Music

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Richard Tandy, Keyboardist for Electric Light Orchestra, Dies at 76

      by

      He helped shape the band’s futuristic sound, which blended Beatles-esque pop with orchestral arrangements.Richard Tandy, the keyboardist for the British rock band Electric Light Orchestra, who helped shape the futuristic blend of Beatles-esque pop and orchestral arrangements that catapulted the group to global fame in the 1970s, has died. He was 76.His death was announced by Jeff Lynne, the band’s frontman and leader, in a social media post. Mr. Lynne, who called Mr. Tandy his “longtime collaborator,” did not specify when Mr. Tandy had died or the cause of death.Born on March 26, 1948, in Birmingham, England, Mr. Tandy joined E.L.O. after the release of its first album in 1972. He initially played bass guitar but became the group’s keyboardist after another member left.Mr. Tandy remained a core member of the band through ever-changing lineups, alongside Mr. Lynne and the drummer Bev Bevan, until it disbanded in 1986. He was Mr. Lynne’s “multi-instrumentalist, co-orchestrator and valued musical partner,” the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame said when it inducted E.L.O. in 2017. When Mr. Lynne revived the band in the 2000s, Mr. Tandy was the only other longtime member to participate. More

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      The Culture Desk: Taylor Swift’s “The Tortured Poets Department” Reviewed

      by

      Larissa Anderson and On Friday, Taylor Swift released her 11th studio album, “The Tortured Poets Department.” Two hours after the initial release at midnight, she announced a second volume of the album, bringing the number of new songs to 31.Our pop music critic Lindsay Zoladz assessed them all and found that despite several strong songs, Swift’s abundance yields diminishing returns.On today’s episodeLindsay Zoladz, a pop music critic for The Times.Photo Illustration by The New York Times; Photo: Michael Tran/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAdditional readingLindsay’s review of “The Tortured Poets Department”The New York Times Audio app is home to journalism and storytelling, and provides news, depth and serendipity. If you haven’t already, download it here — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      FKA twigs Dances Martha Graham: ‘This Is Art in Its Truest Form’

      by

      Once a young bunhead, the acclaimed musical artist is taking the stage with the Martha Graham Dance Company. For her, this is holy grail territory.The rebellious spirit of Martha Graham has found a rebellious soul mate in another creative powerhouse. A classically trained dancer, she’s known in the world as an acclaimed recording artist. She moves like water. Her pole dancing is pretty astounding, too. This is FKA twigs.On Thursday, she will make her debut as a dancer with the Graham company in the solo “Satyric Festival Song” (1932). “To me, this is, honestly, like winning a Grammy,” she said. “I feel like I’m winning a Grammy.”At the company’s gala performance, FKA twigs will slip into her costume, a bold and graphic striped dress designed by Graham. She will pop into the air as if the floor were on fire. She will twist and bend her body into jagged edges. And she will tease the audience with tilts of the head and dancing, expressive eyes. This is a solo inspired by rituals that Graham observed in the pueblos of the American Southwest, specifically, the kachina figures that served as comic relief at religious ceremonies. Graham was also poking fun at her serious, dramatic self.“To me, this is, honestly, like winning a Grammy,” FKA twigs said of dancing with the Graham company. Caroline Tompkins for The New York TimesAn artist of vast imagination whose music defies genre, FKA twigs is adventurous in all of her pursuits. Her shimmering, fluent physicality, displayed over the years in videos and performances, is equally fearless and lissome. “My values of success and achievement are maybe slightly different to other people’s,” FKA twigs said in an interview from London. Many of her colleagues will be at Coachella over the next two weeks, “which is obviously such an honor,” she said. “But I’ve spent the whole of my life in the dance studio. I studied Martha Graham’s technique at dance school. I took the class many times when I was a younger dancer.”The Graham company, though, didn’t know she had studied the technique. So how did this solo happen? Through that unofficial dance network known as Instagram.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      How are musicians supposed to survive on $0.00173 per stream? | Damon Krukowski

      by

      Many of the younger musicians I know – musicians in the full flush of their career – don’t see a path forward toward making a living. These aren’t artists failing to connect with a public; on the contrary, they are releasing widely reviewed albums, going on tours and communicating (constantly) with their fans via social media. But this work is not paying them enough to manage without second jobs or side hustles.That’s a broken system. It’s not just broken for individual artists, it’s broken for our society as a whole. We all benefit from music. And I believe we as a society want that music to come from as wide and deep and rich and varied sources as exist. How could we not?Yet that’s not what is paramount for those holding the finances of recorded music in their hands. In the platform era, the income for recording artists depends on a handful of massively capitalized corporations: Spotify, Apple, Amazon and Google dominate streaming, and streaming now accounts for 84% of all recorded music revenue in the US. There’s almost nothing left for recorded music outside that system.What that system is paying for content is an average, across these platforms, of approximately $0.00173 per stream. And that meager amount, believe it or not, doesn’t even go directly to the artist. It goes to the rights holder for the master recording, which is usually a record label – which then splits this income with artists according to individual contracts, with a typical artist share somewhere between 15% and 50%.The math, at this point, is beyond ridiculous. Which is why so many younger artists I know simply don’t see a path forward in recorded music. What’s more, this crisis has come to a head just as AI enters the scene, threatening to do away with much original recorded music altogether.What to do? We need to rethink the finances of streaming. We need to let artists have a say in how the money from this new technology – and there is a lot of it, it’s 84% of the entire recorded music industry after all – is shared. To date, artists have had no seat at the table as streaming platforms and the three major labels – Universal, Warner and Sony – decided how the revenue from this medium would flow.A new bill being introduced to Congress by the representatives Rashida Tlaib and Jamaal Bowman – from two of the powerhouse music districts in the country, Detroit and the Bronx – would do much to correct this problem. The Living Wage for Musicians Act would bring more money for artists into the system, and for the first time create a direct pathway for that money to flow from streaming platforms directly to recording musicians.The Living Wage for Musicians Act proposes a straightforward mechanism: an additional subscription fee, earmarked for artists, plus a percentage of platforms’ non-subscription revenue to cover ad-supported (free) streaming, is paid into an Artist Compensation Royalty Fund. That fund, administered by a non-profit, would then distribute money directly to artists according to their monthly share of streams. A maximum cap on earnings per track per month would insure a more progressive distribution of this new royalty, to help create more sustainable careers in more genres and in more diverse communities of music.This direct payment is not a new idea for recorded music, or for Congress. When satellite and internet radio first came online in the 1990s, Congress passed a law creating a pathway for payments from these new platforms straight to musicians. A non-profit was established to collect the revenue and distribute it – SoundExchange – and has been doing so efficiently since the early 2000s. The administrative apparatus for this already exists.However, when streaming emerged it – like so many other “disruptive” tech businesses – dodged existing regulations and has to date avoided any direct payments to recording artists. The platforms and the major labels have had a more or less free hand to develop this technology and its payment systems for over a decade, and they have failed artists as they did. Congress needs to step in and make streaming work also for those who create the music that we all – I mean, all of us, musicians and listeners – need.
      Damon Krukowski is an American musician, poet and writer. He is an organizer for United Musicians and Allied Workers More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      N.Y. Philharmonic Adds 2 Premieres to a Diet of Classics

      by

      Jaap van Zweden, the orchestra’s music director, led new works by Joel Thompson and Tan Dun amid pieces by Mozart, Beethoven and Mendelssohn.When Jaap van Zweden, the music director of the New York Philharmonic, led the orchestra at the beginning of the year, the program featured repertory hits: a Wagner prelude, a Beethoven piano concerto and a Brahms symphony. Last week he returned with more of the same: a Mendelssohn overture, a Mozart piano concerto and a Beethoven symphony.This felt a little like “let Jaap be Jaap,” with van Zweden — whose short Philharmonic tenure ends in a few months — finally freed of the burden of presenting new works and past rarities, and able to focus wholly on the standards that have been at the center of his conducting career.But on Thursday at David Geffen Hall, he — or at least the administrators who have encouraged more adventure in his choices — offered a reminder that his time in New York had not been entirely without variety. In fact, the concert offered something unusual in the orchestral field: In a mixed program that will be repeated on Saturday and Sunday, the two (two!) premieres on the first half together lasted longer than the Mendelssohn symphony (yes, more Mendelssohn) after intermission.It was too bad that neither of those new pieces made a positive impression and that performing them together worked against both.First came Joel Thompson’s “To See the Sky,” obscurely subtitled “an exegesis for orchestra.” Two years ago, the Philharmonic premiered Thompson’s sumptuously moody song cycle “The Places We Leave.” Now 35, he has largely specialized in vocal music, and the 20-minute “To See the Sky,” heard for the first time on Thursday, is his longest instrumental work; you got the sense of a young composer trying to figure out how to fill such a substantial span.The titles of the piece’s three sections together form a quotation from the musician Cécile McLorin Salvant: “Sometimes/you have to gaze into a well/to see the sky.” From its beginning, with a series of soft rumbles that explode into violent bursts, much of the work alternates sections of loud and bumptious rhythms, like a parody of hip-hop beats, with periods of subdued lyricism. But these repetitive assertive-then-reticent cycles don’t accumulate interest or tension — though there are nice touches, like the sound of a trumpet flecked with harp.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      The voting bloc that could decide the US election: Swifties

      by

      After weeks of maddening speculation over whom Taylor Swift might support in the 2024 US presidential elections, the venerated pop star finally revealed her endorsement: the right to vote itself.“Vote the people who most represent YOU into power,” Swift urged fans in an Instagram story amid Super Tuesday’s primary elections, perhaps the last chance to stop Donald Trump from once again seizing the Republican nomination for president.Although Swift could still endorse a candidate in the months ahead, her “no comment” on who should win on Super Tuesday was a noted refusal to engage in party politics at this stage. Joe Biden’s campaign is still jockeying for her endorsement, while Trump has said Swift would be “disloyal” for backing Biden and rightwingers have suggested that her 18-year career is a “psy op” – a ludicrous theory that nearly one in five Americans have said they believe.What is true, though, is that Swift currently possesses unprecedented power: an endorsement from the most beloved singer in the United States could potentially tip the balance in what’s likely to be a close election. A reported billionaire, Swift can reroute economies, trigger congressional action and spur tens of thousands of people to register to vote. While her endorsement is unlikely to sway a voter who is undecided between Trump and Biden – if such an American exists – experts believe Swift could convince people who don’t feel energized by Biden to vote for him anyway.But whether Swift will wield that power or instead stay out of the electoral fray remains unclear. Although Swift endorsed Democrats in 2018, she has in recent years increasingly withdrawn from such overt displays of partisanship or making controversial statements. That change that has coincided with her return to the top of the celebrity food chain and, in the process, left some Swifties feeling like their idol could do better.View image in fullscreen“She’s at the height of her popularity right now, so I think she’s probably pretty hesitant to do any sort of political activism,” said Jared Quigg, a 22-year-old Indiana journalist who said he listened to Swift every day. “But because of the influence she has, if she came out and called for a ceasefire in Gaza, I think that … would put more pressure on the US government, especially if Biden wants her endorsement.“I don’t think that’s an exaggeration,” Quigg added. “She is one of the most popular people in the world.”So are Swifties a voting bloc the parties should be targeting?Usually portrayed as a blur of sequin-wearing women draped in friendship bracelets, Swifties are not quite so homogeneous as they may seem. More than half of Americans identify as Swift fans and 16% say they are “avid fans”, according to a March 2023 Morning Consult poll that was conducted before the launch of Swift’s Eras tour. While the avid fans are mostly white and suburban, 48% are men, contrary to the popular perception that Swift’s music appeals largely to women.If about one in six Americans is a Swiftie, there is simply no way they’ll all agree – on Swift, or on anything else.However, there is a clear political tilt within Swiftiedom. Swift’s own politics lean to the left, and her listeners follow suit: more than half of her avid fans are Democrats, while 23% are Republicans and another 23% are independents.Swift has long taken a pragmatic approach to politics. She timed her Instagram post endorsing Democrats in the 2018 midterms to hit the internet after the US leg of her Reputation tour concluded, breaking her career-long silence on politics but shielding herself from red-state backlash. Swift then portrayed her next album, Lover, as an embrace of liberalism and love – including queer love, in the song You Need to Calm Down.By any normal artist’s standard, both Reputation and Lover were wildly successful, but neither album sold quite as well as 2014’s 1989. Notably, neither garnered many Grammy nods; in her 2020 documentary Miss Americana, which tracked Swift’s political awakening, Swift was devastated by the snub to Reputation.Yet, at her (extremely relative) commercial lowest – and when politics could feed into the personal narrative linked to Lover – Swift was willing to use her cachet for divisive political causes. In May 2020, when that year’s presidential nomination process was all but sewn up – much like this year’s Super Tuesday – Swift took to the platform then known as Twitter to spit at Trump: “After stoking the fires of white supremacy and racism your entire presidency, you have the nerve to feign moral superiority before threatening violence? ‘When the looting starts the shooting starts’??? We will vote you out in November.”Today, three original albums and one Ticketmaster-breaking world tour later, Swift has managed to soar past even the stratospheric heights of her 1989 fame, becoming as ubiquitous as gravity and just as untouchable. Yet after endorsing Democrats in 2018 and 2020, including Biden, she only urged fans to “vote” in the 2022 midterm elections, just as she did on Super Tuesday.“I feel like a lot of the things that she has spoken out about are things that are directly benefiting her if they go one way or negatively affecting if they go the other way,” said Jess Simpson, a 21-year-old who is a member of the University of Oregon Taylor Swift Society, which holds Swift-related karaoke and trivia events. “She claims to be a feminist, but that’s not what that is. It’s not just speaking out about the things that you fall into. It’s about reaching past that.”Ryan Kovatch, who also belongs to the University of Oregon Taylor Swift Society, was frustrated to see the Eras tour visit states that had passed laws attacking the rights of LGBTQ+ children.View image in fullscreenSwift did give a short, relatively vague speech about those laws and Pride month. “There have been so many harmful pieces of legislation that have put people in the LGBTQ and queer community at risk,” Swift told a Chicago crowd in June. “It’s painful for everyone, every ally, every loved one, every person of these communities, and that’s why I’m always posting, ‘This is when the midterms are, this is when these important key primaries are.’”Meanwhile, far less successful artists, such as Swift’s friend Haley Kiyoko, took a risk by bringing drag queens on stage in Tennessee after the state passed a law banning drag shows. Ariana Grande, whose fame comes closer to Swift’s, has publicly pledged to donate more than $1m to fight bills targeting transgender people.“It feels like the stakes have gotten higher and she’s backed off pretty starkly,” Kovatch said. “It is strongly disappointing, as a member of the LGBT community, to see that and see the potential there and watch it be foregone time and time again.“Especially using the rainbow during the You Need to Calm Down set,” Kovatch added, referring to a song in which Swift struts amid rainbow lights and proclaims her support for LGBTQ+ rights.“What is there to lose? You have billions of dollars,” asked Trey Pokorny, a 21-year-old whose drag persona is Treylor Swift and another member of the University of Oregon Taylor Swift Society. “Small artists – their careers can be canceled by a tweet. It takes so much more than a tweet to end Taylor Swift.”Swifties have also repeatedly raised eyebrows at Swift’s use of private jets. In 2022, Yard named Swift as the celebrity with the worst CO2 emissions; a Reddit post about the topic on the main subreddit for Taylor Swift fans triggered more than 2,000 comments.“It’s a little rough to see how many celebrities abuse their power of flying all over the place in their private jets and clogging up the environment,” said 19-year-old Addy Al-Saigh, who said she paid $2,000 to sit in nosebleed seats at the Eras tour. But, she added: “In the end, I know that there’s not really much I can do about it.”If Swift does endorse Biden, Al-Saigh said she would probably direct her Pennsylvania college’s Swift fan club to get involved in the 2024 elections. “If she came out and actually did that, I think I would have a reason to also put it up and say, ‘Go vote for Biden,’ because we’re related to Taylor,” she said.View image in fullscreenWhen it came to the 2024 elections, the Swifties who the Guardian spoke to said they were confident any Swift endorsement would ultimately be for Biden – a move they support. (Or, at least, preferred to the alternative.) But Quigg also cautioned fans to think for themselves.“I generally believe that people should not get their politics from a pop star,” he said. “At the end of the day, she’s a songwriter. She’s not a political genius.”He’s not sure fellow fans share that view. He recently saw a post on X declaring: “I definitely believe Taylor could convince Swifties to do a January 6.”“There is something to that,” Quigg said. More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Cat Janice, Singer With Cancer Who Left Her Son a Dance Track, Dies at 31

      by

      TikTok rallied around the singer, who revealed during her cancer treatment that she had transferred the rights to her final song to her son, as an inheritance of sorts.Cat Janice, a singer and songwriter who released a buoyant pop track from hospice that galvanized her thousands of supporters online to sway, and even groove, in the face of tragedy, died on Wednesday at her family home in Annandale, Va. She was 31.The cause was sarcoma, according to William Ipsan, her brother.The singer and multi-instrumentalist, whose legal name was Catherine Ipsan, started writing music as a teenager and released it throughout her 20s. But “Dance You Outta My Head,” which she shared on social media alongside candid discussion of her grueling cancer treatments, quickly became the biggest hit of her career. Over disco-inflected guitar and exuberant strings, she sang about “dancing on the edge of disaster.”Ms. Ipsan released the song on Jan. 19, a few days after entering hospice care. The song caught fire as her health outlook darkened, with social media users — including celebrities like Jason Derulo — leaving messages of support.It became a common soundtrack on TikTok after Ms. Ipsan encouraged her followers to stream the song as a way of supporting her 7-year-old son, Loren, after her death. “I am leaving this song behind for my son,” she wrote on TikTok. In another post, she said she had “changed all the rights from my songs so every presave and every stream goes to Loren.”The song has been used in more than two million TikTok videos and became the singer’s first song to enter the Billboard charts.“I’m praying my story isn’t over yet,” she wrote in a post on her birthday, the day after the song’s release. “But if it is, this is a pretty incredible way to say goodbye.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Bite me! How Apple’s download chart became a new battleground for pop – and politics

      by

      Over 20 years after its launch, Apple’s online music store has found a surprising new life – as a battleground for online turf wars. Last week, at least five songs rose to the upper reaches of the Apple Music (formerly iTunes) download charts, powered by different internet factions. Nicki Minaj and Megan Thee Stallion fans waged war against each other as foot soldiers in the rappers’ feud; Britney Spears fans mass-bought the singer’s years-old songs Liar and Selfish as a way to troll her ex-boyfriend, Justin Timberlake, who released a song also called Selfish last month; and rightwing media influencer Ben Shapiro encouraged his fans to drive Facts, his new rap song with Canadian former wrestler Tom MacDonald, up the charts. Far from a measure of objective popularity, the chart reflected political biases, years-old feuds and outright pettiness.Fans mobilising to push certain albums or songs up the Apple Music download charts is nothing new – in 2018, a group of Mariah Carey fans mass-bought the singer’s 2001 flop Glitter as part of a campaign called #JusticeForGlitter. But musician and writer Jaime Brooks says that the cratering of the digital download market in recent years – around 152m digital songs were sold in the US in 2022, less than half of 2018’s 412m – has allowed campaigns that are smaller and far less coordinated than #JusticeForGlitter to disproportionately affect the charts. “I don’t think anybody’s actually using their phones and iTunes to listen to files any more, except people who have not upgraded their setup since 2012 – there are a lot of people like that in America, but not enough to sustain these huge numbers,” she says. “This [downloading] is a purely performative gesture – it only ever happens as a result of some kind of factional culture war that somebody has the money and inclination to try to represent on the charts.”Indeed, a lot of these sales campaigns have an implicit or explicit political meaning. Shapiro’s song, naturally, is part of an attempt to “own the libs”; Spears fans see their trolling of Timberlake as a kind of punishment for his perceived mistreatment of the singer when they dated, and for the unapologetic pose he has since adopted. In Megan’s song, she references Megan’s Law, a piece of legislation that requires the government to make information about sex offenders public, which many saw as a shot against Minaj, whose husband is a registered sex offender; Minaj’s song accuses Megan of falsely accusing Tory Lanez of shooting her.These relatively niche buying campaigns seem small fry in comparison with two campaigns led by the American conservative establishment last year. In July, Jason Aldean’s single Try That in a Small Town was sent to No 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 after its video was pulled from Country Music Television amid criticisms, including that it was racist, which Aldean denied. In August, the total unknown Oliver Anthony debuted at No 1 with his libertarian – and, some say, QAnon-pandering – single Rich Men North of Richmond.Kristin Robinson, a senior writer at Billboard, says the Aldean song in particular was not just driven by his fans, but by onlookers who saw the track as a cause to support. “Anchors on Fox News and other kinds of conservative talking heads led a fandom – not in the musical sense but in a political sense – to support that song,” she says. That both songs were in the country space, she says, only helped. “Country music still does quite well with sales in general, because country tends to be a bit of an older audience that has more buying power, or might not be as technologically savvy.”View image in fullscreenSales also have a disproportionate effect on the Billboard charts. A single sale counts for 150 streams, which is why astute fans tend to focus more on downloads than the kinds of “streaming parties” that some fanbases hold. Brooks says that education on the charts – the ways in which certain formats are weighted more heavily than others, and how a fairer chart might be implemented – has been led by K-pop fanbases. “They’ve developed among themselves a whole ideology about this type of thing, and they really did teach the pop fan community about how this stuff works,” she says. “That’s factoring into the current situation, where you had Megan fans organising to try to put big numbers on the board to fight back against Nicki.”Of course, few of these campaigns create their desired impact. While Megan’s Hiss debuted at No 1 – with around 100k in sales, 29.2m streams and 2.9m radio impressions – Shapiro’s song debuted at No 16, Timberlake’s at No 19 and Minaj’s at No 23. Brooks says that, either way, we’re likely to see more of this in coming years, as music consumption drops on the whole and pop music becomes more tied in with celebrity and politics. “Politics is sort of eating music – in the case of the Ben Shapiro thing, it’s enthusiasm driven by the political media industrial complex, and with Britney v Justin, it’s the celebrity industrial complex,” she says. “It’s all ultimately pointless – it’s people competing to be into the virtuous product v the non-virtuous product. But ultimately, it’s all the same shit.” More