Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
GIGAMΞSH
@gigamesh
I've been seeing a lot takes like this. Summary: Tech makes creation cheaper but attention is zero-sum, which incentivizes less risk taking. There is no shortage of great music, but it is more difficult for it to break through. Same seems true of all art & information. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bZ0OSEViyo
10 replies
5 recasts
213 reactions
maurelian
@maurelian.eth
Shouldn’t it incentivize more risk taking? Like if every song has a 99.99% chance of being ignored, then why not make something weird? I feel like there has to be a demand side explanation too. (Did not watch the video)
3 replies
1 recast
30 reactions
GIGAMΞSH
@gigamesh
Maybe more among artists, but less risk taking in the funding & distribution. ex: All the movie franchises that are endless sequels & prequels. The equivalent in music is a song that samples another song everyone already knows is much more likely to get radio distribution (all things being equal).
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Will Kennedy
@wkproducer
Couple 100,000 new songs being posted/day with streaming algorithms that drive casual listeners (the vast majority) toward things they’ve already expressed a preference for, and you create a massive reward system for similarity. Weird doesn’t get playlisted, so weird loses absent a major PR $ push.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Brunni
@brunnicorsato
Oooh I’d LOVE to live in a world where more people think like that! Unfortunately, the take more risks conclusion is not that common. On top of the reasons already shared in other comments, there’s the perception that artists need to compete for whatever little resources are out there (money, attention,what have you) and playing it safe would be the easiest way to access those.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
