Do You Need To Own The Record?
In the late spring of 1971, I went to see Lee Michaels at the Fillmore East. Primarily known for his one hit, "Do You Know What I Mean", prior to this Mr. Michaels was a combination blues player and thoughtful rocker. I’m surprised his track "The War" got no airplay in light of the Iraq crisis. Then again, there’s no draft. Still, what hooked me was his track "What Now America". Sans the flash of Katy Perry and the rappers what you got was a penetrating sensitivity. It’s what made me a fan. Hearing "What Now America" pour out of a dorm room in Hepburn Hall during my freshman year at Middlebury made me buy the album it came from, "Barrel". One of my favorites. I had no choice but to purchase a ticket to see him live.
But preceding him on the bill was a band I’d never heard the music of. I’d seen their albums in stores, I’d loved Steve Marriott in the Small Faces, but I’d never heard a lick of Humble Pie music. So I bought their latest album, "Rock On". In anticipation of seeing them live. I wanted to be familiar with the material!
They didn’t even play the classic opening track, "Shine On". But a few months later, their double album package recorded that weekend was released and "Rockin’ The Fillmore" made them stars. Lee Michaels? He switched labels and was ultimately forgotten.
I bought Peter Frampton’s solo album, "Wind Of Change", because I loved his work on "Shine On" so much. I still consider it his best, with the truly classic "All I Want To Be (Is By Your Side)".
I was just reading Ron Asheton’s obituary in the L.A. "Times". I bought "Raw Power", probably because "Creem" hyped it so. But I was disappointed. Awful mix. I loved "Gimme Danger", but in my mind, despite the label switch to Columbia, they were still the band that played on that TV special years before, where Iggy spread his chest with peanut butter. You see the Stooges were a live thing.
That’s what resonated with me reading the obit. No one wanted to buy Stooges records, but tons of people wanted to see the band live.
How many attendees at the Madonna show bought "Hard Candy"? Does every Eagles concertgoer own "Long Road Out Of Eden"? As for Rihanna, sure her singles sell, but she can’t pack arenas.
I’m thinking how there’s a split. Used to be you loved the music, had to own it and needed to see the band live. Now there are groups that specialize in recordings and others that focus on live work. The two are often not united in the fan’s mind. In the Dead’s initial heyday, the early seventies, you had to own every record. When they blew up again in the eighties, it was about the party, you didn’t need to own anything.
The Beatles made their most legendary music after they’d retired from the live scene. An album was not an excuse for a tour, the album was the end product. Today an album is just an element in the overall marketing plan. It sets up the spectacular tour! The key is to have enough hits, enough familiar tracks, which may not even be owned by the public, to get people to go to the show. The show just can’t be the music, because the music is not enough. You’ve got to provide a spectacle. The show is akin to Broadway. The music can’t stand alone. Because that’s not enough for the customer. The customer is looking for an experience! Comparable to a movie, or a music video.
Sure, people wanted to see the reunited Stooges because of their legacy. Maybe enhanced by the use of Iggy’s "Lust For Life" in a commercial. But did you need to own "Lust For Life"? Or was hearing it on TV enough? Did you go to the show for the music or to cut a notch in your belt, to say you’d done it, the same way you ride the Matterhorn at Disneyland?
Record companies have a problem. The audience no longer sees the record and the tour as being united. Hell, look at the burgeoning festival scene… Who’s going to buy all the records of the acts appearing in advance of seeing them? Except for a few stars, you’re just grazing. Having a good time. And many of the bands won’t survive until the next season anyway.
Then there are the records that can’t be played live. Or, if performed, are mimed to hard drive. The idea of being a band and playing your music on a stage is foreign to the mainstream. I was stunned on New Year’s Eve to find the cover band could play memorable songs in a full-bodied way without backing tapes. The idea that what you hear on the record is what you’re going to get live is a mindbender, you don’t expect it.
In order to get the public excited about music, the makers and purveyors have to respect it. It has to be great in its own right. Going to the show can’t be about attending the party with your buds, but reliving the listening experience, with the live vibe. There must be a unification between what you download and what you see.
The Stooges reunion album sold 30,000 copies. Sure, most people don’t want new music by the dinosaurs, but many people don’t want new music by unknowns either. In the seventies, we had Steely Dan, a band that only made records, that stopped touring before they even cut "Rikki Don’t Lose That Number". We didn’t mind, because the records were good enough, great, in fact. To the point where when Steely Dan ultimately went out live years later, fans wanted to see them. But in the seventies, the records were enough, that was the culture. The album was a statement. And you went to the show not to hear the greatest hits, but to hear the album live. And every year or two there was a new record, and you went to the gig because you didn’t want to miss out on your new favorites performed live. You knew every lick.
But in a month Bruce Springsteen is going to have to play classics at the Super Bowl. Because few care about his new material. He’s a live act now. It’s about memories, about raising your fist to "Born To Run". Whereas thirty years ago, you wouldn’t go to the show without buying "The River" first, playing all four sides incessantly, so you’d be up to speed.
People play video games incessantly today. But music? They sample at the buffet. It’s casual. And this is a problem.