Equipment hire, business idea advice needed.

[Drew Stephenson]

but all I can think of is that he gives people what they want, sometimes all they want is a bit of uncomplicated fun and something that's not difficult to appreciate, and is a whole family experience.

Isn't that pretty much the definition of pop music?

[CS70]

there may be the same number listening but they are listening less and doing more video games, streaming, and other diversions.

overall i still say there is less listening going on and certainly less listening/amount_of_'music' now being created.

Both of those things may be true.

It's very interesting to see how kids consume music nowadays with respect to the way we did back in the 80s).

First of all, they start listening to "grown up" music earlier. Due to smartphones, pads and streaming, kids jump in the "regular pop music" bandwagon much earlier.. they can man the control very easily (my 4 years old knows how to start and stop Spotify and YouTube, even if his skills in searching is, obviously, limited by the fact he can't yet read ). My 11 years old twin step-daughters have been dancing to r&b tunes for at least 4 years. And it gets easier and easier.

They still do love certain songs (said twins can sing some of these horrible pop pastiches by memory, even if truth be said what lyrics there are, are few and very simple) - but less so artists.

Long gone are radio and television: they steer what they listen to - and that's a major difference. The odds of discovering something new by random listening are very small - all listening is driven by social and peer advice and what you know. Just like in politics, it's far easier to be insular.

They absolutely listen to singles (or short pieces of singles). Albums aren't really even a concept. A song is a song, and you have a pool to listen from and you pick up from them. It so happens that they may like many songs from the same artist but it's just accidental.

Again, differently from radio, tv, tapes and vinyl - and even cds - often they listen to parts of songs, as it's incredibly easy and instantaneous to navigate. 20 seconds and on to the next. While part of this depends a bit on age (a bit older people, in their late teens and twenties tend to listen to songs a little longer) it's still present. Just have a look at young people on the subway and how often they operate their phones while listening on buds.
Imho it's not that they have short attention span: it's simply that the controls are much easier to operate and allow them to do what we wanted to, but couldn't.

Long, long gone is the hi-fi culture. It's never been really a thing for young people (whatever hifi was there, was usually dad's) but now it's really not an issue at all outside a very small niche. At most you get a nice mono bluetooth speaker which looks cool and has hipster factor, and that's as far as it goes. Vinyl is again most a hipster-y thing - to show you are different and above the mass and cool - but is still quite niche.

Of course, the social factor is still a major driver: if all friends like some artist, they will try and listen and probably like it. But it was always thus I think, nothing changes. The difference is that, since it's far less likely that you discover random music, social and word of mouth has becoming much more important than ever. If you have a litlle marketing money, use it in social-related stuff.

I also feel that there's less of the obsessive listening that we did.. by 13-14, both me and my friends were really into certain bands and albums and we were listening on repeat (or playing over, in my case) for hours. I suspect the immediate availability of immense music catalogs makes that less likely. Not sure about the 4 years old tough - these days, he could listen to "I'm blue" on repeat for hours

Video is more important than ever. YouTube and the phone/ipad screen is a major force, and visual content of some kind is paramount. This started already in our times with MTV etc but now it's become really fundamental. Without a video, a song does not exist. And it's not so crazy important that the video is amazing - only that it exists. Young people watch songs. An unintended consequences is that looks, which always were a factor, are even more important now. Not necessary good looks, but distinctive ones.

Quality is still important. Obviously people's tastes vary a lot, so it's all in over-general terms, but these kids are not acritical: they like good stuff - only it's what they consider good stuff, and it's different from what we did. Mostly, things must have a groove and be danceable to a degree. Since the standard four on the floor kick beat has become so enormously widespread (not that it was uncommon before), anything that doesn't have it is strange.. and strange can be either crap (often that's the result, they're humans after all) or wonderful. Which one it becomes depends, again, on social pressure. That said they love and swallow copycat music just as much as we did, only now it's hip hop and EDM instead of pop and rock.

As of sound quality, people don't give a damn just as they never did. A few may think they do (the ones manning vinyls, often) but in general they have zero clue of what really it is.

So the recipes for getting attention are a consequence: make good music (aka music that most people like); decide to go for copycat or try something very different knowing it may be a total flop; find out how to trigger the social/word of mouth aspect any way you can; always make video productions at some level.

[Arpangel]

So the recipes for getting attention are a consequence: make good music (aka music that most people like); decide to go for copycat or try something very different knowing it may be a total flop; find out how to trigger the social/word of mouth aspect any way you can; always make video productions at some level.

Andre Rieu doesn't even play his own music, he plays other people's music that people like.
On a smaller scale...bring on the pub covers band, you'll be able to make a "reasonable living" in the right area playing in one of those if you're good.
I've known a few very successful alternative musicians in my life, that have broken through to the pop scene, they have amazing ideas, that are quite traditional in terms of structure, but they always put a spin on them, just enough so that you are thrown a bit and can't trace the ancestory or influences. Go round to the house there will be records by Can, Soft Machine, Errol Garner, John Cage. Miles etc, all sorts, lots of them.
I've always been useless at all this stuff, I just do what I do, but then again, I think I may have made about £25 from my music in my entire life!

[CS70]

Andre Rieu doesn't even play his own music, he plays other people's music that people like.
On a smaller scale...bring on the pub covers band, you'll be able to make a "reasonable living" in the right area playing in one of those if you're good.

Oh yes, making money from covers is easier - pubs, weddings, events etc and if you make a little effort in a few months you get a following the old fashioned way, playing gigs.

What i was writing of was more about new music.

[Arpangel]

Andre Rieu doesn't even play his own music, he plays other people's music that people like.
On a smaller scale...bring on the pub covers band, you'll be able to make a "reasonable living" in the right area playing in one of those if you're good.

Oh yes, making money from covers is easier - pubs, weddings, events etc and if you make a little effort in a few months you get a following the old fashioned way, playing gigs.

What i was writing of was more about new music.

New music, I wouldn't know where to start, even giving advice.
I still think that a combination of talent (real ability) virtuosity, absolutely amazing ideas, and a bit of the old Victorian music hall novelty act will win through in the end.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8_xaSom3Lro

[hobbyist]

there may be the same number listening but they are listening less and doing more video games, streaming, and other diversions.
overall i still say there is less listening going on and certainly less listening/amount_of_'music' now being created.

Both of those things may be true.

It's very interesting to see how kids consume music nowadays with respect to the way we did back in the 80s).

Long gone are radio and television: they steer what they listen to - and that's a major difference. The odds of discovering something new by random listening are very small - all listening is driven by social and peer advice and what you know. Just like in politics, it's far easier to be insular.

Long, long gone is the hi-fi culture. It's never been really a thing for young people (whatever hifi was there, was usually dad's) but now it's really not an issue at all outside a very small niche.

Of course, the social factor is still a major driver: if all friends like some artist, they will try and listen and probably like it. But it was always thus I think, nothing changes. The difference is that, since it's far less likely that you discover random music, social and word of mouth has becoming much more important than ever. If you have a litlle marketing money, use it in social-related stuff.

Video is more important than ever. YouTube and the phone/ipad screen is a major force, and visual content of some kind is paramount.

Quality is still important.

As of sound quality, people don't give a damn just as they never did.

Yes. Things are different now.

As to 'quality', that is very subjective. I see nothing but piles of poop covering up a very rare gem that is buried in the noise and not worth my effort to hunt for.

That goes for most videos too. Poorly done. Most of them unwatchable by me.

As to sound quality now they seem to be happy with low fi MP3s. All they care about is loud, thumping bass, and screaming lyrics. And many are deaf having had earbuds stuffed in their ears for too long with the volume set on max.

For me I will replay my Bach CDs.

[MOF]

And we'd still never quite, quite finish that mix properly!

How do you know so much about me?

[CS70]

As to 'quality', that is very subjective. I see nothing but piles of poop covering up a very rare gem that is buried in the noise and not worth my effort to hunt for.

'fraid that says more about you then them

That goes for most videos too. Poorly done. Most of them unwatchable by me.

Well, it's the same as for audio: technically now it's possible to make amazing quality video for a pittance - compared to just ten years ago. Of course, as for audio, that means little if you don't like the content.. and that's the matter: younger people like different stuff. You (or I) simply are not the target. As you say, it's subjective - and for them a lot of stuff we like is plain boring. Nothing new under the sun..

As to sound quality now they seem to be happy with low fi MP3s. All they care about is loud, thumping bass, and screaming lyrics. And many are deaf having had earbuds stuffed in their ears for too long with the volume set on max.

Well, don't know you - but when I was a kid we didn't have an hifi home, so no vinly, fancy speakers and amplifiers, and hardly could afford to buy original cassettes, so most of the music I listened to was from home-made duplicates made by friends. And lots of that was heard on a crappy mono player. Being cassettes what they are, the quality was technically awful.

And you know what? I couldn't care less. That music was speaking to me (and all the circle of friends) completely irrelevant of the audio quality. I suspect things aren't that different now.

I'd even say that audio quality is something for people whose primary interest is not the music.

It's perfectly possible to nail the commercial market - just as it always was - by doing a combination of what you like and what the market likes.

[Arpangel]

I'd even say that audio quality is something for people whose primary interest is not the music. :-

Correct, I've come across more than one "audiophile" that only buys recordings based on technical quallity.
Beethovens 5th or the Velvet Underground's Sunday Morning move me emotionally perfectly fine through a laptop speaker, no amount of fidelity could ad anything more.

[BigRedX]

Well, don't know you - but when I was a kid we didn't have an hifi home, so no vinly, fancy speakers and amplifiers, and hardly could afford to buy original cassettes, so most of the music I listened to was from home-made duplicates made by friends. And lots of that was heard on a crappy mono player. Being cassettes what they are, the quality was technically awful.

And you know what? I couldn't care less. That music was speaking to me (and all the circle of friends) completely irrelevant of the audio quality. I suspect things aren't that different now.

I'd even say that audio quality is something for people whose primary interest is not the music.

It's perfectly possible to nail the commercial market - just as it always was - by doing a combination of what you like and what the market likes.

I couldn't agree more.

My parents weren't very interested in listening to music and for a long time my music playback devices was a Dansette which cost me £8 from a local junk shop and played one channel of my stereo records much louder than the other, a factor that turned stereo mixes of some 60s records into instrumentals, and hid large parts of the arrangement on others.

None of that spoiled my enjoyment of the MUSIC.

[Rich Hanson]

I'd even say that audio quality is something for people whose primary interest is not the music. :-

Correct, I've come across more than one "audiophile" that only buys recordings based on technical quallity.
Beethovens 5th or the Velvet Underground's Sunday Morning move me emotionally perfectly fine through a laptop speaker, no amount of fidelity could ad anything more.

I think Flanders & Swann nailed that back in 1957

I've an opera here that you shan't escape
On miles and miles of recording tape
High decibel gain
Is easy to obtain
With the tone control at a single touch
'Bel Canto' sounds like double dutch
Then I never did care for music much
It's the High Fidelity

[Arpangel]

Slight diversion into old record players, my first was an HMV mono valve player, similar to a Dansette, then I got a Van Der Molen stereo unit with a Garrard 2025TC auto changer, I actually think that was a step down from the HMV. The best I ever had at that time was an inherited Philco valve radiogram, that thing sounded so good it was beyond. It was massive, with 10 inch speakers and a powerful valve amp, at the time it was magical to listen to.
When I started work the first "proper" stereo I got was a Leak Stereo 30, a Garrard SP25, with a pair of home made speakers, using 10 inch Wharfedale dual concentrics in rather eccentric upward firing cabinets of my own design, they were weird but amazing!
Fantastic room filling stereo, and megga deep bass!

[Dr Huge Longjohns]

I couldn't agree more.

Me too. For people who love music it's always been about the material and the performance, not the equipment you listen to it on. Or the equipment you record it on, for that matter.

[Studio Support Gnome]

There's reason I now have a day job .... Indeed I have done so for about 3 years now.... (it's actually been two jobs, one after the other.... the first in hard core electronics , working for manufacturer of high end electronics component test equipment, for 18 months, building their tech support and sales support , from nothing but me, to a team of people in three offices around the globe, and now, for the last 18 months, quite a left field unexpected departure into ventilation and heat recovery design engineering.... as a senior engineer in the technical support and design department.

amazing what one can do with a bit of skill , experience, and knowledge, (and having studied Engineering and Physics )

finally, people actually want to pay me..... decent(ish) money, regularly, and without fuss.... I even get performance related bonuses.... and they're worth having..... coz I perform well....

I doubt anyone would argue that I didn't know what i was doing in audio, or that there was any lack of quality in any of my work... or that i didn't have a seriously over active work ethic.....

but after nigh on 30 years , i just had enough of having to work my nuts off, and compete with the blokes who read my own damn forum posts, and then undercut me on jobs.... and did a poor job.... which occasionally I found myself having to kludge up a fix for... which was never fun...

and of musicians who don't like paying their bills.

or production companies and labels who expect you to work all hours, and deliver the impossible, for no money, a week last tuesday, all gift wrapped and delivered with the moon on a stick thrown in as a good will gesture, and then take 90 days to pay, assuming they ever do...

I still consult , for existing (good) customers, friends and relatives, .... or on personal recommendation/request for their close contacts ../... but do this for a living ?? no.... I actually want to make a living...

and you know what.... I am, and I'm enjoying it....

[Arpangel]

There's reason I now have a day job .... Indeed I have done so for about 3 years now.... (it's actually been two jobs, one after the other.... the first in hard core electronics , working for manufacturer of high end electronics component test equipment, for 18 months, building their tech support and sales support , from nothing but me, to a team of people in three offices around the globe, and now, for the last 18 months, quite a left field unexpected departure into ventilation and heat recovery design engineering.... as a senior engineer in the technical support and design department.

amazing what one can do with a bit of skill , experience, and knowledge, (and having studied Engineering and Physics )

finally, people actually want to pay me..... decent(ish) money, regularly, and without fuss.... I even get performance related bonuses.... and they're worth having..... coz I perform well....

I doubt anyone would argue that I didn't know what i was doing in audio, or that there was any lack of quality in any of my work... or that i didn't have a seriously over active work ethic.....

but after nigh on 30 years , i just had enough of having to work my nuts off, and compete with the blokes who read my own damn forum posts, and then undercut me on jobs.... and did a poor job.... which occasionally I found myself having to kludge up a fix for... which was never fun...

and of musicians who don't like paying their bills.

or production companies and labels who expect you to work all hours, and deliver the impossible, for no money, a week last tuesday, all gift wrapped and delivered with the moon on a stick thrown in as a good will gesture, and then take 90 days to pay, assuming they ever do...

I still consult , for existing (good) customers, friends and relatives, .... or on personal recommendation/request for their close contacts ../... but do this for a living ?? no.... I actually want to make a living...

and you know what.... I am, and I'm enjoying it....

Interesting what you say here, I do feel, from hearing other people's comments, and attitudes, that there is a feeling that anything to do with creative pursuits, in audio/recording or any other artistic field is somehow not of any real "value" anymore and therefore you should be grateful I'm giving you something to do, let alone pay you.
It's not a healthy climate, for the arts in general, there is so much activity that they've become devalued, and that goes for audio hardware and engineering too, high end equipment is facing stiff competition from Chinese made copies, not only in hi-fI, but it's been happening in recording for decades now.
Once upon a time a career path in engineering was quite easy, and obvious providing you had the ability, go to university, a good one, study maths and physics, get a good degree ad look for a job! I can rember when a friend did exactly this in the 70's, he was offered a few jobs on graduation, Ferranti, BBC, he went abroad and had a series of good well paid jobs in the USA, but he just followed a formula, just like lots of others did. Maybe it's a lot more complicated now though.

[Drew Stephenson]

The music industry, like a lot of others, is going through a massive disruption at the moment. Old models are failing and new ones are still developing. It'll take a while but a raft of new models will emerge and for a certain audience there will be people who value quality and are willing to pay for it.
The industry will need to recognise that it is no longer the biggest fish in the pond though and adapt accordingly.
It'll take a while but i'm fairly positive that new approaches will arise once we stop trying to fix everything with outdated solutions.

[Arpangel]

It'll take a while but i'm fairly positive that new approaches will arise once we stop trying to fix everything with outdated solutions.

Very true, and be prepared to have everything you've learned turned on its head as those who achieve great things do so in ways we never imagined.

[Drew Stephenson]

Absolutely!

[CS70]

Interesting what you say here, I do feel, from hearing other people's comments, and attitudes, that there is a feeling that anything to do with creative pursuits, in audio/recording or any other artistic field is somehow not of any real "value" anymore

A good point. But nothing really has changed from that point of view. We're talking economic value here (as Gnome's post): value that can be exchanged for food and a roof to sleep under.

Creative pursuits do not have an intrinsic value of that kind. They never had. There's no economic value in having fun yourself.

There is quite a lot of economic value, tough, in making others have fun.

Unlocking that value requires either that there is a demand/offer ratio is big enough (as Gnome discovered, it's very likely that the demand for studio building is vastly smaller than the offer) or skew that ratio by creating artificial scarcity (which is what branding is all about).

This latter is by far the most reasonable strategy in most cases. But it's far from easy - and it's never been. It requires complementary skills from the creative or engineering ones (and skills that not so often are present in the same person), focused activity and economic investment, and a fair bit of luck (i.e. random factors).

Nobody wants music: especially now, there's a lot of it around, way too much. But people may decide to want your music, of which there's only a limited amount, controlled by you.

All the rest is just tools to get there - they change, but the basic mechanism does not.

[Studio Support Gnome]

fair points most....

I would add that the studio building gig was only part of the service range I offered.... I can evidence a small amount of the other stuff, from the several Million views on youtube for broadcast mixes and live sound etc....

The primary issue, in all avenues seemed to be one of the gulf between what people wanted, and what they thought it should cost.

I was not, ever, a charitable trust , set up to fund the difference between those two positions.

if it takes 4 months to build , you are damn well paying for 4 months of labour.... Plus materials....

I i work on location for your project, be it recording, or building, or any other application of my fairly extensive skill set, then you are paying me for it..... I'm not here to do it for fun, or entertainment,..,.. I'd rather be home with my very beautiful wife, ..... I don't care how famous you are, how rich you are, or aren't, or how good you are on the hurdygurdy ... or even how much beer or cider is available, I committed to spending the rest of my life with my wife a long time ago, and I haven't changed my mind yet....