Check out the entire article (I'm just pasting some of it)
https://tedgioia.substack.com/p/is-old-music-killing-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)

What this suggests to me is that the music industry is no longer focusing on new music. This makes it an order of magnitude more difficult for new bands and artists to succeed on the terms of successful artists of earlier generations (60s to 90s) - celebrity, fabulous wealth, being able to make a living out of being in a band, etc.

Edited by Mascodagama - January 23 2022 at 14:05

Mascodagama wrote: What this suggests to me is that the music industry is no longer focusing on new music. This makes it an order of magnitude more difficult for new bands and artists to succeed on the terms of successful artists of earlier generations (60s to 90s) - celebrity, fabulous wealth, being able to make a living out of being in a band, etc. It's not the case, based on my observations, that this means new music is dying. I think it is actually flourishing, but outside the ecosystem of major labels and publishers. My tastes are fairly esoteric but I could easily name dozens of new or newish artists who are releasing superb music within the niches I follow, and I'm discovering new ones all the time. These people are releasing their music via Bandcamp and/or niche labels covering specialised interests. They are never going to get rich and famous by doing it - I think the days when someone like Frank Zappa would end up with a Rolls Royce and a mansion are definitively over - but they're doing what they love. And if you're not going to make much money regardless, there's little incentive to compromise your vision due to commercial considerations - you may as well follow your muse wherever it may take you. Don't get me wrong, I would love it if more musicians - especially in the kind of marginal genres I follow - could live from their art. I suspect that where that is possible at all now it usually involves a frenetic lifestyle of juggling multiple projects, sessions, teaching. But the heartwarming thing is that this isn't stopping talented people making great new music. And the Internet is letting those people find an audience that transcends national barriers, even if it's rarely a large one.

I listen to more new music now in my late fifties than I ever did in my teens or twenties.

I'm an old guy and I listen to a lot of new jazz and RnB, also new music that mixes jazz, electronica and RnB all together, lots of modern ambient jazzy stuff etc.

Why Is New Music Dying?

MortSahlFan wrote: Check out the entire article (I'm just pasting some of it) https://tedgioia.substack.com/p/is-old-music-killing-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.

Atavachron wrote: ^ Yeah not exactly a pillar of musicologic philosophy.

Happily I’ve read enough of his commentary elsewhere to know what he is without wasting further time watching the video - i.e. a massively entitled ignoramous who lives with his head up his arse. A shame, as he can certainly afford a nice view.

siLLy puPPy wrote: Nah, he's wrong. He was in The Eagles and enjoyed great success. MOST bands from the 70s, 80s and 90s experienced ZERO success. The old game was ALL or NOTHING. The new paradigm means that any given artist can make a decent living selling LESS music. There are plenty of modern bands doing quite well. He's saying all modern music is mindless crap with programmed drums. He's totally out of touch. All you have to do is check out the top albums of 2021 on RYM and see there are THOUSANDS of ratings for many albums that sold crap loads. Maybe not millions but an independent artist makes ALL the $$$. https://rateyourmusic.com/charts/top/album/2021/incl:live,archival/