Registered user login:

Mad about the music

Adrian Molloy

Published 04 December 2008

Observations on digital technology

Recently, at a dinner, I found myself talking in very measured tones to a certain species of music fan (well, music bore, actually) that I had thought was long since extinct. I was trying to explain why I thought we were living through the best time in history to be a music fan.

The person next to me was full of stories of how he and his friends used to rip the cellophane from their vinyl records and of how, as he put it, he loved "lowering the needle carefully on to the record". I understood, really I did, because that was what I used to enjoy doing as well. Only recently, I took delivery of the most gorgeous vinyl box set, complete with four discs, beautifully printed booklet and tactile embossed cardboard box.

I don't have a record player any more, but I do still love the artefact and the artistry of the old vinyl records. But the point I was trying to make during my conversation was that the younger music fans of today are just as obsessed as any music fans were before them. He profoundly disagreed.

Digital technology has liberated the music fan: today, you can stand on the shoulders of giants and pick through the entire history of recorded music at the click of a button. The kind of information that once could only be gathered by trawling through magazines and album credits, as well as hours and hours of hard listening, can now be achieved in an afternoon spent following links on the internet.

Nor has music ever been as accessible as it is now. Music fans can lose days, weeks and months, as I have, tracing the development of their latest heroes back to their heroes' heroes, and their heroes' great heroes. For the so-called heritage artists, this is the lifeline that enables their back catalogue to be discovered by a new, worldwide generation of listeners; the astonishing recent success of the mighty AC/DC in India and elsewhere is a great example of that.

Music is more readily available whenever, wherever and however you want it. The younger generation makes full use of technology (MSN, email, webcams, YouTube, MySpace and so on) to connect with others who share the same tastes, to argue about which is the best track on a particular album and, of course, to dissect every nuance of every statement issued by favourite bands in interviews or on forums and message boards.

Try, for instance, keying the name of your favourite band into the search box of any of the following sites: http://www.last.fm, http://www.hypem.com or http://www.youtube.com. What you will find is an endless resource of streaming music that you can listen to (in amazingly good quality more often than not) of both new and old artists. What you'll also find is that music fans are more informed and opinionated than they have ever been, and all the better for that.

Adrian Molloy manages recording artists

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

3 comments from readers

jhn
04 December 2008 at 16:32

I'm a younger music fan. We value physical

recordings less, but music as much as anyone. The

caveat is we have more music, so sometimes we may

know individual tracks less.

I have a digital collection that is equivalent to 30,000

albums; I've listened to all of them. When you have

only a few hundred albums, you may know each of

them more deeply.

Some older music fans are fans of *records*, not of

music. This is like being a book fan, rather than a

reading fan. A common affliction but not one to brag

about.

(I'm actually both: I tend to buy my very favorite

albums on vinyl. It's physical copies of digital media

that are totally worthless; analog media tends to have

unique, tactile qualities that I value.)

username exempt
04 December 2008 at 21:28

The author inanely enthuses about having easy access to music as if

that was ever a problem or all that ever mattered anyway.

The point is: easy access to WHAT exactly?

Answer: 'online digital files representing sound (for downloading or

streaming) containing data which typically employs drastic lossy

(degrading) data compression'

This is a good thing?

What's great about having 10 squillion songs on your iPod if they all

have degraded sound quality ranging from 'attrocious' to 'unlistenable'?

mp3 is (for the music fan) a huge step DOWN in terms of fidelity

compared to CD's, tapes and vinyl. It sounds thin, papery, brittle, dry,

one dimensional and is fatiguing to listen to. It is the music equivalent of

compressing digital images to a lower resolution (eg for emailing, or

avatar use).

This has several effects including:

Older music originally on vinyl/ tape/ CD is often too sophisticated, too

sonically rich to sound good as mp3. eg Most of the amazing music of

the 60's, 70's and all orchestral music sounds rubbish as mp3. Young

people (and older ones who forget) simply DON"T KNOW what hi fidelity

music can sound like.

Mp3's poor quality and inability to represent complex, full arrangements

and sophisticated sonic textures has in part driven musicians away from

'musical' music and has encouraged them to write more simplistic,

'obvious' music. This is like a photographer composing a shot

specifically for a low res, pixilated image.

The whole emphasis of 'music' now has shifted even further towards

marketing shocking celeb behavior, image, ego, soft porn videos, as

well as media players, ringtones, sharing, rating your music etc THAT is

where all the buzz is to get people interested - REASON? the medium is

now of such unpleasurable quality and the music equally bland.

Music is now about having a fast food takeaway on every corner and

was once about searching for great restaurants and savoring their fine

food. THAT was what the music fan was nostalgic for.

gtr
16 December 2008 at 16:40

Right on exempt!

I teach guitar and because of mp3 some don't know who the artist is, what album it's from(they might not even know this word), or even the title.

They only nitpick crud songs instead of listening to an entire album so 'artists' put out horrible 'albums' with 2 'hit' tracks that are annoying in their trite catchiness.

they've never heard a vinvyl record. They aren't aware of sonority. Their ears are terrible...

Mp3 is convenient, more accessible but lower quality: sublety doesn't work when the sound is weakened...

etc.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Should the international community intervene in Gaza?