Why Music Still Needs the Underground
Posted on 02. Oct, 2009 by refe in MUSIC INDUSTRY
Death Cab for Cutie
The other day I was listening to one of the college radio stations here in Chicago and heard an old Death Cab for Cutie track. The song took me on a brief time warp back a few years to when the only people who knew that name were the indie-kids who accidentally stumbled on the band in some dimly-lit venue in Seattle. I remember how big a deal it was when they went on tour with Pedro the Lion. The big time!
That all changed of course when the eardrums of an entire generation of teeny-boppers were invaded by Benjamin Gibbard’s distinctive croon. Death Cab was propelled from localized indie-rock esteem to international stardom. The album peaked at 95 on the Billboard 200 and was certified Gold shortly thereafter.
The success of Transatlanticism sparked an avalanche of indie-rock favorites showing up on popular TV shows and movies. Bands like the Shins were relative unknowns until their music was featured in the film Garden State. Music directors suddenly became some of the most influential new tastemakers in town.
The ‘Lateralization’ of Market Cycles
TV wasn’t the originator of this mass migration of underground music to the mainstream – Death Cab and the others were simply riding a cycle that has been around since the advent of rock and roll. A new scene pops up locally, gains traction regionally and eventually has the potential to blossom into a national trend. When a popular TV show suddenly declares something cool that was previously just for indie kids or geeks, that can be enough to tip the scales and complete the cycle. The national trend that began in some faceless kid’s garage is the new mainstream.
Of course, at the end of the cycle a void is left in the underground. Some new sound or style has to emerge to provide an alternative to mainstream music and culture. Historically that has always happened pretty quickly. Look at the electro movement of the early 00’s.
Market cycles like this tend to follow distribution cycles. The faster that new albums are produced, manufactured and released the faster a particular flavor of music is likely to reach maximum exposure and grow stale.
In the digital age the distribution cycle of music has been flattened. Little Jimmy can stream a cool album on Last.fm, record something just like it, and release his new-ish creation unto the world in a matter of weeks. Multiply that by the number of artists and would-be artists with access to cheap recording software and you can probably see where I’m going with this.
The Freelance Whales
The flattening of music’s distribution cycle has created an environment where new sounds and styles come and go much more quickly than ever before. For example, I was stoked a couple of weeks ago to discover a promising unsigned band called Freelance Whales only to read yesterday that they are already one of Stereogum’s ‘Bands to Watch!’
“Trends aren’t transmitted hierarchically, as they used to be,” explained Martin Raymond, co-founder of The Future Laboratory, in a recent interview with the Independent. “They’re now transmitted laterally and collaboratively via the internet. You once had a series of gatekeepers in the adoption of a trend: the innovator, the early adopter, the late adopter, the early mainstream, the late mainstream, and finally the conservative. But now it goes straight from the innovator to the mainstream.”
What does this mean for underground music?
Well, it means that there isn’t any, really. Everybody knows everything everyone else knows, thanks to the real-time web and social media platforms like Twitter. To quote the Independent article again, “If a global scenester starts wearing their underpants around their neck in Sao Paolo tomorrow, by next week boxer shorts would be sold out in Berlin.”
I can see two possible side effects of the obsoletion of the underground. The ‘laterilization’ of trends may force more frequent innovations. In order to stay ahead of the curve artists will have to operate in a constant state of mold-breaking and envelope pushing. These innovations will likely be incremental – even marginal at times – but consistent.
Alternately, innovation may actually be stifled by the constant and almost instantaneous recycling of previous musical styles and trends. We’re already seeing this quite a bit. Instead of coming up with something truly new or groundbreaking, artists will take a little from here, a little from there and pass it off as fresh and new.
There’s a fine line between incremental innovation and “pick-and-mix” recycling, but I would argue that the latter is a poor substitute for the former. Real innovation – however minor – represents progress. Recycling by nature represents a gradual degradation of meaning, perhaps even leading eventually to regression.
Can the underground be stopped?
It remains to be seen if the internet will be enough to kill underground music or render it obsolete. I’m hopeful that it won’t. I believe that it’s in the nature of an artist to look for alternatives. There will always be those who want more than the status quo, even if it’s a constantly moving target. The same dissatisfaction that led Kurt Cobain to reject the theatrical hair-bands of the 80’s will eventually lead us to something new again.
Of course, that doesn’t mean we can simply sit still and wait for someone else to do it for us.
What do you think? Does music need an underground or is the underground already dead?
19 Responses to “Why Music Still Needs the Underground”
Leave a Reply
 |
 |
-
The Lower Class Musician
-
Fan Participation and the Democratization of Music
-
Music and Tech Recap - February 2010 Edition
-
State of the Music Business at the Millennium Music Conference
-
wesbnkkmuzik: The list is just great help to indie artist, thank...
-
Gabriel Nijmeh: Thanks Refe... it is tough keeping up with the mas...
-
-
refe: Great recap Gabe. Love the overview of new music s...
-
Suzanne Lainson: I see a few musicians who excel across a variety o...
-
-
Nick Piggott: I'm one of the project co-ordinators of RadioDNS, ...
Tweets that mention Why Music Still Needs the Underground | creative deconstruction -- Topsy.com
02. Oct, 2009
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Shukmei (WeRoqq PR). Shukmei (WeRoqq PR) said: RT @refeup: Why music still needs the underground http://bit.ly/FpdtD #indie [nice article] [...]
Jeff Deibel
02. Oct, 2009
The underground is an intrinsic part of the music ecosystem and every action within the ecosystem, whether positive or negative, directly affects the well-being of the whole.
As every great hero needs a villain of equal strength to remain relevant, the underground music scene needs a thriving mainstream to survive. This symbiotic relationship brings to point one question. How can something be underground if the parameters that dictate the mainstream are obfuscated?
The way new music reaches the masses has dramatically changed mediums and speed, which creates a level of chaos throughout the ecosystem. While this transition takes place, the underground is left waiting in limbo for the mainstream to find a new home.
The underground, weakened in the time being, will flourish when a new set of norms are created. As long as music doesn’t meet its demise, the underground will always survive.
refe
02. Oct, 2009
I love your heroes and villans illustration! You’re right – one could just as easily flip this around and ask the question – “Is the mainstream dead?” The line has blurred significantly between the two, and right now both are being transformed by digital innovation in ways we are likely not even aware of yet.
Andre
02. Oct, 2009
Refe!
I liked this article!
I think the underground scene is still alive and well in that there are a lot of types of music that just won’t ever be accepted by the mainstream. (Sometimes maybe that’s because the music is genuinely bad, but I don’t think that’s always the case at all.)
That said, I do think that even that underground scene is less underground than it used to be.
This is is something that I’ve noticed and it’s sort of related but also a little off topic. It’s interesting, though:
You know how in the early nineties it was cool in the underground scene to wear thick black rimmed glasses, and now those are as mainstream as you can get? Well, for the past few years it seems like the cool thing in the underground scene is to wear thick un-stylish worker glasses, with eye guards and everything. It almost seems like the underground scene is like, “Well, if the mainstream is going to adopt our style, we’ll go a step further.” I don’t know if that’s exactly the attitude people have, but it seems like it. It’s pretty antagonistic toward the mainstream.
Anyway, I think that happens with music too. The underground will do something that is pretty antagonistic toward the mainstream, and sometimes even that trend will catch on with the mainstream at some point. Sometimes not, though.
Anyway, what I’m saying is, it will be very interesting if this whole big-clunky-worker-glasses-trend catches on in the mainstream, because it seems so antagonistic.
Anyway, sorry for going so far off topic!
Why Music Still Needs the Underground | flux-rad.com
04. Oct, 2009
[...] LINK [...]
Paul
05. Oct, 2009
Hi Refe,
I enjoyed your article and you made a lot of good points about how the internet has enabled “underground” bands to rise to the forefront and gain infinitely more recognition than they could have expected even 10 years ago, but one important thing occured to me while I was reading it.
I think it is easy in this day and age to forget that there is a “real” world going on offline – I am as guilty of this as anyone. But when I walk around my neighbourhood in Berlin I quickly realize that there is much more going on than you will ever find online. Here there are underground “clubs” (actually more like squats) with all sorts of live music from groups that don’t have even have a Myspace page never mind their own website. The majority of these would fall loosely into the punk or electrotrash categories although they probably don’t want the labels. In fact, most of them don’t want anything except to play for a few friends or like-minded people and have a good time until the early hours of the morning. They abhor anything that is remotely “commercial” and have no aspirations for financial stability through their music. These bands or artists are the true underground and they are probably not even aware of it.
I think that any band that is active online and is trying to gain recognition is not really an underground band. In the beginning the band might be forced to exist there but a few people spreading the word online is not going to get them out of there unless they really want it.
Underground music has been and will remain alive as long as there are musicians and artists out there doing it for the love of it and rejecting conventional notions of success. If we want to experience it, we will have to do a bit of searching in the back alleys of the world’s creative centers instead of relying on srobbles from last.fm
Just my two cents.
refe
05. Oct, 2009
That’s a great comment and I’m glad you brought it up. You’re right, of course – the internet does not equal culture, nor is music as an artform fully contained in it.
However, while these bands may be content to play in these underground ’squats’ that doesn’t mean that what their doing there will exclusively stay there. All it takes is for some kid to like what he hears, adopt the style and introduce it to the world.
The innovators can choose stay underground, but the sound and style may not. Many aspects of culture that began underground became mainstream to the dismay of the original innovators. The internet allows that to happen even faster.
Paul
05. Oct, 2009
Good point and you are right about these innovative sounds being essentially “taken” by other people and used in a more commercial form and made popular by proliferation through the internet.
I guess it just means we will have to be quicker and pay more attention in the real world when we do get lucky enough to find a band or artist doing something innovative and enjoy it while it lasts. But underground music will always be there if we look hard enough for it.
Zoid
05. Oct, 2009
So basically you want to be the first one to find bands and keep them a secret all to yourself, never wanting them to get any sort of fame or recognition so that they can one day move out of their parent’s house?
I see what you are trying to say here, but it just doesn’t make sense. The majority of bands, even the most ardent “indie” band, seeks a lifestyle that they can sustain, they need money, touring and spreading their sound for our benefit isn’t cheap. Yes knowing bands that nobody else has heard of has this strange appeal to it that I’ll never fully understand, but I embrace them getting recognition for their efforts, I want them to make money and continue to make music that I enjoy. I don’t buy the “things were better back then” argument either. The internet has exposed us to more music and art than ever before, it just seems that things were more underground then, when in fact it was just harder to find new stuff. I find great bands everyday that i’ve never heard of before. Case in point, I am not a selfish hipster grasping for the days of old, I can share music I find and not feel any less-cool for doing so.
refe
05. Oct, 2009
I think you may have missed the point of the article. This post is about the musical innovations that come out of the underground music scenes, and the way that the internet has effected the cycle between innovation and mainstream. Not about feeling cool.
And yes, even independent bands want to make enough to move out of their parents house.
It’s interesting that you should bring that up, actually. I just had a conversation with a band that is very wary of online buzz. They have seen too many bands get a huge wave of online press and blog love only to fizzle out shortly after.
The internet allowed these bands to reach a level of exposure that they really weren’t ready for yet. A couple of years of solid gigging were probably all that they needed, but instead they were thrust into the spotlight – headlining festivals, playing to huge audiences.
They release a second album that doesn’t live up to the hype and they’re history.
So these guys are playing it safe instead. They’re sticking to smaller venues and are considering holding off on a national tour until they get their sophomore record out of the way.
Of course, I’m not saying that promoting your new favorite band is going to hurt them. It’s not about the buzz itself, it’s about whether or not the band is able to handle it.
Links for 5th October 2009 | Velcro City Tourist Board
05. Oct, 2009
[...] Why Music Still Needs the Underground [...]
micah
07. Oct, 2009
you’re right that the democratization of distribution and marketing has levelled the playing field, but i think it’s foolish to suggest that it is anything but good. i might occasionally miss the days when i learned about new music by hanging out at my local indie record store, but i’d never consider that those days are better overall. they may have been more fun in retrospect, but i listen to a lot more music these days, and that’s good. sounds to me like you’re lamenting the loss of strong personal community, which i would agree with. people now are happy connecting and discussing things on the internet, and they’re not meeting up in person as much. that i’ll lament.
as to a possible death of the underground, disagree disagree disagree. the musical underground is not dead, you’ve just had a shallower underground (no offense). a band like death cab, which writes catchy verse-chorus-verse songs with mainstream instrumentation and skill, is merely a popular band in waiting. underground music as never about shit that you could have heard on mainstream radio anyway — you gotta move out to the fringes, where things get weird and extreme.
refe
07. Oct, 2009
If you read the last parapraph or two of the post you’ll see that my view is that there will always be an underground because there will always be artists who are dissatisfied with the homogenization of mainstream music and culture.
As for the fringes – your right, I’m really not talking about that here. Most of that stuff will never catch on because most people just don’t get “weird and extreme.”
But even the weirdest styles have a way of bleeding into more mainstream circles. Look at the punk movement. Some of the stuff they were doing and singing about and wearing were completely offensive to mainstream culture at the time. Look around now, just a few decades later. Dyed hair? Piercings? Aggressive music? That stuff is boring now.
As for your comment about the underground music I’ve experienced being somehow “shallower” than yours… I used Death Cab as an example because I figured everyone is familiar with their story. You may think that your underground music is down deep enough to be immune to these cycles, but if you just wait a few years I’d be willing to bet you’ll start to see what I’m talking about. I’d be interested to hear some examples that you’re thinking of.
micah
07. Oct, 2009
i guess it seems like we each want different things from the underground. i’m not listening to obscure music because it is obscure; i listen to it because the styles i like are not popular. if they were to become popular, then i’d be perfectly happy to turn on the radio and hear the currently-weird shit i love. and, for that matter, if the some of the out-there stuff i listen to becomes popular, then what is currently popular would become the “underground” and it would be weird and edgy to hear songs in 4/4 with guitar solos and choruses you can sing along to.
hm, yeah, i understand why you used death cab, i just never ever considered them underground.
the underground has intrinsic value as a source of rebellion and innovation, but that’s not to discount the innovation in pop music as well. i don’t think you can really compare obscure stuff with popular stuff. they come from such different places. when i first heard timbaland’s production for missy elliot, “work it” in particular (if i remember correctly), i was blown away. minimal, distorted middle eastern percussion, some acid noises, and out-of-phase sections? amazing. it was just as amazing as the first time i heard all of those same sounds from muslimgauze in 1995.
we might start to hear some of the more out-there elements of the underground drift into popular music, i.e. drones, repetition, noise, aggressive/complex rhythms, minimalism, etc. i’d love that! a minimal, droning, bleak, catchy song i could sing along to in the car? i’ll buy two! i don’t care if the mainstream co-opts aspects of my underground culture. if it’s real and done with respect, the result will be successful to me; whether or not the public approves is irrelevant. if it’s done tastelessly and to make a dollar, well, then those who were there at the beginning will recognise it for what it is and not buy it, and that ensures the separation between underground and mainstream.
also, i wouldn’t say that innovation is stifled by recycling of work. if that was the case, then hip-hop and its derivatives would have never been innovative. juxtaposition and recontextualiztion are as important as new ideas (and it’s debatable as to whether or not we’ll ever run out of those). if artists try and pass of something recycled as new and fresh, it’s the duty of the critic to point it out (if it hasn’t already been called out). in this case, i wouldn’t blame the shortcomings of a lazy listening public on the disappearance (or not) of an underground. omar s is on the nose when he says “underground music is for people that’s not lazy”*, so, you know, without a lazy listening public, we might not have an underground.
* from an interview he gave to fact magazine, their site is down now, otherwise i’d give the link.
jeff
07. Oct, 2009
you are way way off base dude, you sound old and out of touch. sorry. go to a house show in any major US city and than re-evaluate. you’re not talking about the underground, you’re talking about bands that are basically ‘marginally less mainstream than the radio’, or basically what the guy above me said in his last paragraph. death cab? really?
refe
07. Oct, 2009
You’re just being short sighted. I think my reply to micah addresses your comment as well. Even the most out-there music has a way of bleeding into the mainstream eventually.
Phoenix injury attorney/lawyer
09. Oct, 2009
Personally, I don’t like music just because it is underground or not. I usually like whatever I like regardless if it is mainstream or not. When I do find an underground band that I really like, I am happy when they become more famous as long as they don’t change their sound.
Phoenix injury attorney/lawyer
09. Oct, 2009
I personally like underground music not because it is underground but because I like the sound. When an underground band I like becomes more mainstream, I am happy for them, as long as they do not change their sound.
Chris
14. Oct, 2009
As a musician/band member, I can say its always attractive to look for the “easy” way to get new fans. That is the crutch that the internet has provided, and many bands probalby lean too heavily upon the same marketing strategy.
Don’t think the underground is dead, but the underground has to go against the grain. Now that marketing is so much in the hands of the DIY bands, perhaps it is the marketing strategy of the band that will also have to go against the grain in addition to the music in order for fans to feel that loyal long-lasting attraction to a band.