Comments on: Are Heritage Acts the Bed Blockers of Music?

By: Tim Hall

Tim Hall — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:33:59 +0000

You can never predict what will and won’t stand the test of time; what has survived from previous eras isn’t the stuff that might have been expected. Who would have thought some of the cheesiest disco records would age better than earnest singer-songwriters from the same era.

You can make educated guesses, though. It’s unlikely that anything highly derivative will last, because future generations will just skip the pastiche and go back to the originals. There are a few current prog bands I could name there…

By: David Meadows

David Meadows — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 12:56:50 +0000

Yes that’s a valid question too. Though it also leads to the elitist conclusion that classical music is inherently the best music there is. (A false conclusion: it’s simply that it’s old enough to have proven itself. Let’s give pop another two generations and see what is being listened to.)

By: Tim Hall

Tim Hall — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 12:11:53 +0000

You could turn that argument on its head too. Is any music that appeals exclusively to one and only one generation really any good?

By: David Meadows

David Meadows — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:46:45 +0000

Let me turn the situation around:

Why are so many new bands choosing to appeal to “heritage fans”?

New bands should be chasing new audiences, not trying to steal old audiences. The Rolling Stones didn’t become huge by appealing to Vera Lynne’s fans, they did it by appealing to the potential fanbase who wouldn’t give their parents’ music the time of day.

So if you don’t want to compete with the Rolling Stones, play something that doesn’t sound like the Rolling Stones.

Ironically, the bands we dismiss as bubblegum pop understand this better than the bands we label “progressive”. Notice how it’s a fan of “progressive” music that is raising the question? Fans of Bieber or Beyonce [or substitute trendy pop act of the moment] aren’t wondering why people are going to see heritage acts instead of their idols. Because their idols are playing music that appeals to fresh audiences, not heritage audiences.

By: Synthetase

Synthetase — Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:21:01 +0000

I would suggest it’s more likely to be the latter rather than the former. Surely most of the money hoovering is done to baby boomers who wouldn’t have otherwise gone out to a gig played by anyone born after 1975?