You know, I thought you were going somewhere with that, and you did but... um... you kind of... made a ridiculously giant assumption there. Yeah. Let's just say that would be very unlikely to happen and leave it at that.
I don't think 8-track recorders are popular anymore since cassettes took over the market. For me, it's unlikely that a renaissance would happen to 8-track recorders. So, I apply the same case for LPs.
If you have anything to comment about that, just do so. I admit that I can be sort of ignorant when making assumptions. I'm very new and terrible at all the "What would have happened if..." guesses.
edited 17th Feb '14 10:57:58 AM by tropeslave
I imagine that the stars of the past - as I mentioned, Paul Whiteman, Rudy Vallee, Benny Goodman and Glenn Miller - would have their own official websites.
Some of them probably do now, but in the 60s they could have more input into them.
"They say I'm old fashioned, and live in the past, but sometimes I think progress progresses too fast."![]()
Counterpoint: The LP remains viable due to superior sound quality. That said, the debate over "supporting the artists" would probably force record companies to be a lot more equitable a lot earlier given how quickly news of the issue would spread.
Then who are we to judge which artists of today will age well, considering that, well... they're today?
It'd be just like today only earlier. Of course you would see the hipster crowd shitting on anything that's popular. You would also see the genre snobs, the guys who will shit on anything that doesn't fit their narrow definition of what the genre should be. I.e. the classic "that's not metal" guys. The only difference is if the internet existed back then they would have a louder voice than they really did at the time.
"If everybody is thinking alike, somebody isn't thinking"- George S. Patton![]()
What would be the "hipster" genre of the 60's, then? Like Metal is the "hipster" genre of today, I mean.
![]()
![]()
![]()
I've always noticed these supposed snobs don't exist anywhere beyond the straw-formed boogeyman within the minds of the self-righteous "open minded" (read: I'll swallow anything you vomit at me) crowd. This might just be me but in my experience, most metal fans like at least a few styles outside of the genre. I mean it's not like most of the newer sounds associated with it totally aren't mostly notorious for relying heavily on influence from outsider genres (indie, alternative, drone, film score, japanese video game music etc.) even more heavily than the original ones with their diverse heritage of hard rock, psychedelia, prog, punk, classical, jazz, blues, modernist classical, ambient and so on. Of course, if anyone points out that that they might not be as firmly rooted in metal as the common listener might like to think, clearly they're just being "close minded" and not simply bringing up the question of what does and does not define metal.
But hey, if it's a specific definition that excludes a lot of stuff with only superficial resemblances to the genre, yeah, those guys and their attempts to more clealry define metal are certainly the evil ones here. Funny, you seem to be shitting on those people who hold a rather differing viewpoint to your own. How snobbish of you.
Anyways, onto the topic of a theoretical 60's internet, I'd be interested mostly in developments in the late 60's. In particular, proto-progressive rock bands and some of the harder stuff like High Tide
and how they would have been treated. I'm imagining there might be small communities of folks focused on applying more erudite musical theory to the ambiguity of the pop/psychedelia of the times in an attempt to give it a more dynamic, orderly sound and how the transition towards prog might have begun. I can see the latter group starting off as just psychedelic fans who were just messing about with distortion pedal settings but starting to figure out that "Hey, we could go places with a more ominous sound like this."
Also, I do not think our current atittudes towards music would necessarily be identitcal to those back then. For many The Beatles would have likely been something completely knew that most people had no idea how to treat or what to really compare it to. There would be a certain degree of snobbishness and wide-eyede naivete in equal spades but I imagine the latter would easily overwhelm the former.
edited 31st Mar '14 8:24:21 PM by StillbirthMachine
Only Death Is RealThe hipster music of the '60s? Come on, now, none of y'all know nothin' about the underground scene? The Velvet Underground? The Sonics? Captain Beefheart? The Monks? ...etc.
Insert witty 'n clever quip here.Which reminds me, Miles Davis. Come on, listen to Bitches Brew and try to disagree.
More underground/potential hipster artists of the time? Maybe some might dig Perrey & Kingsley's experiments as the music of the future. As well as maybe other Moog albums.
Insert witty 'n clever quip here.Hell, can we just assume the music on this album
might have been passed around a lot around then?

edited 17th Feb '14 10:58:23 AM by tropeslave