[HN Gopher] How long does music stardom last? A statistical anal...
___________________________________________________________________
How long does music stardom last? A statistical analysis
Author : cainxinth
Score : 170 points
Date : 2024-08-08 13:55 UTC (1 days 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
| bombcar wrote:
| As an aside it's interesting to note that by some metrics
| Weird Al is the most successful long-term musician alive.
| 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
| pvaldes wrote:
| Disagree. A profession lasts for how much time you receive
| money for your activity. Music stars receive money for their
| songs during their entire lives (and part of the lives of their
| children).
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| depends how much you receive. If they receive the same amount
| of money you might expect someone to get if they are picking
| up cans they see laying about and recycling them then I don't
| think it really applies as a profession.
| pvaldes wrote:
| Waiting for the yearly royalties of your songs is different
| than picking cans because it don't require any effort. All
| free money is still money. And in the long term still would
| be much more that a scientist receives for publishing an
| article.
|
| Stardom duration is also relative as you are always losing
| fans and earning new fans. Is more like an echo machine. A
| good videoclip is paid once but the people will want to
| watch it for decades.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| >Waiting for the yearly royalties of your songs is
| different than picking cans because it don't require any
| effort.
|
| is this one of those xkcd mentos moments here? You are
| not familiar with any situations where artists have been
| screwed out of royalties, underpaid, lied to etc. and
| have to spend time with lawyers to get their loyalties.
|
| Given the well known financial reporting patterns of the
| various media industries any artist who does not put any
| effort into getting their royalties is an artist who
| essentially does not get their royalties.
|
| >Stardom duration is also relative as you are always
| losing fans and earning new fans.
|
| I mean you are saying these things but they seem to go
| against the data in this study as well as the data
| provided by people who also make references to their
| experience in the relevant industries - do you have any
| data and or experience to back this up or are these just
| your opinions of how it must work based on reasoning
| about the problem using nothing but logic to derive a
| conclusion?
|
| Because I too would expect it works the way you say, but
| I would default to expertise of others who say no you are
| misinformed about how the situation is in our industry -
| discounting outliers like Taylor Swift.
| 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.
| nprateem wrote:
| Elton John is well known for doing duets and networking with
| upcoming stars. It's one way he stays relevant, and he said in
| an interview it's a way for him to give back. He often
| showcases new stars when he's on tour.
| wiredfool wrote:
| I think Queen had pretty much faded by the 80's, there were a
| couple of songs that you'd hear (we will rock you), but they
| weren't high profile at all compared to others you'd hear on a
| classic rock station.
|
| Until Wayne's World. That catapulted them back into a new
| generation outside of just a couple of songs.
|
| Then they got another kick with Adam Lambert, and they've been
| higher profile since. (Though personally, I think Night at the
| Hip Hopera probably did something for them too)
| 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.
| Loughla wrote:
| I was going to say that he's literally old by American
| celebrity and performer standards though.
|
| But then I googled it and apparently the average age of
| top billing star musicians still performing live is 53.
| So I guess he's not really that old.
| 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.
| watwut wrote:
| I dont think it is just politics. His albums later album,
| in particular after 2017 sound much different.
| spondylosaurus wrote:
| He also bought and gutted that Ando house.
| https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/06/17/kanye-west-
| tad...
| 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
| Swizec wrote:
| > The public only has a finite attention span. Rap has
| gone through so many changes over the past 20 years
|
| Eminem is the 5th most listened to artist on Spotify
| _right now_. His first album came out in 1996 - 28 years
| ago.
|
| So we know it's possible :)
|
| https://eminem.news/monthly-5.html
| pfannkuchen wrote:
| I think his antics could be better explained by finding
| 4chan late in life and spending too much time there.
| mtalantikite wrote:
| My friends that have been able to translate it to longer term
| stability are the ones that got into producing and engineering
| on top of playing. They'll work with younger artists while also
| doing their own music and getting called to do session work.
| The ones that really only focused on playing in their one band
| and didn't, say, get good at producing/engineering or start a
| label haven't had the best career options after a certain
| point.
| gscott wrote:
| Same with actors becoming directors.
| 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
| biftek wrote:
| I'd argue Taylor Swift has done it too, and to a less
| mainstream degree Trent Reznor who has kept his career
| rolling along forever.
|
| A core audience who will buy what ever you sell is key, and
| also not being afraid to change your style from album to
| album
| bitwize wrote:
| You forgot the intergenerational ur-artist: "Weird Al"
| Yankovic.
| nemothekid wrote:
| I think Taylor Swift is on track, but I'm not sure she's
| old enough yet. She's arguably in her early 30s, while
| Beyonce is 42. I'm sure Taylor Swift will still have
| multiple hit records in her 40s, but currently I think it's
| rare.
|
| You might be right from with Trent Reznor - Pretty Hate
| Machine dropped when he was was 24 and With Teeth went Gold
| when he was 40. This is roughly the same as Beyonce current
| longevity (Cowboy Carter, Beyonces latest album, which she
| released at age 42, has also only gone Gold)
| sddsdd wrote:
| Dolly Parton is a massive outlier this way in terms of
| mainstream longevity.
|
| Also would name Fleetwood Mac.
| Yodel0914 wrote:
| I suppose it depends what you mean by "success". Metallica,
| G'n'R, AC/DC etc can still sell out arenas, even if their
| latest album sales aren't great (comparative to earlier
| success).
| nemothekid wrote:
| This assumption might be wrong, but it's my understanding
| that Metallica, GnR, and other hard rock/metal bands, while
| successful, are aging with their audience, which is mean by
| being generational. Beyonce has penetrated both 19 year
| olds and 45 year olds demographics with great success. I'm
| not sure I can say the same about Metallica.
| 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.
| the_cat_kittles wrote:
| i think the respect of your peers is one of the best rewards
| 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.
| HPsquared wrote:
| It's kind of cruelly ironic that a jobber artist needs to be
| very strong on "business qualities", while the stereotype is
| that artists are bad at those things.
| dxbydt wrote:
| I know of atleast three software engineers who quit programming
| to pursue music fulltime.
|
| This lady[1] got a Computer Science degree from UC Berkeley, as
| even an intern at one of the faangs I believe. Quit the whole
| thing and caught a flight to India. She's sung about 100 songs
| now and is quite famous.
|
| This guy[2] got a Computer Science degree and worked as a
| Visual Basic programmer. Also wrote some FoxPro and Clipper
| code. Was working at Leading Edge in those days. Quit software
| and started singing. Has sung over 7000 songs. Very rich, 9
| figures.
|
| This guy[3] got a PhD in Computer Science and wrote an
| algorithm to reduce non-standard matrices to approx Hermite
| Normal. Wrote a bunch of NLP papers, even published in a pure
| math journal! Then quit software and started writing songs. Has
| written over 1000 songs now. Very busy songwriter.
|
| [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manisha_Eerabathini
| [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shankar_Mahadevan
| [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhan_Karky
| an_aparallel wrote:
| i grew up around a lot of Indians - I was always jealous of
| how engrained being good at a musical instrument is within
| the culture. And the lineage of master to student presented
| with great importance before every Carnatic performance i've
| watched.
| 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.
| bitwize wrote:
| Sharona Alperin, a real estate agent in California, uses her
| fame as the subject of The Knack's song "My Sharona" to
| promote her real estate business.
|
| https://mysharona.com
| 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.
| nolamark wrote:
| Not Tommy Tutone's, so less a direct connection to the article,
| but I love the tech career of James Williamson of the Stooges.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Williamson_(musician)
|
| "In 1997, he was hired as Sony's vice president of technical
| standards; in this capacity, he liaised with competitors and
| helped to codify nascent industry standards, most notably the
| Blu-ray Disc"
|
| I remember shopping at record store in Claremont, CA in early
| 80s and finding all these rare Iggy and the Stooges albums.
| Clerk says Williamson comes in the store every now and then and
| brings in more, and that I should check back from time to time.
| I shrug and think nothing of it. Turns out he was going to
| nearby Cal Poly Pomona and graduated in 1982 with an EE degree.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMHStOPPte0
| vermilingua wrote:
| And of course Rivers Cuomo of Weezer has a github
|
| https://github.com/riverscuomo
| soperj wrote:
| I've had an HN account for years!
|
| (kidding, but fully expected there to be a reply saying exactly
| this, and disappointed there wasn't).
| 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
| WalterBright wrote:
| > I couldn't help but wonder why anyone would aspire to become a
| mainstream music star
|
| Perhaps the author should check out the song with the lyrics
| "money for nothing and chics for free." Quite a number of
| musicians are open about being in a band makes for easy sex.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| This isn't exactly music but an adjacent career: acting.
|
| About 20 years ago, I was in the chorus for a community theater
| production of _La Boheme_. The director was a moderately
| successful Hollywood actor, Ken Tigar, whom you 've probably
| seen:
|
| https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0863024/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1
|
| AFAIK he's never the star, but he continues to get acting gigs,
| because as someone said about a musician: he shows up, he hits
| his mark, he doesn't cause any problems for the director. He's a
| professional, in other words.
|
| So I have a lot of respect for the musician who might or might
| not have had a hit record, but they know their craft and they
| take it seriously.
| nox101 wrote:
| I don't know if this is relevant but your post reminded me of
| Keith David. I don't know if he's ever been the star but he's
| been in something like 378 movies
|
| https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0202966/?ref_=tt_cl_t_2
| HideousKojima wrote:
| I'd say he at least co-starred in They Live, which also has
| the single best street fight in cinematic history:
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dN8Z7y_QcwE
| underlipton wrote:
| Rarely the intended star, but steals the show regularly,
| especially with his voice-over work. He's well-known as
| Goliath's voice in Gargoyles, was pretty much everyone's
| favorite part of The Princess and the Frog, and recently took
| a ton of people by (pleasant) surprise with his
| interpretation of Pluto (Astroboy)'s Dr. Tenma.
| WorkerBee28474 wrote:
| Now there's a man who knows how to have a stable acting
| career!
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Sure, it's relevant.
|
| When we were doing _La Boheme_ the chorus had the "Ken Tigar
| film festival!" I rented (this was when there were still
| video stores) a whole bunch of movies that he'd been in, and
| just watched his parts.
|
| They really should have an Oscar similar to the "Lifetime
| Achievement" award, for people like Ken and Keith.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| I think you're missing an enormous part of being a musical act if
| you're only looking at Billboard chart placement. My wife and I
| have made a hobby of going to concerts and festivals for the past
| few years. Just in the last three years, we've seen KMFDM and NIN
| multiple times, Tool, Madonna, Judas Priest, Kreator,
| Queensryche, Slowdive, Echo and the Bunnymen, Metallica, Dead
| Kennedys, Social Distortion, Bad Religion, Rob Zombie, Alice
| Cooper, Filter, New Order, Ministry like five times. We've got
| Slayer, Weezer, and Flaming Lips coming up in the next couple
| months. I have pretty badly _wanted_ to see Massive Attack, Juno
| Reactor, and Spiritualized, but their tours never hit the US.
|
| Some of these were multi-generational megastars. Some of them
| charted once or twice 30+ years ago. Some of them never charted
| at all. All of them have devoted fanbases and they sell out
| venues. Some of these are 80,000 seat arenas, some are small
| clubs with standing room only, but they're all enough to sustain
| the band for decades.
|
| You don't need to be on the Billboard top 100 to make a living. A
| whole lot of fans continue to be fans and will love you their
| entire lives regardless of whether a single one of your songs
| hits the mainstream ever again or even if you don't release new
| material at all. KMFDM thankfully does release new stuff damn
| near all the time (now 40 years of conceptual continuity), but my
| wife and I met at one of their shows. We've gone to see them
| every single time they come within 100 miles of us ever since and
| we always will. They're a far more important part of our
| identities than Icona Pop is to the casual radio listeners that
| sung along to their one popular song for a summer and then forgot
| about them.
| punk-coder wrote:
| I have a friend that is the drummer in a band that had a couple
| big hits in the 90's, not going to drop names, but their
| contemporaries are bands like Collective Soul, Gin Blossoms, that
| kind of stuff. They have a few gold records. To this day they
| still tour every year and make enough money off touring and
| royalties to make a good living. I grew up on punk and thrash
| metal, so had never heard of his band, so it surprised me how
| close to 30 years later they still get booked at Disney and on
| rock cruises, but happy he still gets to keep doing that.
| golergka wrote:
| Once you get into a heart of a teen, you remain there for the
| rest of his life. Many bands well past their peak have a
| revival of private bookings now, as people who were teens back
| then become rich people who can book a band for a party.
| verisimi wrote:
| > Once you get into a heart of a teen, you remain there for
| the rest of his _[or *her*]_ life.
| pvaldes wrote:
| Both. There are a lot of fascinating women in music also.
|
| But is a valid point
| Gettingolderev wrote:
| He wrote it from his perspective.
|
| come on...
| verisimi wrote:
| He says "a teen". It's just incorrect grammar. He could
| have said 'his or her heart' or 'their heart', but not
| every teen is a 'he'.
| FredPret wrote:
| Still entirely possible it's from his perspective.
| marcuskane2 wrote:
| Interestingly, when I was in school, we were taught that
| "he" could be used both for male or for gender-neutral
| usages.
|
| The shift to treating he/him/his as exclusively male
| seems to be a fairly recent phenomenon (last few decades)
| as American social progressives sought to change language
| to be explicitly-inclusive instead of implicitly-
| inclusive and to avoid confusion due to the context-
| dependent dual meaning of such words.
|
| 1970s - "he" means everyone 1990s - "he/she" means
| everyone 2020s - "they" means everyone
| kanbara wrote:
| this is also occurring in a tonne of european languages:
| german, french, spanish, italian, etc. it's progressives
| and people who care for others, not just americans.
|
| as is well studies, we know very concretely how language
| and word usage influences thought (because it is thought,
| expressed)
| HideousKojima wrote:
| "His" is entirely grammatically correct, even if he was
| speaking about teens in a general sense, both male and
| female.
| kanbara wrote:
| it may be grammatically correct, but it is still
| exclusionary.
|
| i don't know why people fight so hard to just simply not
| include others
| HPsquared wrote:
| This is also how the classic car market works.
| cbsks wrote:
| Case in point: https://www.whenwewereyoungfestival.com/
| bena wrote:
| Are they Better Than some of these other bands? Any connection
| to Ezra Miller?
|
| Why do I think they're Better Than Ezra? Or possibly Candlebox?
| That feels about right. Probably more Better Than Ezra because
| Candlebox feels a little out of the Mouse's wheelhouse.
|
| They were/are solid.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| Yeah, one of the things I didn't like about this analysis is
| that it really didn't do a very good job of differentiating
| between a band that really is a "one hit wonder" and a band
| that may only be in the top 40 for a short time but still has a
| dedicated following and is able to make a good, long career of
| it.
|
| Take his "prototypical example" of Of Monsters and Men. I am
| glad that he did mention that the band "has enjoyed continued
| success since their 2012 breakout", but as a big fan of this
| band, I'd say they have a really dedicated following. I think
| in their case they were more of the "quirky band shoots has an
| immensely mainstream popular single, then goes back to being a
| quirky band, just with a much bigger following".
|
| Rather than just look at placement in the top 40, which is only
| going to be songs that have wide applicability and are usually
| heavily promoted, I think it's more applicable to see how long
| these folks can have a career in music. As another example,
| think of someone like Andre 3000. Sure, he may never surpass
| his fame from Outkast's "Hey Ya" in 2003, but he's been working
| prominently for 30 years.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| There's an entire industry supporting former short-run chart
| names touring - and often selling out - small/medium venues
| and playing smaller festivals, nostalgia cruises, and so on.
|
| There's also an entire industry of cover bands and
| impersonators.
|
| There's far more to it than the Billboard list.
| glenngillen wrote:
| So... the Goo Goo Dolls? :P
| vundercind wrote:
| I'd guess whatever band it is, is at least one full notch
| less-prominent and -successful than that one.
| Pet_Ant wrote:
| Something more like Better than Ezra is my guess.
| punk-coder wrote:
| I may have put them in a rung higher than they are, since
| I didn't listen to them back when they were big and
| touring, so I only know them more by who they tour with
| now, but his band is Sister Hazel.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| I'm glad you said who they were. I think the example of
| Sister Hazel perfectly fits the example I gave in another
| comment: it wasn't the case with them that they were a
| one hit wonder that flamed out quickly, but rather that
| they were a good band that made a lot of music that a lot
| of people liked, and one of their songs just happened to
| be a big radio hit.
|
| AFAIK they really only had one song that "everybody"
| knows, "All for You", that got a ton of airplay. But they
| still put out a lot of records, they had a good devoted
| fan base of high school/college kids in the late 90s, and
| AFAIK are well respected for their music in the industry.
| Glad to hear they're still performing.
| bombcar wrote:
| It's a variation of the "thousand true fans" -
| https://kk.org/thetechnium/1000-true-fans/
|
| You do not need to be terribly famous at all to make a
| comfortable living; locally famous or historically know will
| get you to that level.
| winternett wrote:
| As a musician myself, who has also brushed elbows in coming up
| amongst friends within the industry, one of the most vital
| skills a musician can learn is that avoiding overexposure is
| the key to long-term survival, just as much as making great
| music that endures... I know many artists that were very
| prominent years ago, but now can barely climb that hill again
| because of overexposure and huge re-marketing costs, coupled
| with an ageing fan base.
|
| People who follow trends, and try to sound like others is
| definitely an indication that their career is short lived, but
| in this day and age, with the way social media promotion works,
| too many artists compete to constantly be on trending lists,
| and that easily burns out audiences on them and their names...
| It's relatively easy to "look popular" if you dump tons of
| money into music promotion, and labels love it when an artists
| dominates online, but that also makes them flood out everyone
| else, and even more important trending topics than music at
| times.
|
| There can be a huge backlash for bought popularity, and for
| promoting yourself as more important than other vital topics
| people care about in their daily lives, as on social media,
| there is only one timeline and trending list for everything.
|
| Absence can potentially make the heart grow fonder for
| listeners towards a music artist when well timed, especially if
| every time the artist re-emerges they put out consistently
| great music projects... Modern musicians need to learn how to
| share the microphone, and social media needs to create a more
| even playing field for multiple artists to coexist in over
| time, rather than pushing just 3-7 celebrity artists all of the
| time... That's the key to longer careers in music in my
| opinion.
| agentultra wrote:
| Just do it because you love it.
|
| I know plenty of people who went for it. Had fun. Some went on to
| become programmers even when it was all over.
|
| Doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing, rise-and-fall type of
| story. Aiming for hits is a sure fire way to burn out.
|
| Even in programming, maths, making video games, films, books...
| don't compare yourself to others and don't look at the stats and
| think, why bother?
|
| As long as you're surviving and not throwing away your life or
| those lives that depend on you or care about you... just make
| music. Doesn't have to be top 40. Just make the stuff you like
| and as much of it as you want.
| bitwize wrote:
| Again, my mind goes back to that bike shop manager: "Just...
| fuckin' _ride,_ man. "
| realkiddredd wrote:
| This is kinda bullshit. He's basing everything in his "analysis"
| on having a "hit." There are many working musicians who sell
| seats and make a good living, and many stars who have toured
| their way to success without ever having a Billboard hit.
| verisimi wrote:
| I'm surprised to read so many comments that think a 'natural'
| phenomenon is being described. As with famous actors, it seems to
| me that certain faces are heavily promoted for some reason, and
| others are not. Certain people get endless publicity. The
| attention they get from the public is due to time they are gifted
| on TV, in newspapers - its not a natural phenomenon.
|
| Eg Elton John and Madonna have got some good songs, but are they
| _that_ good to merit the limelight they are given for so many
| years? And if you take anyone really, but give them access to the
| best producers and musicians etc, surely you will come up with
| lots of hits that would be associated with that act, even though
| the talent is in the group?
| bezier-curve wrote:
| I think they're talented, but they got their rise in a time
| when social mobility was generally easier. Once entrenched in
| popular culture, it becomes a matter of maintaining momentum.
| Digital music production has democratized discoverability,
| while people's attention spans remain the same.
| rob74 wrote:
| > _Throughout this analysis, I couldn 't help but wonder why
| anyone would aspire to become a mainstream music star--to achieve
| professional success that bears a near-immediate expiration
| date._
|
| I think this quote demonstrates that the author hasn't really
| understood what they're writing about. Many musicians (especially
| those that have only one hit, or even no hits at all) simply make
| music because it's what they love to do. If enough people are
| interested in them for them to be able to make a living out of
| it, that's enough "professional success" for them. That's the
| reason why many bands stay together (or artists stay active) for
| decades after they had a top 40 hit. If they were just chasing
| stardom, they would have probably given up after a few years. For
| example, this band I went to see a few weeks ago in Cologne:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INiKwU2JPF0 (the concert
| recording is not mine) - they were pretty big stars in the
| nineties with two hit albums (and a James Bond title track), then
| had two less successful ones, had a fallout with their record
| company, went on hiatus, then reformed in 2012 (with the original
| lineup!) and since then had three more albums (recorded in their
| own studio, published by their own record label) which were
| critically pretty well received, with a fourth one apparently on
| the way. Most people probably don't even know they're still
| around (or rather, around again), but as long as their loyal fans
| keep listening to their music and going to their concerts,
| they're happy...
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| Like most everything else, "success" falls under the Pareto
| Principle (aka 80/20 rule). That is, unicorns are rare and most
| are (naturally) bunched around the middle of the curve.
|
| People knock one-hit wonders but that's not easy. Any band with
| longevity was at one time with only one-hit in hand.
|
| Get that "hit" (product). Figure it out from there.
| jollyllama wrote:
| By the time you play the Super Bowl half time, you're already
| past the peak.
| underlipton wrote:
| I came to the realization a bit ago that musical stardom is
| essentially a finishing school for a personal brand. Most of the
| extremely successful artists seem to use their career as a
| springboard to some other venture; your time touring and putting
| out albums is more about networking and showing that you're
| dynamic, poised, attractive, etc. Basically, that you're
| qualified to be the "face" of something else. If you don't seize
| that once-in-a-lifetime marketing opportunity... Well, it's once-
| in-a-lifetime. You should essentially have some plan ready to go
| the moment you realize your name is on everyone's lips. Fashion
| partnership, acting gig, merchandising deal, something.
| cmpalmer52 wrote:
| A friend of mine is a wonderful musician who never "made it", but
| continues to play bars and restaurants and small venues weekly,
| as he has for 30+ years. He's done some session work as well.
|
| Another friend said he feels bad for him because he never lucked
| into greater fame, but he's too good to give it up.
|
| As long as he's happy performing, I don't see this as a bad
| thing. I can go see him perform regularly, he seems happy, he has
| a dedicated local following.
| PepperdineG wrote:
| I watched The Beach Boys live at county fair a few years ago,
| which it was the official band but basically a cover band since
| most of the originals had moved on or passed on. The main
| headliner Beach Boy actually talked about why he was still on
| tour, like he mentioned that he drove a Bentley...he wanted to
| maintain the style of living that he had become accustomed to.
|
| Certain musicians/bands can be even more successful even if
| they're not at the top of the charts anymore, like multiple bands
| make more money now on tour than they did when they charted. I
| kind of disagree with the premise due to this in that you can be
| more successful not charting new songs, but touring with past
| hits to your now more-affluent fan base. The Rolling Stones for
| instance have a lifetime tour gross of over $2B. I think it's
| like the ultimate musician longevity plan where if you have one
| or more iconic songs that are part of culture, you can make a
| good living touring for as long as you're willing and able to
| tour, perhaps even making more touring your hits than when you
| were charting.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-09 23:02 UTC)