The Prog Popularity Illusion

[shadowcircus]

Some tangential thoughts related to Robert's recent "Prog fans eating their own young discussion", but going in a somewhat different direction...

It occurred to me that the perception of live Prog having poor support from fans in live show scenarios, is that there is somewhat of an illusion of popularity, thanks to the internet. To explain:

1. We can thank the combination of internet and home recording technology for the apparent popularity of prog that we enjoy in this community. Literally anyone can produce something and have it available for worldwide distribution within minutes, and fans can find anything they want to hear. So, maybe artists who would otherwise have no outlet manage to find a few thousand fans across the world.

But none of those fans share geography or have any other significant cultural commonalities. Cultural relevance tied to a musical genre and a shared geographic zone have always been necessary for the existence of any "scene". (Hence the much-touted demise of prog at the hands of punk rock in the U.K. in the 70's)

2. The choice of music is so vast - people can afford to be particular about their tastes because there is just so much to choose from. We can scour the internet until we find music that sounds precisely like music we want to hear. It's like the designer drugs of the 90's. As artists, we are no longer creating content for the masses, but for individuals.

In summary, technology has enabled somewhat of an illusion of popularity, so we drop our jaws when we hear that what seems to be a popular band is only drawing 30 people to shows. The truth, i think, is simply that technology has permitted a community that would be otherwise impossible, but technology simply does not apply on "the ground"...Until we can freely teleport as easily as we can download an mp3, the odds of an indie prog band drawing a big audience to a show is the same as what it was before the internet...

Thoughts? Feelings?

[izz_brian]

I think, when held to it, most prog fans would reluctantly agree with this assessment. However, one of the nice things about the Internet is that it DOES allow for a community (virtual though it may be) to exist where one could not before. Sure, there's no realistic way to manifest those numbers in one physical location. Sure, the current fan headcount is probably somewhat comparable to the fan counts pre-Internet (rather than the exponential popularity explosion it is sometimes perceived to be). I still think being virtually linked counts as a viable, albeit compact, fandom.

We have to be careful not to fixate on the concept of prog's popularity; it's not truly "pop music," in the most literal sense, so it can't be pushed/promoted/marketed down the throats of the general masses. But we have a glossy mag-rack periodical devoted to the scene, so that's something right there. In addition, a few of the prog festivals seem to be able to keep on ticking through this crappy economy. It's okay if that's all there is to accomplish. As long as there's a stage (small thought it may be) and an audience (even if you can count them on one hand), I think we'll be okay.

[Digital_Man]

To think there is the same number of fans now that there was just before the internet(ie late eighties and early 90's)is just plain silly. The number of younger people getting into prog(not that there are a whole lot of them but it is a growing demographic) as well as the album sales and concert/festival attendances speak for themselves. Sure, it's certainly not where it could be and prog still is basically a cult thing but nonetheless I think it has come a pretty long way in the past twenty years as far as quality, number of bands and fanbase goes not to mention some mainstream support and a more relaxed and tolerant view from critics.

[shadowcircus]

Well-stated, Brian!

I should clarify that I agree that an internet-acquired community is valid - my own band wouldn't exist without it, of course. It's just that expectation that it would translate offline somehow...we've just yet to see a technology that gives people the free time, expandable cash, interest in non-celebrity performances, and geographic proximity to make for a more "vibrant" live scene...Before the internet, one first had to conquer that dilemma before selling recordings - now we get to skip over that laborious process and deliver music directly to people without overcoming that hurdle. Ad that's a good thing! But the hurdle remains...

[Zonefish]

You'll get no argument from me. In a universe where Yes pulls in 1-2K a night (casinos and smaller "intimate" venues) as opposed from the 15K in its heydey (sold out arenas), it simply trickles down from there. The "scene" typically revolves (lives and dies) around a high octane promoter (PapaJim and Kerry Kompost here on the left coast), but is typically limited to a few hundred dedicated people. But in regard to your comments on advances technology, why don't we see more of the bands take advantage of one of those smaller venue clubs and simulcast a concert. Charge for "admission," run special download options for a fee and even interact with the tuned in internet base. For bands that tour infrequently or rarely move beyond their regional base, it could be a new revenue stream and affordable promotional tactic that is potentially less costly (and more spontaneous) than a DVD production. There are plenty of bands from England and Sweden I would pay to see live, but the likelihood of seeing them live is remote.

[Facelift]

Virtual communities result in virtual "scenes." Unfortunately for the bands, virtual scenes don't often result in many actual gigs or much actual money.

[shadowcircus]

To think there is the same number of fans now that there was just before the internet(ie late eighties and early 90's)is just plain silly. The number of younger people getting into prog(not that there are a whole lot of them but it is a growing demographic) as well as the album sales and concert/festival attendances speak for themselves. .

Just to be sure I understand correctly - you do mean that by the number of prog fans changing, you mean that they are only a fraction what they were in the late eighties, right? Going by plummeting record sales, cancelled tours/festivals, failed Kickstarter campaigns, bands that used to headline Madison Square Garden now playing in casinos, etc.?

[shadowcircus]

You'll get no argument from me. In a universe where Yes pulls in 1-2K a night (casinos and smaller "intimate" venues) as opposed from the 15K in its heydey (sold out arenas), it simply trickles down from there. The "scene" typically revolves (lives and dies) around a high octane promoter (PapaJim and Kerry Kompost here on the left coast), but is typically limited to a few hundred dedicated people. But in regard to your comments on advances technology, why don't we see more of the bands take advantage of one of those smaller venue clubs and simulcast a concert. Charge for "admission," run special download options for a fee and even interact with the tuned in internet base. For bands that tour infrequently or rarely move beyond their regional base, it could be a new revenue stream and affordable promotional tactic that is potentially less costly (and more spontaneous) than a DVD production. There are plenty of bands from England and Sweden I would pay to see live, but the likelihood of seeing them live is remote.

Really good thoughts! At least a good foundation of a brainstorm and experimentation...I think it's a good thing that the internet has allowed a genre to thrive to the extent it has - and I think technology can make it even better...

[Zonefish]

Really good thoughts! At least a good foundation of a brainstorm and experimentation...I think it's a good thing that the internet has allowed a genre to thrive to the extent it has - and I think technology can make it even better...

And it is much harder to pirate a live podcast than a DVD...unless I don't understand the whole torrent thing--so therefore a band gets the lionshare of the money (yes they need to pay the technology company a piece and get licensing agreements from the venue), but the upside is that if Facelift's comments are true (and I believe they are)...if the scene is only vibrantly virtual, then you have to adjust to a virtual marketspace.

[shadowcircus]

And it is much harder to pirate a live podcast than a DVD...unless I don't understand the whole torrent thing--so therefore a band gets the lionshare of the money (yes they need to pay the technology company a piece and get licensing agreements from the venue), but the upside is that if Facelift's comments are true (and I believe they are)...if the scene is only vibrantly virtual, then you have to adjust to a virtual marketspace.

Pretty much anyone can capture anything that is streamed and share it for free. In all cases, as far as monetizing something, it just has to really stand out. From the quality of the music, of the audio, of the video, to having something truly exceptional to show in the performances. If something is really, truly remarkable, then of course you would want people to share it freely so that more will appreciate it. Tough to get someone to even pay a dollar to see footage of an unknown act, who may be quite good, but anyone can go on to Youtube and see footage of any one of literally hundreds of thousands of legendary performances for free. That's what we're up against! The bar is raised quite high. I haven't gotten there myself yet, though a handful of appreciative fans may think so, but as a mere side note, I am somewhat obsessed with achieving that at some point, so I will work until I do!

After some thought, I think there is more to the equation in that we used to have to play live for years before perhaps earning a following and maybe eventually releasing an album for general consumption. The value of a record was higher, because anyone who made it to print had to pay those dues before they got to that point. Now we release albums, entirely skipping that stage. So, the albums are out, no audience or experience was earned on the trial-by-fire live stage, but we wonder why people are hesitant to support it....

[Jefferson James]

we used to have to play live for years before perhaps earning a following

Some things never change; of course in smaller markets this is much harder to accomplish but here in Los Angeles I have seen it with my own eyes: playing gigs and winning over a few fans actually happens. Heliopolis made a few fans who randomly caught us at our first local gig and showed up for our second (and, hopefully, third next month); it happened with Mars Hollow as well (we played a lot more local gigs than Heliopolis 'cause MH were around longer but we definitely saw our audience increase over the three years we were making music together).

The way I look at it, we're a rock band playing music that is basically "classic rock" with some modern twists and technology; we just play shows at rock clubs and/or events, period. I will set up a gig now and again that caters to the prog folks but those are special gigs done more for friends and associates. The important thing is to get out there and put your band -- in all its glory -- directly in the faces of strangers who like live rock music. Fuck genre classification, that's for the "virtual" world and it's a great tool to connect with potential fans across the globe, but in the real world, you've gotta work your ass off and just get out there and play.

I will say this: there are few things more gratifying to me than winning over people who've never heard of my band or even progressive rock. That is one of the highest highs, I tell you.

[Man In The Mountain]

I agree with Shadow Circus 100%.... one other thought, though it might be considered a different topic, yet related... is the 21+ rule in bars/night clubs. How can young people, even still college aged, get into these clubs to see bands, if they are not allowed in? Growing up in the Chicagoland area in the 70's, we famously always drove up to Wisconsin to see bands, as the drinking age was 18. Now you can no longer do that. I just checked at Shank Hall Milwaukee, the only way you can get in ANY show, while being under 21 is with a parent. Oh yeah, that's fun.... not. I've seen young people on-line complain that they couldn't get into a Spock's Beard show or whatever.

I think the only way to really start a music scene, is on the college campus circuit. And that's a whole 'nother game altogether. Yes? Am I wrong?

[3RDegree_Robert]

In summary, technology has enabled somewhat of an illusion of popularity, so we drop our jaws when we hear that what seems to be a popular band is only drawing 30 people to shows.
Thoughts? Feelings?

30 per band isn't too bad. My post was 32 total for 4 "well known" prog bands (in NYC on a Friday, etc.)...But, you have a good point as to our vantage point and what is happening "on the ground".

In addition, a few of the prog festivals seem to be able to keep on ticking through this crappy economy. It's okay if that's all there is to accomplish. As long as there's a stage (small thought it may be) and an audience (even if you can count them on one hand), I think we'll be okay.

That leaves a very small amount (16 per year?) of bands to be selected for May and September (ROSfest and ProgDay) for "us" to digest. For the bands selected, it sure feels good and is a validation but it's a pretty small amount especially when you consider 1/2 of those are not American which leaves like maybe 6 American bands per year on a stage with a decent audience to view it.

To think there is the same number of fans now that there was just before the internet(ie late eighties and early 90's)is just plain silly.

Good point, but tough call. I'll tell you from 3RDegree's point of view, the 90's was a wilderness where we didn't know what the F we were doing from '91-'97 when we were playing all over the NY/NJ area with no guidance, festivals (had no idea about ProgDay the 1st few years), and a tiny fan base. We just played a lot hoping "something" would happen. We knew about Progression and some retailers but that was it. Since getting back on the scene in '07/'08, it's WAY more easier to "navigate" the band to some sort of "success".

But in regard to your comments on advances technology, why don't we see more of the bands take advantage of one of those smaller venue clubs and simulcast a concert. Charge for "admission," run special download options for a fee and even interact with the tuned in internet base. For bands that tour infrequently or rarely move beyond their regional base, it could be a new revenue stream and affordable promotional tactic that is potentially less costly (and more spontaneous) than a DVD production. There are plenty of bands from England and Sweden I would pay to see live, but the likelihood of seeing them live is remote.

I think a place like Orion Sound Studios in Baltimore would probably be THE PLACE to do this at if it were to be done anywhere. The unique situation he has there where the place is "his" rather than say NJ Proghouse where it's a concert series but at a 3rd party location makes it a good idea. Not sure he'd want to do it though.

And it is much harder to pirate a live podcast than a DVD...unless I don't understand the whole torrent thing--so therefore a band gets the lionshare of the money (yes they need to pay the technology company a piece and get licensing agreements from the venue), but the upside is that if Facelift's comments are true (and I believe they are)...if the scene is only vibrantly virtual, then you have to adjust to a virtual marketspace.

You can do it on Ustream or the like.

[shadowcircus]

Some things never change; of course in smaller markets this is much harder to accomplish but here in Los Angeles I have seen it with my own eyes: playing gigs and winning over a few fans actually happens. Heliopolis made a few fans who randomly caught us at our first local gig and showed up for our second (and, hopefully, third next month); it happened with Mars Hollow as well (we played a lot more local gigs than Heliopolis 'cause MH were around longer but we definitely saw our audience increase over the three years we were making music together).

The way I look at it, we're a rock band playing music that is basically "classic rock" with some modern twists and technology; we just play shows at rock clubs and/or events, period. I will set up a gig now and again that caters to the prog folks but those are special gigs done more for friends and associates. The important thing is to get out there and put your band -- in all its glory -- directly in the faces of strangers who like live rock music. Fuck genre classification, that's for the "virtual" world and it's a great tool to connect with potential fans across the globe, but in the real world, you've gotta work your ass off and just get out there and play.

I will say this: there are few things more gratifying to me than winning over people who've never heard of my band or even progressive rock. That is one of the highest highs, I tell you.

That's one of the many things that make you the real deal, Kerry! It's not like you exported an mp3 from Garage Band one day and wondered why you didn't sell out an auditorium...you've been doing this a long time, it shows in your music, your stage presence, everything.

I agree with Shadow Circus 100%.... one other thought, though it might be considered a different topic, yet related... is the 21+ rule in bars/night clubs. How can young people, even still college aged, get into these clubs to see bands, if they are not allowed in? Growing up in the Chicagoland area in the 70's, we famously always drove up to Wisconsin to see bands, as the drinking age was 18. Now you can no longer do that. I just checked at Shank Hall Milwaukee, the only way you can get in ANY show, while being under 21 is with a parent. Oh yeah, that's fun.... not. I've seen young people on-line complain that they couldn't get into a Spock's Beard show or whatever.

I think the only way to really start a music scene, is on the college campus circuit. And that's a whole 'nother game altogether. Yes? Am I wrong?

That's absolutely right. The only scenes that resemble that now are EDM and Jam, I think. Though many points addressed the problem of youth and Prog in Robert's thread, it bears repeating...If we wanted youth to get on this bandwagon, doing it with multi-thousand dollar cruises, multi-hundred dollar festivals, and expensive imported acts isn't really the way to do it. Youth rebelled against prog for a reason - it turned up its nose at the dregs, and now has literally sailed away on a cruise ship! Rock and roll is for the dregs, not Mr. Howell...I've yet to see a music scene established by 40-somethings, or a scene established by youth supported by 40-somethings. They just don't want to hang out with each other, generally speaking, when it comes to being in the same physical location.

[shadowcircus]

That leaves a very small amount (16 per year?) of bands to be selected for May and September (ROSfest and ProgDay) for "us" to digest. For the bands selected, it sure feels good and is a validation but it's a pretty small amount especially when you consider 1/2 of those are not American which leaves like maybe 6 American bands per year on a stage with a decent audience to view it.

It's even worse when you consider there isn't enough demand to repeat those performances every year. Once a band plays a festival, a return performance will either be never, or very, very rarely many years later. So even hitting that lottery = one single show. There's no ability to "follow-up" with that audience, they'll never see you again, only a handful at a time maybe if you play in their home turf.

[3RDegree_Robert]

It's even worse when you consider there isn't enough demand to repeat those performances every year. Once a band plays a festival, a return performance will either be never, or very, very rarely many years later. So even hitting that lottery = one single show. There's no ability to "follow-up" with that audience, they'll never see you again, only a handful at a time maybe if you play in their home turf.

Or you just show up at a festival you played after you put out a new album, book a Friday night show and call it a "pre-show"!

[shadowcircus]

Or you just show up at a festival you played after you put out a new album, book a Friday night show and call it a "pre-show"!

Oh no you di'int!!!!! LOL! SNAP!!!!

[profusion]

None of this is unique to prog. There aren't really any "thriving" musical genres out there that I'm aware of. The biggest albums sell around 500k copies. Newer bands "make it" when they play large clubs or theaters. Only a few legacy acts can headline arenas or large amphitheaters on their own anymore.

The only difference I see is that prog had such a short commercial heyday, to begin with, and it was a LONG time ago. It's unrealistic, and a bit sad, to expect a teenager or young adult today to gravitate towards a genre that focuses heavily on sounding like something their grandparents possibly listened to.

[emperorken]

I live in a dead zone for live prog, so I'd have to travel to see any live prog show. I would welcome, and be happy to pay for a live simulcast.

I am very thankful for the easy availability of internet radio and recorded music.

And BTW, I love "On a Dark and Stormy Night". Thanks for that.

[3RDegree_Robert]

If there's less HUGE bands with money for hookers and blow and more mid-sized bands (albums every few years that sell 10k-100k each) who can make a modest living off of music, then I'm ok with that. Any prog band lesser known than say a Spock's Beard would gladly sign on for that. They say you only need 1000 "true fans" and you can live off of that. That would probably be for a solo artist so just multiply the 1000 by how many members in your band.

[Digital_Man]

Just to be sure I understand correctly - you do mean that by the number of prog fans changing, you mean that they are only a fraction what they were in the late eighties, right? Going by plummeting record sales, cancelled tours/festivals, failed Kickstarter campaigns, bands that used to headline Madison Square Garden now playing in casinos, etc.?

Hmmmm. You know, it depends on how you want to look at it. If we are counting mainstream prog bands like Yes and whoever else you consider to have hit the big time then I would agree with you. I was referring more to the underground of prog and the prog scene in general. I do not play in a prog band like you or 3rd degree or IZZ or whoever else so my perspective is solely as a fan and former promoter and seller and as such will be different than yours. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree. Then again I am admittedly probably a bit too optimistic for my own good.

[shadowcircus]

Hmmmm. You know, it depends on how you want to look at it. If we are counting mainstream prog bands like Yes and whoever else you consider to have hit the big time then I would agree with you. I was referring more to the underground of prog and the prog scene in general. I do not play in a prog band like you or 3rd degree or IZZ or whoever else so my perspective is solely as a fan and former promoter and seller and as such will be different than yours. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree. Then again I am admittedly probably a bit too optimistic for my own good.

Hey, optimism is good!

I think I am actually headed towards some optimistic conclusions from this discussion. I think that the internet is the reason we even get those 30 people at shows - they are sincere fans who might not have ever heard of us otherwise. And I'll play to them with hopefully the same aplomb I would to 300 or 3000! The conclusion i think I am reaching is, getting to that 300 or 3000, is still tough, and may seem surprising to play to 30 after selling 3000 records. It's not dependent on the popularity of the genre, as others have pointed out - any relatively unknown band has to pull off something pretty remarkable to burst through that ceiling - whether it's putting out a product or show that is so uncanny that word spreads quickly, or someone of celebrity stature endorses it enthusiastically (such as Portnoy's endorsement of Spock's Beard early in their career).

[Sunhillow]

You'll get no argument from me. In a universe where Yes pulls in 1-2K a night (casinos and smaller "intimate" venues) as opposed from the 15K in its heydey (sold out arenas), it simply trickles down from there. The "scene" typically revolves (lives and dies) around a high octane promoter (PapaJim and Kerry Kompost here on the left coast), but is typically limited to a few hundred dedicated people. But in regard to your comments on advances technology, why don't we see more of the bands take advantage of one of those smaller venue clubs and simulcast a concert. Charge for "admission," run special download options for a fee and even interact with the tuned in internet base. For bands that tour infrequently or rarely move beyond their regional base, it could be a new revenue stream and affordable promotional tactic that is potentially less costly (and more spontaneous) than a DVD production. There are plenty of bands from England and Sweden I would pay to see live, but the likelihood of seeing them live is remote.

Good idea! Gosh, now I will fantasize the rest of the day for a www.progstreaminglive.com. You want copyright for the idea?

[Sunhillow]

I agree with Shadow Circus 100%.... one other thought, though it might be considered a different topic, yet related... is the 21+ rule in bars/night clubs. How can young people, even still college aged, get into these clubs to see bands, if they are not allowed in? Growing up in the Chicagoland area in the 70's, we famously always drove up to Wisconsin to see bands, as the drinking age was 18. Now you can no longer do that. I just checked at Shank Hall Milwaukee, the only way you can get in ANY show, while being under 21 is with a parent. Oh yeah, that's fun.... not. I've seen young people on-line complain that they couldn't get into a Spock's Beard show or whatever.

I think the only way to really start a music scene, is on the college campus circuit. And that's a whole 'nother game altogether. Yes? Am I wrong?

Gosh, is your country this in the Middle Ages? A friend of mine recently brought his own son (12 years of age) to a concert. My first concert (Camel) was in 1984 and I was 14. By the time I was 21 I'd been to at least 150 concerts, I think. I pity the Americans.

[shadowcircus]

Gosh, is your country this in the Middle Ages? A friend of mine recently brought his own son (12 years of age) to a concert. My first concert (Camel) was in 1984 and I was 14. By the time I was 21 I'd been to at least 150 concerts, I think. I pity the Americans.

Ah, what would an internet forum be if someone didn't come up with a way to insult an entire country? :-) Like the rest of the world, we wish we were beyond the middle ages, but we're all still barely neanderthals, but admittedly, I would trade our music scene for that of the Netherlands any day, even if it's just a marginal improvement. :-P Concert venues and theaters have no age restrictions here, as in Europe, only some of the smaller bar-oriented venues, but even most of those now give bracelets to those who want to drink and show proof of id. It's rare, but some bars are like that who don't want to be liable for an adult buying drinks for younger attendees.

As far as streaming videos of live gigs, there are literally thousands of videos posted of these shows that one can watch anytime without being tied to their computer at a certain time. Few get more than a few hundred views. People don't really want to watch them unless the quality is superb.