Check out the entire article (I'm just pasting some of it)
https://tedgioia.substack.com/p/is-o...ling-new-music
All the growth in the market is coming from old songs. 200 most popular tracks now account for less than 5% of total streams.
Consider these other trends:
The hottest area of investment in the music business is old songs—with investment firms getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen, etc.)—if not already dead (David Bowie, James Brown, etc.).
Even major record labels are participating in the shift, with Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others buying up publishing catalogs—investing huge sums in old tunes that, in an earlier day, would have been used to launch new artists.
The hottest technology in music is a format that is more than 70 years old, the vinyl LP. There’s no sign that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research & development to revitalize their businesses, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier day, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015—with the result that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and deepfake music—making it all the harder for a young, living artist to compete in the marketplace.
I'd like to add that it's worse than the numbers show
Many older people don't use streaming to listen to music. I talk to a LOT of people (just like here), and many still play their records, and others I know took their CDs and burned/digitized them into mp3's (some flac) so they can move them wherever and never have to purchase them again.
Simple answer: 60/70s > last 40 years, and it's no contest....
People can accidentally come across any kind of music on YouTube, and even the young people aren't going to deprive themselves of pleasure, despite the dumb pejoratives, like calling a 22-yr old a "dinosaur" (which happened today)
https://tedgioia.substack.com/p/is-o...ling-new-music
All the growth in the market is coming from old songs. 200 most popular tracks now account for less than 5% of total streams.
Consider these other trends:
The hottest area of investment in the music business is old songs—with investment firms getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen, etc.)—if not already dead (David Bowie, James Brown, etc.).
Even major record labels are participating in the shift, with Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others buying up publishing catalogs—investing huge sums in old tunes that, in an earlier day, would have been used to launch new artists.
The hottest technology in music is a format that is more than 70 years old, the vinyl LP. There’s no sign that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research & development to revitalize their businesses, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier day, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015—with the result that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and deepfake music—making it all the harder for a young, living artist to compete in the marketplace.
I'd like to add that it's worse than the numbers show
Many older people don't use streaming to listen to music. I talk to a LOT of people (just like here), and many still play their records, and others I know took their CDs and burned/digitized them into mp3's (some flac) so they can move them wherever and never have to purchase them again.
Simple answer: 60/70s > last 40 years, and it's no contest....
People can accidentally come across any kind of music on YouTube, and even the young people aren't going to deprive themselves of pleasure, despite the dumb pejoratives, like calling a 22-yr old a "dinosaur" (which happened today)
__________________
https://www.youtube.com/c/LoyalOpposition
https://www.youtube.com/c/LoyalOpposition