The Digital Long Tail.

Like many people interested in music business in the UK, i listened to the lecture given by Pete Towshend, of The Who, yesterday. It has certainly caused a bit of a fuss in the media, with its seeming attack on Apple, iTunes and digital music services.

Whilst i do tend to agree with Pete Townshend on his views about modern record companies and the idea that digital music providers could and maybe should do more to help new music. It made me think of another aspect of this.

Pete Townshend himself referred to the idea of the Long Tail in his lecture. But, i'm not sure he thought that digital music provision and the Long Tail idea could actually help provide some much needed income for musicians in the future?

In the traditional music business, albums were recorded and then released by record companies on vinyl, or more recently on CD. This meant that the CD's etc had to be physically produced, packaged, packed and then distributed to record shops, or outlets across the world. This, as you can imagine, is a costly business and the distribution companies would take a cut of the cost price for their services.

When a group split up, or stopped recording, there would usually come a time, especially for lesser known artists, when those original recordings would be deleted from the record company catalogue and would therefore be no longer available to any potential customer. Either via the record company themselves, or in record stores.

How often have you discovered a band, or artist, only to find out that they're no longer around and their CD no longer available?
This happened to me only the other day. The band in question, The Aeroplanes released their one and only album, 'Black Hearts And Maladies', back  in 2008. Unfortunately, the band split up in 2010. Meaning that i never got the chance to see them live, except on YouTube. A fact that ties in very nicely with the whole point of this blog post.

How i found them is another story. But when i went to try and buy that album, the only place i could buy it was, rather ironically, on iTunes. The physical CD couldn't be found anywhere, except secondhand. It's possibly that with a lot of searching i may have come across it, but who does that kind of thing these days eh?

So, and i'm sure you're ahead of me here, in the old days i wouldn't have been able to listen to, watch, or buy The Aeroplanes music. The digital revolution has enabled me to buy the music and give a little bit of money to the songwriters and members of that band. Money they would not have got otherwise.
It may well only be a small amount of money. But, that is exactly the whole idea behind the Long Tail theory. Small amounts add up to something bigger.
Especially, as that money would not have been forthcoming in the pre-Internet age.

I'm not suggesting that the Internet and digital music in general is good for everybody, because is quite obviously isn't. But, for The Aeroplanes at least, it has helped them to gain one new fan, some much needed royalties and it's also given me a favourite new band.

Sounds good to me.

Who Am I To Judge?

I've just sat down at my computer and watched a DVD of The Who live at Charlton football ground, way back in 1974.

That was at about the time that i started going to gigs myself (I was 16 in 1974). I realise that it was, quite obviously, a whole different world back then. Both, in the world of gigs and the world in general.
But, what struck me the most about this gig footage was just how chaotic it was on stage.

Let's not forget that, at that time, The Who were one of the biggest bands on the planet and that gig at Charlton was a very big deal indeed. In fact, during the gig, Pete Townshend comments that that was probably the biggest crowd they'd played to since Woodstock!
Stadium gigs back then were very rare. Unlike today when they seem to be ten a penny.

So, seeing how haphazard it all was came as a bit of shock, even to me. I saw The Who, at Charlton once again, only a couple of years later and remember it as being a very good gig indeed. I wonder now if i was badly mistaken?

The 1974 DVD, filmed by the BBC i believe, showed Keith Moon's drum kit being subject to running repairs throughout the show. Cymbal stands were taken away and brought back again. Roadies were fixing various drums as the show progressed. And this doesn't even take into account Keith Moon himself throwing drumsticks way up into the air and then not catching them on their way back down again. Or, just losing sticks and scrambling for a replacement.
Pete Townshend is seen frequently talking to somebody at the side of the stage trying to get the sound adjusted. Roger Daltrey's microphone has to be replaced. The list goes on.

I just can't imagine this kind of thing happening in quite the same way today. Gigs today, especially stadium gigs like that, are run with military precision. I'm sure things do go wrong, that's to be expected. But, i doubt they go so wrong so publically.
Of course having a birds eye view helps you spot the errors and i expect what i saw was edited (although that could make it worse!), but even so....

The other aspect that really shocked me was the actual quality of the bands performance.
I'm a fan of The Who and they have written some of my favourite songs of all time. But, it must be said, that this was a pretty bad gig. Although the crowd seemed to enjoy it. Don't they always?

The band seemed under rehearsed and, at times, seemed to be making it up as they went along, or jamming. For example, some songs ended in a very haphazard fashion, almost petering out.

Keith Moon came in too early on Baba O'Riley. Pete Townshend was all over the place throughout the gig and appeared "tired and emotional". Roger Daltrey seemed to be wondering what was going on some of the time and stood with his back to the audience for a fair amount of the gig because of this. The band also seemed to go out of time on more than one occasion. The whole atmosphere on stage seemed a little strained at times too.
There was also hardly any talking to the crowd, especially from Roger Daltrey. Just a few random ramblings from Pete Townshend.
To be honest, i was half expecting the whole gig to disintegrate before my eyes.

All this seems a far cry from what a modern crowd would expect at a prestigious gig like this today. Maybe this is just the way things were in those days? Maybe i just notice these things more now? Maybe that's what The Who were always like? I doubt it somehow.
I''ve seen many films and DVDs, albeit usually official ones, of gigs from those heady days and have never seen a performance like this.
In my experience, bands have always prided themselves on putting on a good performance for their fans. Possibly, even more so back then when the music seemed to be more important than making money?

I can't imagine a band these days being able to last very long if they put on a performance like this one. Any band today has to be able to be good live. That's partly due to the amount of good bands around. You need to be able stand out from the crowd. Then again, if you're big enough, maybe you can get away with it?

Maybe things were just different back then? Or, maybe, some things never change?
If you pay a lot of money to see your own favourite band, you are always going to enjoy it, aren't you? No matter what.
Maybe, we just all analyse things too much nowadays and forget about just letting ourselves go and enjoying ourselves?
Who knows and who am i to judge?

Never Meet Your Heroes?

A meeting with Roger Daltrey of The Who & i got paid to work with him. All because i said "Yes' to something a few years ago.
Who knows where your decisions will take you.

Tribute?

Tribute bands eh? Don't you just love them?
Or not, as the case may be.

I've been having some discussions recently, with a musician friend of mine, about tribute bands and their worth. And, because of my involvement, as a compere, at an upcoming local gig, headlined by an AC/DC tribute band, i posted a blog post on the Hastings Rock MySpace site, advertising the event and subsequent gigs as well.

But, after further discussions, since that recent blog post, i decided to share my own personal thoughts about this whole topic and this seemed like the best place to do it.

Anyone who knows me, knows that i am a big music fan and through my involvement as a DJ with Hastings Rock, i've developed a huge appreciation of local music and local musicians generally. But, as a DJ, i've only tended to play original music by those local musicians, rather than any cover versions and that is where my real interest lies.

Like anyone else, i go to pubs and watch the local covers bands doing their stuff and very good the vast majority of them are too. They provide a great service to those who just want to go out, have a few drinks and generally have a good time. And with that i have absolutely no problem at all.

My problem, if that is what it is, is with the, seemingly, ever increasing amount of tribute bands that do the rounds and have probably visited your own town recently.
These are the bands that are effectively a carbon copy version of the real thing. Often going as far as having members who look like the original members and certainly dressing the same as them.  They try to use the same instruments and also copy the stage acts and mannerisms of the original artists.
They also charge you quite a lot of money for the priviledge of seeing them too (I wonder if they have to pay any royalties to the original act? And if not, why not?)

The first band that i remember who fitted into this category, were The Bootleg Beatles. No prizes for guessing who they were copying. I did see them, many years ago and enjoyed them. They even split their set into two parts, to cover different periods of The Beatles career. Complete with a costume change.
Since then, the whole tribute band scene has developed and is now a pretty lucrative business. There are tribute bands to all of the major acts, both from the rock and pop world. These acts can be seen touring all over the UK and beyond. I've even seen whole festivals devoted to rtibute bands.

So, there is obviously a big market for this type of entertainment. But, that doesn't mean that i have to like it.
It's not that iwsh to stop people going out and enjoying themselves. My own problem with all of this is the effect that it might have on the nurturing of up and coming local, original, talent.
The whole world has gone copy cat mad and there is just no room left for new and original music.
I realise that this can be seen a a bit of an exaggeration. But, i do think it does have a noticable effect at a local level.

Local musicians, that i know, speak of their inability to get gigs when showcasing their own, original, music. All of the gigs seem to be taken up by bands doing those crowd pleasing cover versions. And, maybe, that's where, ultimately, the problem lies? People are voting with their feet and with their wallets and saying, "we want to hear familar music".
And, if you're the owner of a venue, the customer is always right. Aren't they?

So, maybe we've only got ourselves to blame for this situation? The problem is, where is all of the future original music going to come from?
And, is this yet another effect of the "X Factor" etc?
Yes, i know that tribute bands have been aroung longer that the "Pop Idol" type of shows. But, maybe those shows have had an effect on the popularity of the many tribute bands around and actually helped to increase their number?

Years ago the tribute bands that were around, like The Bootleg Beatles, seemed to only copy those acts that you just could not see. Whether that be The Beatles, The Doors, or Led Zeppelin etc, who had split up and therefore could not tour anymore. Or, maybe, some of those really big bands who toured infrequently and often only in huge arenas, miles from home and who were, quite frankly, past their prime anyway.

These days, just about everyone seems to have a tribute band based on them. It's probably become almost a badge of honour amongst acts, to have your own tribute band.

And that brings up another aspect to this whole topic.
I can understand why people might want to go and see a good tribute band, for an act like Led Zeppelin, or The Beatles. Those acts, as i said before, that it's just not possible to see live anymore, for whatever reason.
But, i can't see the same attraction in going to see a tribute of an act that is stil going strong, still in their prime and still available to see. For example, a local venue in my hometown recently booked a tribute act to the Kings Of Leon. I have no idea how many people turned up on the night. But, i wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't a roaring success.

I suppose that it could be argued that by going to see the tribute act, of an existing band, that you are getting an approximation of the original band and at least you don't have to sit through all of those boring new album tracks, that you've never heard before! But, personally i'd rather save up and make the effort to go and see the real thing.

As for those bands who are no longer in their prime, or who just don't exist anymore. Maybe, those good tribute bands are a worthy substitute?
After all, what you get to see is a re-creation of whichever band, in their prime and playing a greatest hits set. A band that you quite possibly never had the chance to see in their heyday.

I was lucky enough to see Led Zeppelin in their prime, The Who with Keith Moon, AC/DC with Bon Scott and Lynyrd Skynyrd before the plane crash and i would not wish to spoil those good memories, by paying to see a re-creation of those days.
And maybe, that is at the heart of my objections?

Having said that, is a tribute band any worse than a band using the original name, but having very few, if any, original members in the existing line up? To me, that is just plain wrong.

I've just read that Big Country are re-forming. Despite the fact the band's founder, singer, songwriter and main guitarist, Stuart Adamson, died 9 years ago. WTF?
To me that is just as ridiculous as The Jam without Paul Weller, Thin Lizzy without Phil Lynott, The Doors without Jim Morrison and just in case they get any ideas, Led Zeppelin without Robert Plant.

Just don't get me started on that one!