How Do People Find New Music These Days?

Plus: Snoop Dogg, Pixies, Johnny Cash, Shakira, Hank Williams, The Doors, J Dilla

I’ve written a lot about how we music listeners discover new music. So far it’s mostly been about my own journey to more effectively find new music based on understanding my own tastes, but the entire point of that exercise is to help me know what I like, which will help me figure out how to find new music. My way, with spreadsheets and extreme engineeryness, may not be the best way, but it’s working for me. But it got me thinking about how everyone else is finding their music. I know for a fact that those who read cool music recommendation Substacks aren’t in the majority, sadly. So how is our music really getting delivered to our brains?

After the buzz of the news about Pitchfork, a well-respected music review site, being absorbed into GQ, many people started talking about the end of music journalism. I can see their point - GQ isn’t exactly known for its relatable everyman journalism. It’s more known for celebrity spreads and clickbait and listicles these days, at least in my mind, which is totally at odds with what I’d personally want from a music review site. Will GQ transform Pitchfork into something useless or unrecognizable? Who knows, but it seems like a possibility.

I’m not a music journalist - I’m a music fan. So with all respect and sympathy to the music journalists out there who will struggle with the Pitchfork situation, and who rightly lament the lack of opportunities and exposure for music journalists these days, I want to focus on the ways this will affect fans of music. Because fans, after all, are a large part of the reason music and music journalism exist in the first place.

I’m going to look at this through the lens of my main motivation as a music fan - discovering great new music. Certainly, if Pitchfork turns into some corporate listicle-generating monstrosity, that will be a bad thing for me as a music discoverer. But I want to zoom out a little and look at how critical music writing fits into the overall picture of how we discover new music, and how music fans can adjust to the new norm.

---

This felt like a good place for a gratuitous plug for some of my new favorite music sources this month, in no particular order. Down with the algorithms!

• Musicmap - A fascinating project that takes music nerdiness to the next level. Zoom in and check out the web of how the different genres interconnect, and prepare for limitless entertainment and new ideas for what to listen to. It even comes with ready-made playlists to illustrate each of the many sub-genres. It might be algorithm-supported, but it’s super transparent and lets you use it however you want, which I appreciate far more than the black-box approach of Spotify et al.

• Songletter
  - Half of my Liked playlist come from this newsletter lately!

• Network Notes- Not primarily music recommendations, but fascinating reads about the music business

---

So how do people discover music these days? According to this 2021 survey from YouGov, which surveyed music listeners from 17 different major markets, the answer looks something like this:

Credit: YouGov (link)

Note that the percentages don’t add to 100 - the percentage represents the number of people in that age group who use that media format to discover music. Some presumably use multiple sources. Also I know this is a few years old, but this was the best data and the most pleasing chart I could find on this subject, so we’re gonna roll with it.

I’m not sure where awesome Substackers like me fit into this picture, but I’m gonna guess they fall under websites and blogs. Or maybe friends and family, right everybody??? Right? ☺️

The results, although a couple of years out of date, actually seem pretty intuitive to me. Young adults - millennial-ish and younger - get their music mostly from music apps and social media, while our older friends rely on the radio, although the social media percentage in the older generations is higher than I might have guessed. 

I find video games a surprisingly large source of music, but it makes sense in retrospect - video games have become so cinematic and epic, including the soundtracks, and have been for years now. I can frequently be found listening to the Skyrim soundtrack during longer writing sessions - I know it’s a decade old but damn that soundtrack brings back epic memories of my gaming days. I expect many gamers feel the same about their favorite games. Also let’s not forget the incredible game soundtracks us Millennials grew up with, like Tony Hawk Pro Skater, that featured real bands and pretty much made me fall in love with punk music as a kid. Video games are becoming the new tastemakers for younger folks - I might have to do a video game music series at some point

But back to the music journalism thing; my age group actually has the highest percentage of music found on websites at 17% which seems relatively low. As important as music writing is to a lot of people, it seems that for fans of music, the impact of a more fractured and corporatified music critic landscape won’t really be that large. Of course, you can make the case (as I have) that the ratio should be higher for critics and curators than for the algorithm. It just appears, based on the current state, that losing Pitchfork and its peers to the corporate giants means losing at most 17% of our music recommendation sources. Very sad, but not insurmountable from a listener perspective. That suggests to me that some of the points from the Guardian article might be very true: not only is this a “travesty for music journalists and musicians,” but it also has the potential to be a travesty for music fans, who might lose a great source of recommendations without really noticing, as social media and others elbow music writing out of the picture. More on that later.

Music apps and social media provide a huge majority of music recommendations across age groups. And what do those two sources have in common? They are driven by recommendation algorithms, for the most part, not people. Even instagram influencers are largely brought to your screen by recommendation algorithms, no matter how pure their recommendations might be. That’s a huge thing to be aware of - many people get most of their music from algorithms that operate in utter secrecy. 

Each algorithm is wired to benefit its corporate owners, not the listener in all cases - that’s why these companies exist, after all. To make money. Fair enough. Sometimes the interests of the algorithm’s oeners and those of the consumer converge, true, but when they don’t the algorithm will push you towards music that will hold your attention instead of suggesting new tracks to see if you like them. An echo chamber forms, and you listen endlessly to the same songs, and the companies make money as their listening or watching metrics skyrocket.

There’s little surprising on the above numbers, but a lot that’s depressing. The fact that so many more people get their new music from computer-centric places instead of other real people is concerning, not because the algorithms will take over the world, but because the companies who control those algorithms have different goals than listeners do. That’s not morally wrong (in theory) but it’s an inescapable fact.

---

I don’t have any bold predictions about the future of music recommendation and curation, but one of the things I think is most worth following - whether in horror or in amazement - is TikTok’s role in the music industry. Many seem to believe TikTok is the next generation of music discovery - to me, that just sounds like a fancy way of saying “we invented a new algorithm to direct your streaming tastes.” Sure, TikTok might reach people differently, but if they wade into music streaming and recommendation formally, what’s the difference? Music still gets promoted by a black box of code, and listeners are still as much at the mercy of the labels paying TikTok for promotion as anything else.

---

***Update after the Universal / TikTok war that materialized after this article was written: I think this space is so lucrative that someone in social media will pick up the torch in the unlikely event TikTok fails to keep it, so you can substitute TikTok above for the social media company, new or existing, of your choice and I think my point still stands***

---

However you feel about social media, one thing I can’t get past is that the goals of the creators and the goals of the consumers are often completely opposing. The creator is incentivized to get more attention, and the consumer is incentivized to find great content. You might make the case that creators are thus incentivized to make great content, but that has never been my experience - creators can often make more of a splash with crappy content that stirs discussion. Plus, music influencers know that they’ll get more attention following trends rather than discovering new music. This could lead to a world where the rich get richer, if you will - the most popular artists will get more popular because they’re popular, while those at the bottom trying to break into this vicious wheel of popularity will have a harder time than ever doing so.

The situation reminds me of the classic Innovator’s Dilemma they teach in business schools. Basically, in the innovator’s dilemma, new companies tend to grow fast because of a new innovation that they can focus on, but when they reach a certain level of success, more innovation becomes harmful for the business. Essentially they reach a point where instead of creating new ideas for growth, they are forced to protect the growth they’ve already achieved, meaning their tolerance for new risky ideas goes out the window. A new music journalism website, if one were to appear, would face the same dilemma. They might make their name on hot takes and great content, but at a certain point, there will be some trigger that forces them to change tack - they might get so big that they become a target for lawsuits, or even a target for acquisition like Pitchfork. These scenarios, and countless others, put those in charge of the business in a hard position - more innovative writing, like what got them to this position in the first place, suddenly puts their success at risk when considering the new stakeholders who have entered the game - in my examples, lawyers and investors.

So what’s the solution to the Innovator’s Dilemma? Well, an MBA might tell you that the solution is for the established companies to keep innovating as if they’re still small. They might create little offshoot think-tanks who are allowed to experiment and create whatever they want, and the host company will take all their innovations and continue to lead their market. (Hint: that never works, or at least it forces all the good ideas that aren’t related to the host company’s business to be buried forever under NDA’s).

But I think there’s a better solution, at least in my ideal imaginary world. The Innovator’s Dilemma assumes that the primary motivation of the business is growth. But what about smaller businesses that primarily want to just keep existing? Or non-profits who want to grow in ways that aren’t 100% financial? These businesses might not succumb to the dilemma at all, or at least not in the same ways. The Innovator’s Dilemma would be broken if the innovating company actually cares about quality and customer experience over profits - but that’s only practical when the company is extremely small because after all, when you have employees they’ve gotta eat, and that brings us right back to the money discussion.

So to complete my analogy here, I think there’s a new path for music journalism, and curation as a whole, that needs to be explored - small, grassroots, non-profit-driven journalism that doesn’t have to answer to the market forces that ruin larger businesses like Pitchfork. I think this can take many forms.

One that’s already taking root is the rise of smaller publications like those on Substack - but I won’t focus on that here, since every newsletter writer will have the same idea. As I’ve written before, writers with similar motivations to their readers are more common in smaller formats, and that’s the kind of thing you’ll find on Substack. But newsletters that get super big are just as prone to fall prey to the Innovator’s Dilemma as any other website or business.

I think another solution to preserve authentic music recommendations is to expand the independent or non-profit curation model further. Doing this in social media seems counterproductive, but I wish there were a realistic solution. What if there was a social media algorithm that recommended only creators with less than a thousand followers? Or a platform that made the creators choose their top 10% most active fans and block all the rest? Or a platform that only lets people follow someone for a month before forcing them to move on and follow someone new? Or only let you post once a month, forcing you to focus on quality vs. quantity? These kinds of ideas - which would force creators to stay small - would NEVER work in an enterprise that thinks growth=profit, but maybe there’s another model out there that could sustain them. The small businesses of the internet, I’d call them. Little neighborhoods in cyberspace that are kept small on purpose because they function better that way, avoiding the pollution of endless growth and the demands of insatiable investors.

As cool as that kind of internet might be, it’s nothing more than a pipe dream right now. I think all we can do as music fans in the meantime is just think. Think about where our music recommendations come from, who might be steering the content we see, and use common sense when consuming social media. Think about how many algorithms are steering your day-to-day life, and don’t fall into the trap that social media accounts always care about your needs vs. their own growth. Think about ways to find lesser-known music; not because that’s just the cool thing to do, but because we legitimately might be missing things if we just let the algorithms decide. And finally, think about how we can help each other connect as fans, because finding personal connection will always yield better results than being just a number on someone’s follower count.

Project BAE - Best Albums Ever - Episode 11

Doggystyle - Snoop Dogg

This was the best shiznit I’ve heard in a while. I forgot how great Snoop’s music is. This was a little before my time, so I didn’t bond with this music myself growing up - it was almost a decade old when I could understand what was going on, and by then Snoop had basically become part of everyday culture. It won’t be for everyone due to some of the lyrics that haven’t aged well, but it was totally awesome listening to this album for the music and realizing there’s a reason the guy is so famous. 

Brain Rating: 8

Taste Rating: 8.5

Jams:

• “Gin and Juice”

• “Tha Shiznit”

• “Lodi Dodi”

• “Who Am I (What’s My Name)”

Doolittle - Pixies

Who ever said 80’s rock was no good? Seems like I’ve heard that forever growing up, but why? This album was released in 1989 and is just awesome. Critically acclaimed while also scratching that slightly punky alt-rock itch. Fantastic.

Brain Rating: 8.2

Taste Rating: 8

Jams:

• “Debaser”

• “Wave Of Mutiliation”

• “Here Comes Your Man”

• “Mr. Grieves”

• “Hey”

At Folsom Prison - Johnny Cash

I’m part of the generation who learned about Johnny Cash in part from the Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon movie about Cash and June Carter. No sense lying about that fact. I was young when I saw it, so there’s no easy way to avoid that connection in my head when I hear his music now. My other main exposure to Johnny Cash was his 2002 cover of “Hurt” by Nine inch Nails, which is of course amazing and made a big viral appearance at some point in the past few years. This album came after Cash’s decline and (mostly) recovery from drug abuse, and revitalized his career, not to mention paying homage to the prison that inspired “Folsom Prison Blues,” one of his hits.

For an album recorded in 1968 at a prison, I was impressed by the quality of the recording. Cash’s banter with the audience (including some announcements summoning prisoners to reception for visitors) and the excellent performance made this a fun listen.

Brain Rating: 8

Taste Rating: 5.5

Jams:

• “Folsom Prison Blues”

• “Cocaine Blues”

• “Jackson”

Donde Están Los Ladrones? - Shakira

Reviews praise the lyrics in this album, which I truly wish I could understand - the music and emotions I get from what I can understand are nothing but quality, but I know I’m missing out by not speaking enough Spanish, which sours the experience somewhat. Reading along with translated lyrics helped, but it was still hard to link the words to the emotion in her voice as she spoke them. I also get the comparisons to Amy Winehose that resulted from this album.

Brain Rating: 9

Taste Rating: 3

Jams:

• “Ciega, Sordomuda”

• “Moscas en la Casa”

The Doors - The Doors

The Doors were somehow not one of my favorite classic rock bands growing up. I think the main reason was the organ that replaced a lot of the bass and lead guitar parts that I’d grown up to love and expect in classic rock. That dang organ just didn’t hit me right as I power-chorded my way through every song I could get my hands on.

Listening now, the organ does lend some of the otherwise dark and brooding rock a little bit silly-sounding tone at times, but it’s mild enough that the overall effect is uniqueness rather than sounding gimmicky. And of course, the songwriting and the undeniable talent of the band, not least that of Jim Morrison, makes up for almost anything I didn’t enjoy tone-wise (even the hard-to-tolerate organ solo in “Light My Fire”). And the songwriting still sounds ahead of its time.

Brain Rating: 8

Taste Rating: 4

Jams:

• “The Crystal Ship”

• “Twentieth Century Fox”

40 Greatest Hits - Hank Williams

Another compilation from the days before concept albums. Hank Williams had a pretty amazing music career considering it lasted only 6 years or so. This album is great because of the influence Hank had on countless artists. I normally have trouble really relating to 50’s music, but some of these are such classics they’ve almost become fossilized in my mind. Like the songs sung by bards in my favorite fantasy novels. They just exist in everyone’s consciousness without any specific reason for being there. There’s a place for Hank somewhere in everybody’s playlists, even today. 

Brain Rating: 9

Taste Rating: 4

Jams:

• “Move It On Over”

• “My Bucket’s Got A Hole In It”

• “Hey, Good Lookin’”

Donuts - J Dilla

This album was released 3 days before J Dilla’s death in 2006, with most of the tracks recorded mostly or completely in his hospital room. If that doesn’t give you chills, I don’t know what will. As Tidal wrote on the album’s 10 year anniversary:

“Armed with a Boss SP-303 sampler and a portable 45 rpm record player, brought to him by friends from respected indie label Stones Throw, Dilla would produce 29 of the album’s 31 tracks in the hospital, leaving behind a lingering parting gift that keeps on giving today.”

It’s 31 songs over 43 minutes, and I don’t see a reason to pick favorite songs here. It’s an amazing work start to finish, and I think it’s best appreciated all together. I still have goosebumps from listening to the whole thing.

Brain Rating: 10

Taste Rating: 7

Jams

• “Workinonit”

• “The Diff’rence”

• “Anti-American Graffiti”