[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"Music as career" has indeed, loosely and generally speaking, always been the case historically, though along with the other arts it was pretty much a practice driven by more primary factors, say, you were born into it (gypsies, castes, etc). Performance is tied to social role, spirituality, etc. Accumulated wealth was consequential. That dynamic still exists in some respects, most akin to forms of folk music.

Well, don't get me wrong, there are millions of amateur musicians in every country of the world who do it for the love. However, I was referring more to those bands who get exposure to a broader crowd. 99% of those people are in it for the biz.

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This, however, is where it gets more complicated. Folk music in that sense cannot be consumed (key word of yours btw) by an audience of any considerable size, so... yep, you have to record it. The paradox: accessibility, variety, exposure and the like increase; while the ability to package and distribute (and we all know that commodification leads to alienation!) goes up as well.

The interwebz is doing a good job at forcing change to the model. More amateurs are now able to get their music out. They've always been able to, but the record corps have been forcing them out of the game for some decades now. Something had to give, eh?

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Now your evolution of pop takes the stage (lawl). Without audio recording and the creation/marketing of genres, pop music doesn't exist.

Disagree. See: patrons of the arts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A few things first though - Most consumers are definitely not 12 year old girls

Bullshit. Go look at any reliable source of demographics for who consumes the most albums. Go look at what bands sell the most records across the world. It's all teeny bop bullshit dude. I have some education in this subject, and I can definitely assure you that even some of the "harder" bands out there cater their music to a teeny-bop audience.

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

BUT kids ARE the most impressionable audience. The receipt from each box of Fruit Loops and Jonas Brothers album is nestled inside a parent's wallet, so yeah there is a special focus on them. That's kind of beside the point though, as marketers have crafted oodles of terms and price-tags for EVERYONE and EVERYTHING imaginable. Chalking up the creation of popular music to teenagers driving tendentiously paycheck-seeking musicians is a bit of a dead end, especially given that "teenagers" didn't even exist until marketing execs created them.

Regardless of where they came from, the result is the same. Propaganda-laden advertisements loosely couched as music, aimed at opening mommies purse.

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It also ignores cases like the inception of punk, or even the entire underground music scene of a nation like China, where seeking wide distribution (or "selling out") is not only faux pas, it's not even a viable job option because the "market hasn't yet matured."

For sure there have been some great underground artists that have made it in spite of the system, such as The Offspring. Taking that example one step further however, you can listen to their music pre-label and post-label and clearly see that they started making records for young girls. Young girls rule the world dude. Daddy spoils them, their boyfriends spoil them, etc. I can't believe I even need to argue this, it's like you're ignoring a pink elephant in the room with us and talking about the weather.

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is no paycheck to seek.

There is always a paycheck dude. Even if it's not in front of you. I'm not trying to discount amateurs who do it for the love, please don't get me wrong. ..but people in China know who NSync is, and I guarantee you that for every underground band coming out with dope shit on their own, there are a dozen chinese boy bands who are trying to use the same model to get ahead in life.

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There's that saying, "You can't call yourself a musician/actor/artist until you get PAID to do it." I can't prove it, but I'd bet all of my jaw harps on the argument that this gained currency *after* the marketing of recorded media.

Disagree. See: patron of the arts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage

Originally Posted by isitatomic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Absolutely, but the whole radical and disproportionate division between populations of appreciators and entertainment-seekers came about for the reasons mentioned above. Reifying a dichotomy that registers as flaming BS to us is counterintuitive!

Disagree. Concert halls have always been filled with a large amount of revellers out to show off their style/cash/women, and to drink and have a good time. Likewise, pubs have always been full of dancers/revelers/drinkers who don't really give a shit about the skill of the musicians playing for a couple coppers. There have always been true appreciators of skill, but these have ALWAYS been far outweighed by people who enjoy music for the atmosphere and a chance at grabbing some ass.