that presents itself so strongly as a counter-culture movement is tarnished in their eyes when they consider that it is entirely a marketing category or a demographic and psychographic profile? I mean, look at all of the couter-culture youth musical movements that have since been co-opted and turned into sales tools, advertising soundtracks and marketing campaigns. Worse - it's been 'mainstreamed'. Look what happened to punk.
But in the past, this has brought with it the tag 'sell-out', which had tremendously negative connotations. It was the sign that you'd lost the faith, and the fans would abandon you in droves.
Does that still happen? Or are teens now so immersed in commercial culture that not to think of yourself as simply a 'consumer' would be too radical?
But you're right - there's good money to be made in nostalgia. I wonder if, in Jeff's example, whether our credit cards don't get fired up because there's not enough new music that does what we want it to, or that we don't have the same passion about new music that we used to. Maybe we buy stuff we used to love in an attempt to recapture a feeling we no longer have access to.
So I guess my question is whether the teens who buy masses of music because they're passionate about the new stuff - and will lock themselves in their bedrooms listening to it at high volume to insulate themselves against parental behest - have now become parents themselves (without losing that passion?), and that their own children live in what is in large part a different media environment.
Dead jealous about the SF Music Tech Summit. Would have given anything to see Derek in conversation with Tim Ferriss.
Well the observation that I have made in recent years stems from my 10 years as a parent of two children. As I have worked around the house doing my domestic duties there would always seem to be either Nickelodeon or Disney Channel playing on the telly...As well as Radio Disney being aired in my automobiles.
Recently at my day job there is a young lady working there (age 24) listening to Internet radio and to my amazement the vast majority of the songs she was listening to were the same as the ones my 10 and 6 year old daughters listen to; Miley Cyrus, The Jonas Brothers, Jesse McCartney, Naked Brothers Band etc. etc.
(as well as My Chemical Romance, Chris Brown, Christina Aguilara and assorted other popsters)
To me this is really quite shocking. I am realizing that there is a substantial gap in the ages between popular music listeners and what I might call "quality" music listeners. (examples of "quality" music being say, The Foo Fighters, David Byrne, Radiohead, Travis, even the likes of Moby or Gnarls Barkey)
I guess my point here might be that as parents we will shell out the money for our kids to get a copy of the "High School Musical" soundtrack (you parents out there know what this is)....and as listeners ourselves we will shell out money for the latest Foo Fighters LP.
As adults I don't think we need to be 'marketed' to because we have the age and experience to seek out and find what we want and will do just that. Our kids will take whatever is force fed to them and come ask us for the $10 to $15 to purchase it for them.
Adults (over 30) will crawl across the world wide web and find the music that will satisfy our needs without all the bells and whistles used to lure our children (and unfortunately the teens and 20 somethings) that flip through channels like MTV and sites like Myspace.
Quality and what I like to call the "Gusto" factor: The ability to stand the test of time i.e.; Queen, Zeppelin, Beatles, Police, and now the likes of Radiohead and maybe even Gnarls Barkley...these bands do not need much past the initial marketing involved in pushing their first couple of releases...after that the audiophiles will make it their mission to keep up with them.
I think the new wave of Gusto seeking artists should certainly do all they can to establish themselves through marketing techniques for their first couple of LP's....but then I think quality is king and the fans of this Gusto music will make it their job to keep up with them.
How does this type of artists establish themselves without succumbing to the fad-like infantile MTV / Myspace marketing that exists today? Certainly quality songs is the first step and I think the whole "celebrity association momentum" thing that has been recently discussed here.
I completely agree with the prior comment that 30 + year old music fans will spend good money for what they love while the other fads rise and fall at the expense of many a parents income.
Was this a helpful comment at all? I am not sure...at the very least I hope it was an informative observation from a quality music fan and a parent who has had to spend his money on music no one will be listening to in 10 years.
Helpful indeed. The idea that people in their early twenties are listening to the same music that kids as young as ten are listening to is something of a worrying thought. Either young kids are being socialised upward (and while there'd always been an aspirational side to pop music - liking your older brother's records, etc - this is an early start indeed), or teens are no longer the market for 'music that matters' as BBC's 6Music radio station (targetting 30+ music nerds) puts it.
I have access to two live examples. Jake, my son, is 15 and is hyper-critical. He's a drummer and has gone heavily down the hard rock path. Jake listens to punk and metal, old and new. Brooks no boy bands, and will listen to no synth pop. He can stomach pretty much anything else when it's 'just kind of on', but if there's actual listening to be done, then it better ROCK.
My other case study is Jake's friend Ethan, who seems to live in our house and sometimes doesn't go home for a week at a time. Ethan's 17 and frankly does not care. He likes music, but would probably struggle to name much of it. Not sure if he owns any, though he has an mp3 player. Wonder what's on it.
At any rate, my point is that neither are typical, probably. Or maybe that's what's typical - there's no unified teen culture around music and everyone has different levels of enthusiasms, genre leanings and engagements. The fact that they are so musically different has no impact whatsoever on their relationship as friends. They bond over films, games and other media. At their age, this would have been unthinkable to me.
But perhaps that's what you're noticing, Milton - a kind of 'default' pop culture as far as music is concerned. That's why it's the same. When you don't care enough to seek stuff out - you'll put on whatever's around. Might as well be the same stuff that 10 year-olds are listening to...
It is all a bit frightening to think about. What's worse is that I know that the music I make does not fall into my self described "Gusto" category...but I do feel safe saying that my 10 year old will not be clamoring to load it on to her iPod any day soon either!
For me it comes down to enjoying what I do and aspiring to someday write that Gusto tune. For now I will stay locked into my "Obscure Electronic Headphone" music and the occasional film score work that comes my way (the obscure electronic stuff lends itself to such opportunity).
I regretfully admit that I am not actively pursuing any kind of marketing strategy to wedge myself into any demographic...I am being quite selfish and making music because I love to do it.
As my local electronic "scene" begins to breathe life into itself once again I can begin to see some chance of getting some of that "celebrity association" momentum.
With so much crap music out there and even so much quality music out there I still think the musicians worst enemy is obscurity...and as time marches on I see that beast only growing larger with the only hope for "success" being these few things:
1. Good Music
2. Using The Tools Accessible to You
3. Who You Know
4. Persistence
I just don't think we independent musicians can compete on the same scale as Disney, Warner Bros., etc. etc.
For anyone interested in hearing my substandard noise feel free to go here:
http://ultrameek.blogspot.com/
There are links within that blog to my currently limited web presence. (yep, shameless self promotion)
Good luck to us all!
Andrew, I think the industry has damaged itself by focusing on the teens. There is huge buying power in people beyong 30, but it is difficult to reach them.
Where do they get to know new music? Real music lovers will search the www. But what about the ordinary person that enjoys music a lot, but would make no extra effort to find something new? The radio doesn't help anymore because of playlists and strict format. Record shops - you know it...
I'm asking myself this question often, because my audience is usually over 30.
I make "timeless" music that fans of Santana, Clapton, Larry Carlton, Booker - T, etc. like a lot - if they only get to hear it. Instrumental songs, most of them longer than 3 minutes. "Music to live by", as one fan commented.
You become a fan of a certain track or artist after you have heard the music ( multiple times) Where do people over 30, with a job & kids listen to (new) music in everyday life?
Hey, Andrew. Thought-provoking post and comments.
I see 2 things at work here. The first is supply and demand. The second is the disintegration of "mainstream."
Cheaper recording costs and instant global distribution has led to a flood of music from millions of sources, as opposed to the handful that existed 15 or 20 years ago. As people experience the breadth of available music and are slowly given the tools to wade through the oceans of MP3s to find "their music", the mainstream will slowly cease to exist. Us 30-50 somethings may not get it, but the kids do, and they will expect it once their credit cards start arriving.
This is not only the case with direct consumers, but with companies that license music. As more movies studios, ad agencies and video game makers realize they can get edgy, hip, high quality music at a fraction of the cost from the millions of boutique labels out there, they will become an even larger factor in the diversification, accelerating the process.
In other words, I don't think the demand for music is decreasing, I think it's increasing, and will continue to as long as the population on the planet keeps increasing. It's just the demand for mainstream music that is declining as tastes diversify. The majors just simply can't continue to produce the majority of music that is being consumed, nor can they continue to rake in the majority of industry profits, no matter what strategy they take as producers of music.
So I think the record companies (meaning the majors and major independents) are better off focusing on finding a new business model. After all, we're all record companies now.
AGING WITH MUSIC > an extremely interesting topic!
It helps to define onself - it helps to define today's situation of popular music in the context of today's world - and it may even offer an outlook on the future ...
The period of recorded pop music from mid 1950s to mid 1980s brought an ongoing developement based on creations from outside the *accepted / conventional* creations. This was named *undergound* to have a label to sell.
This period brought a permanetely mutating sound that screamed "I'm new / different - I don't want to follow the rules from the ones before" - so it was perfect for a teenage audience that since rock 'n' roll had a sound to *define* itself as *new / different*...
1970s Punk ended all this because it was nothing much but a variation of the original rock 'n' roll *idea* - a *parallel universe of music* was probably from R&B to RAP ...
(no - I'm not forgetting pre rock'n' roll > "Swing" .. also not forgetting after punk > "techno" .. but the obvious begin and end to me is rock 'n' roll and punk - all other explorations would take too much explanation)
Eversince we live in a world of crossover, which has a strong aspect of being manufactured .. take a bit from this and a bit from that .. a very helpful tool was the birth of the digital age (the 1980s) - everybody who pushed a certain key on the Yamaha DX7 got exactly the same sound ..
Today I absolutely see NO aspect of *original outbursting freedom* in the sound that is sold to the youth ... this leads to the fact that it really does'nt matter anymore how old you are .. in the 1960s is was quite impossible for the older generation to *like* the Rolling Stones ... today it's no problem at all listen to a *wild guitar band* if you're older .. they *all sound like The Rolling Stones* ...
This leads to questions:
1. what kind of music would be interesting/inspiring for *older* people?
2. what kind of *older* people are out there?
3. what does music mean to you today, if you are *older* ...?
Since I came closer to the answers in the context of my own life I understand myself / the past / the present / a possible future much better. So music still has the impact on me it had when I first heard *something* that the *older generation* hated just because it was *different* ...
I think everybody has to find his/her individual road to today's inspiring music world - it's all out there:
1. it may be re-discovering a hit song one heard 40 years ago (re-integrating the song in ones *today* context)
2. it may be a a new release by a young band that is looking for *pure/free/labour of love* music and sells it to a small dedicated audience (I NEVER get that via today's *biz-music* because I've heard it ALL before and/or the cold *manufactured approach* does not offer me anything)
3. and/or it may be in the music that one creates
The world changed completely - the (a) record industry
... no longer has the material (new music with a real impact)
... no longer has the importance (in times of web 2.0)
... and NEVER learned that there are other values than *quantity*
In my life a record *industry* does no longer exist ...
cheerz
Lord Litter
Music Consumption in the Digital Age - Electric Avenue: The Demand Side
I appeal to your kind heart & wide network :-) for help with my bachelor thesis. It is called Electric Avenue and it's about the music industry in the digital age.
Right now we really need people to take our survey about how they consume music and how they feel about recent developments. It only takes about 8 to 10 minutes to do and you can also choose to enter our prize draw for US$20 vouchers to Amazon (it is going out to people on 3 continents, so we figured this would be the most viable option).
It's running until Wednesday 14th May and we would love to have as many respondents as possible.
It would be really really great therefore, if you could fill it out and pass on the link to your friends that might have time to help out.
E-mail link:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=DiVqis8pEg6KuTFlPFkQNg_3d_3d
Or:
Click Here to take survey
If anyone experiences technical difficulties, they can contact me or the project e-mail: electric.views@gmail.com
Thank you kindly in advance for your time and assistance. Have a lovely weekend.
Cheers,
Kama
P.S: We are also on facebook, if you would like to contribute more on the subject you can also join our discussion group - Electric Avenue (it will continue on after the thesis as well)
Visit us here: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=12834676303&ref=mf
I wrote a post in 2007 titled Age Doesn't Matter. In this post, I broke down the US population statistics that demonstrate that there are huge segments that can be tapped into in every age bracket. My assessment is that age will matter far less as the use of digital music grows.
Andrew, Re: "I suspect (though cannot currently prove) that... the overwhelming majority of music purchasing take place by people over the age of 30." IFPI provides figures on this. Three years ago they were reporting "In 1999 music buyers over 30 accounted for less than half of all music sales. Now 55% of music is bought by over 30s" according this this BBC piece. It's not clear whether these are UK-only figures.
Funny, Lefsetz just said the exact same thing I did. :)
...I think maybe that kids care less and less as time marches on(?)
I think maybe it is the evolution of the human condition. We 30+ folks still hold a great deal of value for our prefered music no matter what genre whereas each generation following cares less and less...maybe(?)
Comments here were proof that the model is working...outstanding thoughts and analysis, thanks to everyone for the brainfood.
Interesting Post,
I was interviewed for a radio sales position and the lady (late 40's) who was interviewing told me that she doesn't listen to new music. She went on to say the station's listeners are mid 30's to mid 50's and prefer the classics and talk radio. They aren't looking for new music.
When I asked her about satellite radio competition, she said they don't compete because satellite attracts a younger audience who want new music.
I know she can't speak for all people in that age bracket as I know "older" people who love to hear new music. However, they are passionate music fans (the ones I know at least).
She may have a point when speaking about the general population.
-Hoover
The New Rockstar Philosophy: Take Control of Your Music
There are so many points in here, and us older music industry-ites need a number of reality checks. I do want to say that there are so many different messages in the indie movement, that you really have to decide what's right for your program. (I'll vent about that later on).
First off, we need to get past the attitude of there not being music that appeals to an older demo out there. It exists both with established acts who are at different fame levels. There is the Eric Clapton and Neil Diamond, whose careers are still in a fiercely competitive position because there are 500,000 dollar campaigns with their new releases out of the gates? Why? They still play Madison Square Garden. They're still on best seller lists.
I doubt--however--that Bonnie Raitt is at that level anymore. She's in the same circle as some of my bands--Jethro Tull, Tower of Power--where they play out steadily or when they want, and can be in the top 20-40 of tours each year, selling out large venues, but not stadiums or Madison Square Gardens anywhere. Those acts--I think record labels tend to put less money in promoting and are really signed because the CD is released and the fans will buy 'em, and then some CDs sell as the band tours.
Then you have the old timers who have their own labels or are signed to incredible indie labels. Look at Yep Roc's roster. That is based on acts who've broken, and will have some automatic sales and downloads.
The next category are older artists who have been plugging in obscurity for years. That can be someone like Richard Julian or Adam Levy. Both are connected to young Norah Jones. Richard's signed to Manhattan (EMI) and Adam--I believe--has his own label. Don't hold me to that.
But you also have a variety of songwriters, jazz acts, progressive artists, who aren't even connected to a hit act. And they're in different situations, but still appeal to an older demo. It's their goal to get to be a household name or play steadily to an audience, so they can bring home 1000 to 5000 dollars every week, after the rest of the band/entourage are paid. That takes an investment, and it generally comes out of the artist's pocket within his means. Initially he might start with distribution just through CDBaby, which does send discs to stores on request. So, you, yourself start witha triple AAA campaign for 5000 or so dollars. If that--combined with other outreach, including touring--can sell 2000 or 3000 CDs, and you're willing to bank that money on a 15,0000 dollar campaign to bigger Triple AAA radio, plus set up a distribution deal with a company like Red Eye, Koch, AND tour, plus continue with internet marketing, with the goal to sell 5 to 10,000 CDs, and again be willing to invest that into marketing, you're ready for a bigger campaign. (Of course during all this outreach, you're looking to get your songs exploited in films and advertising....)
But, you know, there are also articles that are defeatist about marketing on a large scale. A lot of folks in our indie movement use the "You can sell 50,000 CDs without any help from a record company, and the important thing is that you're making money on sales and not spending money to get on the charts, because getting on the charts just proves you spent the money you could have used to buy a recording studio for your house with...."
I think the mixed messages I get in some of these conversations are really meant to look at different scenarios and figure out which one works right for you, and also need to be in accordance with your goals. If you just want to make money doing music, then tour and look for large revenue gigs and be of service to your clients (venues you play at), while sending CDs out to ad agencies. If you're looking to really get your music heard by the masses, then be patient and responsible with your money and hire the right marketing companies to work your music. Check and recheck your progress and goals.
Here is an observation. I have found that many people like only what they grew up with, but in contrast many people that are also musicians like new stuff either as well or exclusively.
I listen to most of the stuff my 21 year-old daughter brings home from college and we often do the “listen to what I found” thing trying to outdo each other, to where many of my non-musician friends prefer only the oldies station.
I also echo Andrew's point about music stealing. My daughter and all of her friends that I know pirate every bit of their music (I must confess, though, that I have reformed from doing so myself).
I write this post today on my 51st birthday.
I love all these questions, discussions. I myself am not a member of a band but, a close friend of one. I am in the 20-30 year age group and can not believe how much it has changed just within my age group. You never see people buying cd's anymore, and most of my friend's stick to what's on the radio. You grow up have a family and your priorities change. The teens want to sit in front of the computer all day, so that is where they will find music.
I remember going to see EVERY live band I could, good or bad. Just sucking in the experience. I do not think teens are so open to the same these days. Music is not something they care to have in common. If it is a top 40 song and you can mumble a few lyrics, you will fit in.
As far as the 40+ age group. I have worked the merchandise booth several times and they will buy. Shirts, cd's, bumperstickers. They are the best fans. They will fully support what they believe in. Marketing to them is another story. That has taken us face to face marketing and word of mouth. Once we can convince someone to see a show or give them a taste of the music they are in. It is just a slow process.