Indie Bands Struggle to get a Piece of the Pie
– In November 1965, a young up-starting group from West London, calling themselves ‘The Who’, would release their third single, “My Generation” – one of the first songs to define 60’s youth culture and a spark a new revolt against authority. It was tracks like these and bands like this once-raucous four-piece that played a significant part in the youth uprising of the 1960’s, with the song’s most quoted line , “I hope I die before I get old” an adopted maxim for pre-adult rebellion.
The Who was one of the main acts to personify this riotous revolution, taking rock ‘n’ roll to the conformity. One of their signature moments came in 1967, when they destroyed their instruments onstage after a televised performance of My Generation on the ‘Smothers Bros Comedy Hour’, a pastiche and stiff-collared CBS variety show.
But flash forward forty-odd years and their once youthful and angst-ridden fans now find themselves older than the square stereotypes of authority they despised in their heydays. Fortunately for them, The Who, along with plenty of others from the ‘ageless’ 60’s, are still performing their hits to this ever-enthused audience.
We could forgive guitarist Pete Townshend, who penned My Generation at the ripe age of twenty, for being aware of the irony of performing the song to a crowd with an average age of over fifty. But the demand is there – “They want me to pretend to continue to be pretending”, being one of the songwriter’s most famous quotes.
An equally-referenced proclamation from the ever-Rolling Stone, Mick Jagger, often resurfaces when his band announces yet another world tour. “I’d rather be dead than singing “Satisfaction” when I’m forty-five” was a stern statement once delivered by a man who is now in his sixty-seventh year and the Stones two years away from their fiftieth anniversary. And there seems to be no plans for retirement just yet (just how does Keith manage to stay vertical?).
So the rock ‘n’ roll of the 60s may have grown older, taken out the ear plugs and left the concert early to beat the traffic, but surely there’s no harm in a band (no matter how old they might be) playing to an appreciative audience, or is there?
While erstwhile rock ‘n’ roll pioneers and reunited outfits continue to fill up the musical calendar, there is significantly less space for today’s generation to have a voice of their own. For example, at the last two years of Glastonbury, the world’s biggest music festival, five out of six headliners began their careers over 20 years ago, including Neil Young and Stevie Wonder in the 60’s and a reunited Blur in 1989.
As well as the long-running groups like the Who, the Stones and U2, reunions have been coming thick and fast and for far too long – it’s nearly now a question of which band isn’t going to reform. With the more band reunions that are announced, the further we get close to scarping the barrel of one-hit wonders, acts the majority had gladly forgotten and those who deem a brief flash in the limelight licence to flog a dead horse.
Recent statistics for today’s up-and-coming bands paint a very bleak picture: In 2008, out of the steadily-dwindling album sales in the US, 227 out of 1400 acts had sold over 10,000 units for the first time. And just 12 of these acts qualified as wholly independent.
We can also take a look at the chart toppers themselves. Bar the usual Black Eyed Peas and Lady Gaga exceptions, older acts have dominated the album charts by re-releasing their back catalogue in various formats. The Stones had their first UK no. 1 for 16 years in May 2010 with the re-mastered version of ‘Exile on Main Street’; out of the scarce amount of albums to go platinum in recent times, the Beatles last three compilations (this could obviously go without saying) were part of the elite, as was Led Zeppelin’s ‘Mothership’ in 2007 and 2003’s ‘The Best of The Who’ – the list goes on.
But we have to find the real cause for the current imbalance between the old and new There are, of course, plenty of obvious and worthy reasons why older bands are still selling so well – great music will always be great music – but the industry is entirely in their favour. When you are sitting in a record executive’s chair, wondering how to make money in a continually contracting business, do you put your hopes on the risky investment of a new and unknown band or rely on the sure-sell and repackage the back catalogue of a proven and popular artist?
Gone are the days when a label’s new acquisition could be given some nurturing time – the simple matter is that even the bigger hits from larger acts cannot cover the costs of a failing investment like they used to. In the golden age of the 60’s music business times and trends were different: one of the most well-known examples of an artist to take two strikes at stardom was David Bowie, whose 1967 eponymous debut failed to chart, only to be followed up by the release of the ‘Space Oddity’ single, and huge success, two-years later.
It was also Bowie who decided to revolutionise the idea of back catalogues in the 90’s, when he sold his royalties as ‘bonds’ for a handsome sum to wealthy investors (a spearheading and influential financial move, later to be known as “securitisation” – what’s been considered one of the main causes for the recent global recession). With so much money to be made reselling the classics, it makes perfect business sense for one-time heroes to dust off their guitars and take to the road (or in cases already mentioned, not putting them down at all).
Granted this may be the general public demand, but this is a demand that is largely ignorant to what is being produced by the today’s musical talents. Labels and music executives are still stabbing in the dark within the unpredictable realm of Internet marketing. However, relying on back catalogues is not a formula for longevity.
It is hard to think of many acts from even the last fifteen years that could have a stockpile of equally-pensionable hits to keep those lofty record labels afloat – as much as they would continue to have a loyal fan-base, none have achieved a status as high as the legends of the 60s’ and 70’s. The current blueprint doesn’t benefit anyone except for the minuscule minority of arena-touring performers and the short-sighted record companies and promoters taking their cut.
If more money from this small sector were to make its way to new acts, either through labels or the artists themselves, it would result in a more sustainable industry, better marketing and, eventually, an improved and more varied product for everyone to enjoy.
This, of course, would not be a panacea for all of the industry’s current woes, but it could give a new perspective, help rediscover the excitement that great bands of the 60’s created (what so many fans are crying out for) or indeed return some much-needed kudos for over-inflated artists.
Either way, the majority of young and active music lovers are beyond-tired with the endless procession of reunions and geriatric performers. Only the older generation is buying what’s already been sold and it is only a matter of time before this back-catalogue bubble will burst.
Conor O’Brien
