Why do bands and singer/songwriters fade from the music biz?

[Helen Back]

So a band or a singer./songwriter will have a few hits then fade from the limelight. Some of them carry on forever doing nostalgia gigs of their old stuff, but the majority just return to private non-music life.

Do they run out of inspiration? Do they get tired of it all? Have they said their piece and have nothing more to say with their music?

What's the most common reason to let a msuic career gently fade?

 

[ddraig]

Is this for a lesson?

 

[Helen Back]

No, just personal curiosity.

 

[Dystopiary]

Well money is a lot of it. Hard to make much as a musician, especially nowadays. So people often do something else to survive.
That said, plenty of folk still working behind the scenes doing production, mixing, songwriting, I've even known of people going down the route of tour management.

 

[mojo pixy]

Parenting makes a big dent in playing shows in the evenings and hobnobbing afterwards (which tbh is the really important bit, career-wise)

 

[friedaweed]

A lot of the bands and singer songwriters I go and see live have been doing it for 20 yrs plus. Maybe it's just the music you're into Helen Back . You know it's Christmas when HMHB are touring.

 

[danski]

Because it’s a shit business.

 

[existentialist]

As far as bands go, one of the biggest factors is the dynamics of the group. It's not a given that a bunch of people (even brothers/sisters) get together to make music, and will somehoww automatically get on, Partridge Family style. And by the time the little differences starts to play out, the personal clashes are taking the edge off the creativity (The Kings, and the Gallagher brothers being notable cases in point). I've seen it myself - we've auditioned people for the band I'm in, and it's really hard to get a read on whether they're likely to fit in, or despite being the best viola player in West Wales (say), are or become a bit of a pain in the arse. I think it's probably as much luck than anything that some bands do stay together for years and years...

But I think life takes over. If you're married (or you get married), there's going to have to be a tradeoff between the craft and the relationship. Same if kids come along, etc. Or the day job is demanding (because it's precious few musicians who will be making a solid living at it). And it is hard work - just lugging your gear to gigs and getting setup (and packed up) is tedious, lugging it all downstairs in the knowledge that you'll be making 3 trips up and downstairs probably at midnight, to lug it all back in again. I can see how some people just say "enough". The way I see it, it saves me a gym subscription. And I enjoy the music. I'm glad I don't have to make a living doing it, though.

 

[editor]

So a band or a singer./songwriter will have a few hits then fade from the limelight. Some of them carry on forever doing nostalgia gigs of their old stuff, but the majority just return to private non-music life.

Do they run out of inspiration? Do they get tired of it all? Have they said their piece and have nothing more to say with their music?

What's the most common reason to let a msuic career gently fade?

It can be a hard slog in the lower divisions of the music circuit, with loads of travelling and time away from the family many musicians have acquired since they had a hit.

Very few bands make enough to live off their music career, so being in a band often means working in one or more other jobs.

Some musicians just have enough of strutting the boards, and some physically can't do it anymore. And then throw in Brexit which has virtually eliminated a vast network of European dates, making the money pot even smaller.

 

[Bus Honeygun]

Parenting makes a big dent in playing shows in the evenings and hobnobbing afterwards (which tbh is the really important bit, career-wise)

Yes, it's put a big dent in the music career of someone I know. Plus she's just too knackered to think about writing stuff.

 

[Steel Icarus]

As for famous ones - who presumably are going to be the ones noticed before it's noticed they've faded - I'll use two boxing quotes, one real, one fictional:

"The worst thing happened to you that could happen to any fighter. You got civilised."

"It's hard to get up and do roadwork at 5 a.m. when you've been sleeping in silk pyjamas."

 

[Bus Honeygun]

There's also that trajectory of creativity and companionship.

Group of friends or people who know each other form a band, get on well, write some songs and hone those tunes, playing them over and over at local gigs.

They get popular and start playing further afield, spending more time stuck in a van together. They release the record with all those songs on and everyone loves it. Now you've got to play them over and over and over, spending even more time stuck in a van together, only now the singer thinks he's god and the drummer's developing drug and alcohol problem is making them an arsehole.

What's that? Write some more songs because the record company money (if you're lucky enough to get some) is an advance, not a payment? But I'm still working part-time and I'm sick of these twats. Fuck it, this is no fun anymore and the creativity's dried up, plus they're offering full-time hours and more money at my day job. Oh well, at least I got to be in a band for a while...

 

[skyscraper101]

I sometimes show up to friends gigs and see the amount of effort they have to go through just to get enough interest from people to show up. I doubt half of these gigs even break even. Basically it's a massive slog and that's before factoring in the various personality clashes which can often lead bands to self-destruct.

I used to do it myself when I was in bands and the enthusiasm was hard to maintain after a while. Travel costs, hanging around in gig venues, lugging gear, etc. It's not for me. DJing was/is a lot more sustainable and lucrative, but even then it's working late nights and weekends and not exactly conducive to the 'regular' social hours of everyone else.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Quality.

The Stones, Elton John, Eric Clapton... quality is the reason they are still going.

 

[Sasaferrato]

There's also that trajectory of creativity and companionship.

Group of friends or people who know each other form a band, get on well, write some songs and hone those tunes, playing them over and over at local gigs.

They get popular and start playing further afield, spending more time stuck in a van together. They release the record with all those songs on and everyone loves it. Now you've got to play them over and over and over, spending even more time stuck in a van together, only now the singer thinks he's god and the drummer's developing drug and alcohol problem is making them an arsehole.

What's that? Write some more songs because the record company money (if you're lucky enough to get some) is an advance, not a payment? But I'm still working part-time and I'm sick of these twats. Fuck it, this is no fun anymore and the creativity's dried up, plus they're offering full-time hours and more money at my day job. Oh well, at least I got to be in a band for a while...

I have great admiration for those who can play an instrument, even greater admiration for someone who will stand in front of 100,000 people and play.

 

[Steel Icarus]

Quality.

The Stones, Elton John, Eric Clapton... quality is the reason they are still going.

Yep, all those brilliant hits they've all had in the 2010s

 

[pogofish]

One I knew moved up here after the band he had his most significant musical relationship with underwent one of its periodic fragmentations.

He bought a derelict castle and set about restoring it. He did work a bit more, did some entertainment/hospitality-type stuff in the castle itself, some television/soundtracks and set-up an imprint for re-publishing old/antiquarian books but after a few years, he developed another interest - restoring/converting old/derelict buildings that the title that he'd bought to go with his castle allowed him to buy-back for a pittance, when the local property market was very overheated by the oil industry. Some he sold, others he rented-out and after a few years, his property/landlord-related activities made him far more money than he'd ever made from music and he sank into the life of a high-level local worthy, who occasionally picked-up his guitar to join his old bandmates at reunion concerts/tribute gigs etc..

 

[editor]

And for some bands, time just hasn't been kind to their style of music (I'm looking at my mid-80s big hair band).

 

[Sasaferrato]

Yep, all those brilliant hits they've all had in the 2010s

Look at it more in terms of how difficult it is to get a ticket to see whoever.

The Beatles disbanded in 1970. 53 years ago, yet their music is regularly played.

Quality lasts.

 

[Sasaferrato]

And for some bands, time just hasn't been kind to their style of music (I'm looking at my mid-80s big hair band).

Aye, there is that.

 

[existentialist]

Quality.

The Stones, Elton John, Eric Clapton... quality is the reason they are still going.

It's more than that.

The Stones are an example of a band that seem to maintain a very professional relationship on-stage, but do their own thing too. I guess they've worked out a good work/life balance.

As far as Elton John is concerned, he is, by all accounts, a decent bloke and his musical team, given that he's not "in a band" as such, has been loyal.

I'm not sure if Eric Clapton is a good example - he certainly did his fair share of aggro to bandmates, although he does seem to have mellowed in his older years to the extent that he has a pretty close circle of musicians he works with now - Nathan East was onboard a long time ago...

 

[editor]

Look at it more in terms of how difficult it is to get a ticket to see whoever.

The Beatles disbanded in 1970. 53 years ago, yet their music is regularly played.

Quality lasts.

It's not as simple as that.

A lot of the heritage bands minting it now would have really struggled it they rose to fame in the 00s or later.

It's a very, very different ballpark to how it was in the 60s/70s and there's plenty of absolutely brilliant bands who will never get the longevity that their music deserves because the industry has totally transformed.

 

[Hollis]

It's more than that.

The Stones are an example of a band that seem to maintain a very professional relationship on-stage, but do their own thing too. I guess they've worked out a good work/life balance.

As far as Elton John is concerned, he is, by all accounts, a decent bloke and his musical team, given that he's not "in a band" as such, has been loyal.

I'm not sure if Eric Clapton is a good example - he certainly did his fair share of aggro to bandmates, although he does seem to have mellowed in his older years to the extent that he has a pretty close circle of musicians he works with now - Nathan East was onboard a long time ago...

As far as Sir Elton goes, from what he said on stage last year, his band leader - Davey Johnston? - basically knocks the band into shape, and Elton comes along for the finishing touches before touring..

 

[danny la rouge]

It's more than that.

The Stones are an example of a band that seem to maintain a very professional relationship on-stage, but do their own thing too. I guess they've worked out a good work/life balance.

As far as Elton John is concerned, he is, by all accounts, a decent bloke and his musical team, given that he's not "in a band" as such, has been loyal.

I'm not sure if Eric Clapton is a good example - he certainly did his fair share of aggro to bandmates, although he does seem to have mellowed in his older years to the extent that he has a pretty close circle of musicians he works with now - Nathan East was onboard a long time ago...

I think there’s a great deal of cultural and sociological weight behind these acts. They were at the height of their fame during a period that saw big social changes in the West, and they had a cohort of fans who have remained loyal for decades, because these acts hold significance for them. This in turn means successive generations are exposed to them.

I’m not a particular fan of any of them, to be honest. I like the idea of the Stones, and they did some good tunes, but even their best period (with Mick Taylor) I’d be hard pressed to last a whole album. But they are the archetypal rock band.

Clapton, while I admire his guitar playing ability and sound, is more difficult to like. I like his work with the Bluesbreakers, but Cream tended to the overblown and I think Bruce was the songwriting talent, and his stuff since then has been MOR and meh.

Elton John, I’ve never been a fan of. He has great tone to his voice and his phrasing is immaculate, but I just don’t really like his songs. And some of the big ones (Benny and the Jets and Tiny Dancer for example), take for ever to get to a hook, and are just dull.

But editor said something interesting about time not being kind to a lot of 80s stuff. I love the 70s production sounds. But there’s absolutely no way I’d try to emulate a lot of the 80s sounds. Gated snare, over compressed guitar, all that. Even artists whose music I love. Miles Davis, for example: his 80s music just sounds far more dated than his 70s stuff. I rarely turn to his 80s output, and when I do the production slaps you in the face and detracts from the music. Something that doesn’t happen with his 70s records.

 

[RubyToogood]

Quality.

The Stones, Elton John, Eric Clapton... quality is the reason they are still going.

If there's one thing the music industry is definitely not, it's a meritocracy. There are very musically mediocre acts who succeed and brilliant ones that get nowhere.

Also, it's a lot easier to get good if you're being paid to do nothing but music.

 

[Sasaferrato]

If there's one thing the music industry is definitely not, it's a meritocracy. There are very musically mediocre acts who succeed and brilliant ones that get nowhere.

Also, it's a lot easier to get good if you're being paid to do nothing but music.

The Stones, The Who etc did their hard miles at the start, they didn't land fully formed on the stage at Wembley.

 

[mojo pixy]

The Stones, The Who etc did their hard miles at the start, they didn't land fully formed on the stage at Wembley.

You can't be unemployed and just play music now, not like you could eg. in the 60s, 70s or 80s. Not having to have a 'day job', just being able to play while claiming benefits, was a massive gift to musicians that we no longer have and probably never will again.

 

[RubyToogood]

The Stones, The Who etc did their hard miles at the start, they didn't land fully formed on the stage at Wembley.

Not sure why you think that invalidates my point.

 

[editor]

The Stones, The Who etc did their hard miles at the start, they didn't land fully formed on the stage at Wembley.

No, but then back then almost every pub would put on live music, bands didn't have to compete with Netflix and home entertainment systems, and it was a revolutionary time in music.

Try being in a band in the 2020s with a finite amount of gigs, fuck all money from record sales, barely any music press left and a lot less people going to grassroots shows.

 

[Sasaferrato]

No, but then back then almost every pub would put on live music, bands didn't have to compete with Netflix and home entertainment systems, and it was a revolutionary time in music.

Try being in a band in the 2020s with a finite amount of gigs, fuck all money from record sales, barely any music press left and a lot less people going to grassroots shows.

It certainly is harder now, but easier if you do make it. Instant worldwide exposure.