Re: Re: Why does mainstream seem more like , downstream these days?

[Rick Walker <looppool@cruzio.com>]

On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, andy butler wrote:
>> /"Wow, I cant agree that its ALL retro no no no!!!" /
> good, so what mainstream stuff isn't?
Well, I'll go back into time to answer this, but when they first 
appeared on the pop charts,
David Bowie, Talking Heads, Kate Bush, Peter Gabriel, Paul Simon (around 
the Graceland phase), Bjork and Radiohead
weren't retro.      Every now and then,  there are progressive things 
that break through to the mainstream.

The rise of the internet,  the ubiquity of very narrowly defined 
stylistic internet radio, the ubiquity of
music in films and television,  the ubiquity of free downloadable music 
(both legal and illegal) has,
essentially,  started to erode the concept of mainstream.  We now live 
in a world of micro cultures that
are defined by media, socio economic and age demarcations.

Lately the charts are equally divided between Country, Hip Hop and Pop 
(Gaga, boybands/girlbands, et. al.)
   I know this because suddenly I have a free copy of Rolling Stone coming
to my door all the time and I perversely, still read the charts at the 
back.

It's my observation that, invariably, the lions share of fans who 
purchase this music purchase one of those categories and
eschew the other two.

Musically, we are a country divided and there is no discernable 
mainstream concensus any more.

It's hard to talk about it.    Maybe 'commercially successful music' 
would be a better tag.

rick walker