The Death of the Middle-Class Musician

This Hacker News discussion explores the precarious financial state of musicians and artists in the digital age, touching upon broader themes of economic inequality, the changing nature of work, and the value of creative pursuits.

The Declining Viability of a Music Career

A central theme is the struggle for musicians to earn a sustainable living. The advent of streaming services is repeatedly cited as a major factor in this decline, with many users expressing disillusionment with the low payouts.

• "Streaming has caused the number to fall, but recorded music before that likely made it fall as well."
• "Streaming is the biggest scam to have perpetuated the entertainment industry."
• "The musical middle class wasn’t thinned out by the audience, but by labels and streaming models."
• "Spotify in particular cemented a payment structure that disadvantages any “serious” music versus endless repeat pop songs, while also being completely corrupted by conflict of interest from record labels with an ownership stake."

This leads to a broader question about whether music should even be considered a viable career path.

• "Should we stop thinking about music as a job and start thinking about it as a hobbyist art form?"
• "My answer is no not necessarily. One can pursue it in their free time."
• "What’s the deal with always wanting to turn art into a day job, anyway? These things are almost antithetical..."

Users contrast the current situation with the past, noting that even historically, music was often a hobby for those with independent means.

• "Everyone else music was a hobby they did after farming was done."

The Role of Hobbyists and the Value of Music

The discussion grapples with the idea of music primarily as a hobby rather than a profession. While some users lament the potential loss of professional quality and output, others see value in a scene driven by passion rather than profit.

• "I’ve come to the perhaps grim conclusion that the world doesn't value music enough."
• "It seems to me that most artists are making music because they love to do it themselves. It's essentially a form of play."
• "imo, it's better to have a million bands dicking around and having fun playing terrible shows for crowds of ten people than a hundred polished superstar groups playing sold out arenas."

This prompts a debate about the nature of artistic production and consumption.

• "If musicians can't make a living, then both the quantity and quality of our musical options go down."
• "Plenty of hobbyists record their music. A lot of the music I listen to is from youtubers with a handful of views."
• "It is a lot of fun to play gigs for friends and locals. But for most musicians… that’s not going to pay the bills."
• "When you do a hobby you can get practice and feedback in."

The argument is made that music serves a vital role in society beyond mere entertainment.

• "For the sake of the health of the whole, some members of the whole must be able to bring in certain vibes, patterns, states of mind, ideas, etc."
• "Music is one of those things that's actually the whole point of being alive."

Conversely, some express skepticism about the necessity of music for societal function.

• "And for me with musicians the number is zero."
• "Neither musicians or social media is needed for modern life. Or even online marketing..."

Economic Inequality and the "Winner-Take-All" Dynamic

A significant portion of the conversation centers on widening economic inequality and how it manifests across various professions, including music. The "winner-take-all" nature of many industries, exacerbated by technology and the internet, is a recurring theme.

• "Streaming is only the next step of the ladder, the reality is that ever since recording was possible... music (and most of the arts for that matter) has increasing winner-take all effects, where a minuscule amount of artists reap huge gains, while the rest just scrape by."
• "The future feudal lords will just sell to each other and ignore the jobless, moneyless masses. We don’t like to hear this, but normal people will likely become less and less economically relevant..."
• "The 'secret organization' is us, via the tyranny of small decisions."

The discussion touches on how technological advancements, including AI, might further concentrate wealth and reduce opportunities for the majority.

• "We will start thinking about jobs when the tech feudal lords find out there's no more growth, because consumers to their products are being replaced by AI."
• "The problem is people are ok with corporate, mass-produced slop—whether it be music, furniture, or (soon) software. Fewer and fewer people are willing to pay for human craftsman-produced product."
• "It's capitalism working as intended. There are an increasing number of jobs that are only available to the children of the wealthy."

Generational Shifts and the Impact of Technology

The conversation highlights how generational shifts in technology and economics have impacted creative careers. The decline of physical media sales and the rise of low-paying streaming models are seen as devastating blows to artists who previously relied on these income streams.

• "We decimated recordings as a revenue stream... And we let people peddle the lie that artists can just find some other revenue source like merchandising or another job or anything else rather than paying for the thing people ostensibly value."
• "It’s funny whenever there is a comment like “hey, maybe we shouldn’t let individual people get so rich they can basically become thier own country.” Always get called socialists/communists."
• "The main rehearsal space in San Francisco closed more than two decades ago. I venture that live music has suffered because of it."

The impact of technology on live performance versus recordings is also debated.

• "Now hit play on your phone connected to a speaker, GG musicians."
• "Not really comparable experience though."
• "Now you have a lot of people who are willing to play at venues for free just for the fun of it have crushed the viability of doing it as an actual job."

The Role of Education and "Nepo Babies"

The discussion touches on the increasing role of privilege and connections in creative fields, with "nepo babies" (children of famous or wealthy individuals) being mentioned as a symptom of broader societal trends. Educational institutions like Berklee are brought up in this context.

• "It's about connections, wealth, and nepotism over anything else."
• "Rich people funding their actor-aspirant children more convention ways: ... pay for living costs, education and any additional classes."
• "Schools like Berklee are… questionable at best. Lots off nepo babies just taking a few years to fuck about, basically."

Potential Solutions and Broader Societal Issues

Users propose various solutions, ranging from individual artist strategies to systemic changes like Universal Basic Income (UBI). However, even these are met with skepticism and debated in terms of their feasibility and implications.

• "Instead of chasing fame, the solution is to do your own marketing."
• "Maybe you’re not rich and your parents are roofers while you want to become an actor, but if you’re good and well connected you might benefit from other peoples connections."
• "The government should introduce universal basic income. This would indeed afford artists the security to create art, but it’s also extremely fanciful."
• "My answer is no not necessarily. One can pursue it in their free time. Whether it should be a career or not is honestly an invisible hand question (aka capitalism)."
• "This is another in the long series of observations of seemingly distinct problems which are actually facets of a larger problem, namely that overall economic inequality is way too high."