[HN Gopher] How long does music stardom last? A statistical anal...
___________________________________________________________________
How long does music stardom last? A statistical analysis
Author : cainxinth
Score : 74 points
Date : 2024-08-08 13:55 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.statsignificant.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.statsignificant.com)
| wizardforhire wrote:
| This is worth the read if you happen upon it.
| dpee123 wrote:
| Oh wow, thanks a bunch! I wrote this :)
|
| Cool to see this show up here.
| entropicdrifter wrote:
| Did you enjoy the new Weird Al parody biopic? Seems to me
| that if you enjoy Walk Hard you'd enjoy the Weird Al one as
| well
| jtwoodhouse wrote:
| This realization is what made me get my life together. I
| recognized that striving for success as an artist requires you to
| abandon the rest of your life while counting on being an outlier,
| and no rational person would bet their life on that.
|
| I still make art and I still swing for the fences sometimes, but
| I decided not to starve and my life is all the better for it.
| ghaff wrote:
| Much of the article really focuses on (more or less) "one hit
| wonders."
|
| However the intro on music biopics really hits home. It's not
| even just music. I find a lot of biopics suffer from fairly
| predictable story arcs that are constrained by the subject's
| actual trajectory while often not being that true to life.
| dpee123 wrote:
| Yeah, Back to Black (the movie) was really disappointing. Wish
| they could have done better by Amy Winehouse.
| doytch wrote:
| > Using this "cross-verified database," we find that music stars
| have one of the shortest lifespans of any profession, with an
| expectancy comparable to boxers, military figures, and race car
| drivers.
|
| Although according to the chart directly below, the life
| expectancy is more comparable to chess players and poets.
| Probably isn't as fun a sentence to write though.
| dpee123 wrote:
| You're not wrong lol
| jmyeet wrote:
| Just one note on Elton John's Cold Heart: its reappearance on the
| chart was due to a remix that featured the (very current) Dua
| Lipa [1].
|
| I liken this kind of prolonged success as similary to winning the
| lottery twice. It happens. But it's a lot more common to only win
| once.
|
| With music you never really know what's going to resonate with
| audience. It can be a complete accident. It could be a song being
| featured in a movie or TV show that completely blows up. It could
| be used in a Tiktok that goes viral.
|
| There are many enduring artists from the 1960s through 1980s. I'm
| talking the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Elvis Presley, Michael
| Jackson, Queen, Elton John, Billy Joel, Fleetwood Mac, Prince and
| so on. In their times they dominated the airwaves in a way that
| doesn't really exist anymore.
|
| It's a bit like how TV used to be a shared cultural experience
| because it was broadcast at the same time before streaming. Non
| 21st century TV show has hit (or will probably ever hit) the kind
| of numbers you saw from Seinfeld, MASH, Cheers and the like..
|
| Taylor Swift is obviously massive. But she's the outlier among
| outliers, almost the exception that proves the rule. And even
| though Taylor Swift has incredibly popular music, she doesn't
| produce enduring "hits" in the way the aforementioned artists
| did. Will current music have the same cultural power in 50 years
| that Bohemian Rhapsody or Billie Jean?
|
| My thesis is that we don't have the same shared cultural
| experiences anymore because of the Internet and I suspect this
| will make the likely duration of a music artist even shorter.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qod03PVTLqk
| ghaff wrote:
| >It's a bit like how TV used to be a shared cultural experience
| because it was broadcast at the same time before streaming. Non
| 21st century TV show has hit (or will probably ever hit) the
| kind of numbers you saw from Seinfeld, MASH, Cheers and the
| like..
|
| I couldn't even name current scripted network/basic cable shows
| unless it's something that has been around forever and I assume
| is still on.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| I can't name the _networks_ any more.
| ghaff wrote:
| I know the major networks--and a number of the basic cable
| channels--but I couldn't tell you the network news anchors
| or Sunday morning talk show hosts any longer which I'd
| probably have considered something of a cultural failing at
| one point.
| chrisco255 wrote:
| It's a good theory, but I dunno, I think these things are
| mostly decided by the younger generation. I don't know if Tyler
| the Creator, Post Malone, or Dua Lipa or whoever will still be
| relevant in 50 years. Queen and MJ obviously some of the most
| talented music artists of all time so quite tough to say who in
| this decade or whatever will live up to that kind of high
| reputation.
|
| One thing that's worth noting is we don't really have any new
| genres to master. It's usually the best songs and artists of a
| newer genre or subgenre that we elevate to all time greats.
| whatevertrevor wrote:
| I agree. I've not heard many Taylor Swift songs but hearing
| about "Eras" is almost inescapable.
| brentm wrote:
| Having worked closely with a number of artist that achieved
| notable level of mainstream success (multiple Billboard Top 40
| hits, years of touring) I have to agree with the authors
| conclusion. Even for those that have successful careers spanning
| a number of years it's more or less over as soon as it starts.
| They then spend years chasing what they had but it's near
| impossible. By the end most end up financially not well off and
| with little to no career options. It's amazing while it's
| happening but the candle burns quickly, that being said I doubt
| many artists would agree.
| paulpauper wrote:
| Maybe this is why Kanye West does so many stunts and make
| controversial remarks, to stay relevant when the odd are so
| stacked
| throwup238 wrote:
| I think his antics could be better explained by manic
| episodes. He'd have stayed far more relevant if he had just
| stuck to his music.
| paulpauper wrote:
| I somewhat disagree. Many artists who were hot in the early
| 2000s still put out music, but hardly any media attention
| anymore and much lower sales by the 4th or so album. The
| public only has a finite attention span. Rap has gone
| through so many changes over the past 20 years since his
| career began yet afik he is still able to put out new
| material and get a lot of media attention and sales for
| such an old act.
| wisemang wrote:
| I'm not actually a huge fan of his (I think he's a weak
| rapper but admit he has a golden ear for production, not
| to mention his highly objectionable public outbursts).
| But to call him an old act seems a bit ignorant, the
| material he's continued to put out is a big part of some
| of the "many changes" seen in hip hop over the years.
| throwup238 wrote:
| I'ma let you finish but... Kanye has long been a master
| of publicity stunts and his music has always been popular
| (and dare I say it - even as a non-fan - consistently
| _good_ ).
|
| He was doing fine until he (self-admittedly) stopped
| taking his bipolar medication in 2017, jumped into
| politics, and supported a group that has almost entirely
| alienated his fanbase because there's pretty much zero
| overlap in the demographics. He says he stopped taking
| them for the sake of his music so maybe he was in a catch
| 22 situation, but he's gone completely off the rails.
| dvngnt_ wrote:
| kanye would be relevant just off music production making
| beats and fashion.
|
| his outburst are hurting him more than helping him
| especially now that his quality has declined
| tylerrobinson wrote:
| I really enjoyed this. I think about this a lot, especially with
| young famous artists or social media creators.
|
| How long can they sustain the act that got them famous? Will we
| want to see Olivia Rodrigo at age 30, 40, 50, performing her hits
| from today?
| BJones12 wrote:
| > Will we want to see Olivia Rodrigo at age 30, 40, 50,
| performing her hits from today?
|
| Yes, but in the form of a Vegas residency or multi-act
| nostalgia tour.
| nemothekid wrote:
| I think ti mantain longevity for decades requires being a
| generational artist. It's not also about performing well, but
| having an certain kind of taste that can hook newer generations
| (while also competeting with those generations rising stars).
|
| I can't really think of any artists who really enjoy multi-
| generational, mainstream, success. Maybe Beyonce?
| bananaboy wrote:
| Stevie Wonder, maybe Herbie Hancock
| WalterBright wrote:
| Bee Gees
| WalterBright wrote:
| I'd love to see Led Zeppelin perform again.
| the__alchemist wrote:
| Green Day + Rancid are still filling stadiums to capacity. And
| that is such an outlier.
| slater- wrote:
| Yeah but Operation Ivy is done.
| paulpauper wrote:
| this is why the arts are underrated when people try to show
| charts of how 'STEM people' earn more. Yes, they earn more
| initially, but the humanities and the arts have the benefits of
| residuals, branding, and legacy. A top -40 hit can generate $
| forever. Same for a book.
| chrisco255 wrote:
| A SaaS product with low churn can generate revenue for
| decades.
|
| The songs and books that actually last for decades with a
| high amount of revenue (enough to live off of) is a tiny
| fraction of 1 percent.
| paulpauper wrote:
| but the product has to be updated , no . The song or book
| does not have to be changed at all.
| NeoTar wrote:
| It's maybe less so in the digital era, but certainly
| before 2000-or-so so you needed to republish books and
| songs.
| ghaff wrote:
| Most books don't even earn out their advances.
|
| While STEM covers a lot of ground, it's a _lot_ more reliable
| career path than the arts in general.
| the_cat_kittles wrote:
| on the flip side, improvised instrumental music (which has
| relatively no market or fame) is kind of the opposite- the top
| dogs basically stay there their whole life. but thats in terms of
| status, not money, which is mosty nonexistent.
| autoexec wrote:
| If all you have is "status", but no one knows who you are and
| most people don't care either (no market or fame) that's a very
| small consolation.
| thefaux wrote:
| Yes, I am reading James Kaplan's 3 Shades of Blue which tells
| the biographical story of the main players on Miles Davis's
| Kind of Blue. It is almost shocking, even though I knew, how
| impoverished these musicians were even though they were widely
| acknowledged to be at the top of the art form. Miles did ok
| financially but most of his peers did not. And yet people still
| listen to Kind of Blue 70 years later (and hardly anyone
| listens to modern jazz).
| __mharrison__ wrote:
| Top jam bands do quite well, but most are not played on the
| radio. Phish, Dave Matthews, Dead and Company. Up-and-comers
| Billy Strings and Goose appear to be following the pattern. But
| like many things content-wise, the outliers get the majority of
| the money. These are the outliers.
| looknee wrote:
| I think this is very interesting about Billboard Top 100 artists,
| however there are TONS of artists and bands that have never
| cracked the Billboard Top 100 yet have been making music and
| doing live shows for years/decades successfully. I would
| guess/assume that these artists vastly outweigh the # of artists
| who have had a Top 100 song or album.
|
| While I'm sure most artists would love to have a Top 100 album or
| song and the associated wealth it brings, I feel many would also
| love continuing to create music and tour on it while making a
| decent living for years. Leaving out these artists in the
| discussion I feel skews the point of the article.
| paulpauper wrote:
| All you need is a small and loyal fanbase to make a living with
| touring and merch , plus you keep a greater % of revenue
| instead of the manager taking it
| joe_the_user wrote:
| I've heard the claim you have a whole new crop of musicians
| making reasonable money with tours and Patreon. I'm skeptical
| - any references for how many.
|
| It's a bit different but I watch a lot of D&D advice youtube
| channels. The single most popular of them (the entertaining
| Ginnie D) can make a bare living at it but nearly everyone
| else has a day job. It's hard to believe the situation for
| musicians would have a different distribution of results
| (money made from fame just naturally follows a Pareto
| distribution).
| shmel wrote:
| I don't know if it is really comparable. I listen to a lot
| of music, if any of my top 50 favorite musicians tour in my
| city, I don't hesitate to pay 50 quid for a ticket. For
| some I am willing to fly out. If Spotify didn't exist, I'd
| have bought many albums.
|
| But I can hardly think of a YT channel I like enough to pay
| money. I guess I bought a couple of online courses made by
| relatively popular YT creators, but that's about it.
| joe_the_user wrote:
| I think most musicians "have been making music and doing live
| shows for years/decades successfully" don't actually make
| sufficient money to live but rather do it as a hobby (my only
| reference is living in a tourist town and knowing a few local
| musicians).
|
| I believe the only working professional musicians out there are
| basically working for the film, video game or music (as session
| musicians) industries making music to order (plus some
| professional teachers).
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Billboard Top 40 is a poor measure of "stardom lasting." "Money
| earned" would be a better one.
|
| If they can get a steady residence in Vegas or Branson, or play
| the state fair circuit, they're still getting decent money.
|
| Other stars managed to move into producing or guesting on other
| people's records.
|
| Norman Greenbaum lived off "Spirit in the Sky" for many, many
| years.
|
| > "Rock 'n' roll is a young man's game"
|
| That's why Taylor Swift credits herself as co-writer of songs
| that other people write for her. That way she gets some the
| publishing royalties, which last a _long_ time. "Change a word,
| get a third."
| m463 wrote:
| I wonder if "money earned" correlates super well. The amount of
| money available and the way music was pushed might have favored
| a few groups represented by big record labels.
|
| Nowadays with streaming and algorithms I wonder where the money
| goes and if it makes it to artists in the same uneven way.
|
| https://www.visualcapitalist.com/music-industry-revenues-by-...
| khazhoux wrote:
| Your metric is worse. Playing Vegas, Branson, or the summer
| winery circuit makes you a working musician, but no longer a
| "star".
| AlbertCory wrote:
| You're right, they're not "stars."
|
| They're still better off than the group struggling to gig at
| the local bar.
| 082349872349872 wrote:
| Odd, for a site named "statsignificant", that they didn't try to
| fit a distribution or two?
| dxbydt wrote:
| > they didn't try to fit a distribution or two?
|
| Since mu is 28, and 13 is the min, you have 28-13=15 = 3*5,
| which makes sigma 5, so use rnorm(n,28,25) to generate n
| samples from the gaussian.
| https://www.desmos.com/calculator/mlwm7mke16
| merciBien wrote:
| Insightful article, music celebrity is fascinating. I have a
| musically-gifted friend in her twenties who got a full-time job
| singing and playing in a band in a live-music nightclub, she's
| the only musician I've met who plays music for a living, without
| a non-music side gig. Her own band has never toured and has a
| tiny instagram presence, she seems happy with that.
| kasey_junk wrote:
| I have a friend who has been a working musician with no side
| gig for over 20 years. He makes money in a wide variety of
| small band types (pipe & drums for funerals and parades, Jimmy
| Buffet cover bands for festivals, jazz groups for events, etc).
|
| What I take from his experience is that the things that make
| him successful are the same as many other jobs. He's
| dependable, competent, on time and has a large professional
| network.
| merciBien wrote:
| that's good to hear! I always wonder when I see a band
| playing a live gig how they're doing. My friend's bandmates
| are very creative, but struggle with the professionalism
| part.
| khazhoux wrote:
| This applies to any ultra-bright success and not just music, no?
|
| I was briefly a "star" in silicon valley for a project I did.
| Random people at conferences knew who I was and would smile when
| they met me. But the years roll by and despite a nice career, I
| understand that work is now forgotten and my (real) name will
| never be in the press again.
| NBJack wrote:
| It sounds like you still had a day job independent of it. It's
| probably a great highlight on your resume that is celebrated
| when brought up and opens doors.
|
| For most artists, this kind of fame sustains the day job. Loss
| of fame means loss of royalties, tours income, etc. We even
| have a somewhat derisive name for it: the one-hit wonder.
| khazhoux wrote:
| I marvel at the one-hit wonders who pivot into behind-the-
| scenes mega success.
|
| Linda Perry is a top example. Had a minor early-90s hit with
| 4 Non Blondes What's Going On (title is actually "What's
| Up?"). Then exited the spotlight and became a songwriter and
| producer with major hits like Christina Aguilera's
| "Beautiful."
|
| Or Ashton Kutcher, who parlayed earnings from his Kelso role
| (plus a few forgotten movies) into an gigantic pile of money
| courtesy of angel investing in Twitter and more.
| ilamont wrote:
| Kind of curious about Tommy Tutone's programming career. It would
| be cool if he had an HN account!
|
| What's interesting to me is the nostalgia boom for artists who
| either kept going or reunited, and the crowds now are far larger
| than what they were back in the day. The Pixies filling a 5000
| person venue? Morrissey with a Vegas residency? I don't think
| either charted on the Billboard Top 40.
|
| I knew a musician who was a star overseas, and during the 90s
| could regularly sell out large venues. He packed it in after
| about 10 years. To him it really was a grind, there were
| diminishing returns as his core audience grew up and moved on,
| and he was operating in a relatively small market. He ended up
| doing real estate and business development in a second country
| where the economy was booming, and had a moderately successful
| career doing that. He doesn't seem to be interested in performing
| anymore.
| larkinnaire wrote:
| This feels like a question that would really benefit from talking
| to some musicians, instead of basing your framing on biopics and
| data. Some musicians are in it to be rich and famous, and become
| computer programmers when riches and fame leave the picture, but
| most of them are musicians because they like writing and playing
| music more than anything else. I'd bet that Of Monsters and Men
| is perfectly happy to make an okay living off of their remaining
| fanbase, because they still get to tour and make new albums. They
| might be even happier about it if they could get a second hit,
| but there are so many musicians who have never had a breakthrough
| hit, who make a happy living opening for other bands, meager
| royalties, Patreons, etc. Basically, this post assumes a causal
| link between chart success and life satisfaction that probably
| doesn't exist.
| vizzah wrote:
| "If you're reading this and thinking to yourself, "What's Of
| Monsters And Men?" then you've proven my point."
|
| Not proven, sorry. Actually prefer their other tracks, like
| 'Empire', from the 2nd album.
| whatevertrevor wrote:
| Or Organs, or Mountain Sound, or Dirty Paws. That point didn't
| land with me either, especially since I discovered Of Monsters
| and Men in 2018.
| niccl wrote:
| There's the 'long tail' aspect to ephemeral stardom and what
| people get from it. Most musicians I know (and I know a lot from
| the local music scene) want foremost to perform. Money and fame
| would be really great, but getting up in front of an audience is
| what they most want to do.
|
| A lot of 80's and 90's bands come through the 200-500 cap venues
| where I mostly work. People like Midge Ure, Nik Kershaw. They're
| still happily performing and touring despite (as far as I know)
| not being in Billboard top 100 for some time (tm)
|
| So the fact of having been super-famous once and then not again
| is probably disappointing but not crushing, and no reason for
| other people not to try for the 15 minutes of fame
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-08 23:00 UTC)