In America, Country and EDM Can Coexist Without Comparison

Image via Complex Original

Comparisons are ultimately about relationships. When determining the merit and relevance of these relationships, context is everything. Comparing the historic and long-lived American success of mainstream country music to the astonishing new global phenomenon that is EDM seems more like fodder for web pages than an idea that provides a fair comparison. In retrospect, it would have been a lot easier to cast these ideas off as heresy rather than attempt to measure the validity of such an assumption. DAD made it very clear that what we are talking about is the short-term parallels between country and EDM, in the American “pop” mainstream. The distinctions between the two, as DAD points out, will be whether the massive growth being experienced by EDM is something that can sustain and prosper for decades to come. What must be highlighted are the contradictory measurements of success that define country’s mainstream prosperity. Additionally, both genres’ unique structures of industry and creation, which equate to very distinct and divergent identities, must be contrasted. If there is one thing apparent about EDM’s success up to this point, it has had nothing to do with America’s mainstream radio broadcasting.

Country’s traditional measurements of success in previous time periods have been based upon hard copy record sales and radio play, unlike EDM. While there may be a push of youth into the pop-country market, the traditionally older audiences of country are being pushed away, and understandably so. This division could become troublesome for the future of a formerly undivided market. Country is built on lifestyle and cultural sediments. It appears that country, in the midst of an anemic sales market, is closer to an identity crisis than it is to a push for mainstream dominance. DAD’s example of one east coast radio station moving from EDM to country doesn’t say a whole lot. One could speculate that EDM listeners have very little active interest in American broadcast radio, therefore making pop-country radio a more profitable market place. The contrast here is that EDM on American radio has been relatively rare since its mainstream inception, and most EDM listeners have no intention of switching mediums just to hear repeated, advertisement-based propaganda. Most EDM listeners are using mobile streaming from SoundCloud, Spotify, and Internet radio, supplemented with digital downloads. EDM fans are active listeners, and are heavily invested in choosing the material they consume, rather than having it chosen for them.

It's hard not to agree with DAD when they say that country music in America has been built to last. The next question in order must be "is it still built to last?" Pre-Internet, and generally for the last century, content and distribution was scarce. Consumer attention was abundant; the tools for creators were slim. The barriers to market entry were high, while information was exponentially more scarce and less accessible. The overwhelming majority of country music success was built in decades pre-Internet, where traditional record labels flourished. The music industry used to be a sellers market, with the cost of substitutes being high and the quantity of substitutes being low. In a physical world, with limited shelf space, scarcity makes things more valuable. The music industry has always been about selling hard goods—up until digital sales turned everything inside out. In the history of CD sales, 2013 was the worst year ever. In a digital world, high accessibility leads to exponential visibility, brand familiarity, and higher potential revenue. The key comparison here is that EDM was built on, and for, a highly mobilized world. Old habits and excessive caution could mark the beginning of the end for those who cannot adapt. What remains certain is that independent creators will continue to innovate, and continue to push forward into the unknown.

The democratization of content, discovery, and creation challenges the traditional top-to-bottom hierarchies of nearly all mainstream music industries. The Internet not only fuels independent innovation, but also influences corporate strategy and decision-making processes. The Internet is erasing the division between consumers and creators and this has the music industry desperately scraping to find ways to remain relevant. As DAD has previously reported, record labels and production companies have done this through acquisitions and stake holds in previously independent entities, such as SoundCloud. Big industry is no longer the gatekeeper, and EDM has proven that. Examples of this paradigm shift are the massive successes of self-built dubstep sensation, Skrillex, and the virally explosive mainstream introduction of “electronic trap” via the "Harlem Shake."

The lack of a kingdom to rule for EDM is not based upon its inability to create one. EDM relies on globalized and hyperactive lines of communication and creation. These new tech fueled capabilities redefine the rigid infrastructures, which create overhead expense, and inefficiency. As quoted from a recent Billboard article featuring some random white dude, “...He was in Ibiza, Spain, with Skrillex, where they set up a makeshift hotel room studio... This is how a modern hit gets made, Diplo-style: not in big-money studios, but on the move, in hotel suites, private jets, SUVs -- bits and pieces pasted together with collaborators all over the world.” EDM is the pinnacle of lean business. While industrial hubs create infrastructure and jobs, true success in business is about utilizing efficiency, and maximizing margins. The rise of EDM never required geographically based industrial hubs. This provides a case model of efficiency that exceeds all genres and movements that have come before. EDM holds a model of elasticity through flat organization and democratized distribution, which gives it an immense advantage in a world that is rapidly evolving. Fundamentally, its popular use of cloud services like SoundCloud and BandCamp is not only the future of musical movements, but also of business and commerce as a whole. EDM has not only mobilized beyond the geographical production of music, but continues to influence innovative and resources through symbiotic relationships with parallel industries.

Country as a mainstay has been based upon simple principles: creating hits, and when the conditions are perfect, blockbusters. To quote DAD, “the deciding factor of excellence must go to the style of music that has consistently best lent itself to commercially friendly songs for a longer period of time with a more sustainable level of success.” To determine the value of this statement, we must examine the realities of how "pop" hits are made. As Chris Anderson notes in his book The Long Tail, when it comes to creating hits there are two basic options: (1) search far and wide for rare, unpredictable genius, or (2) use lowest-common-denominator formulas to manufacture something to sell. Luke Bryan’s 2013 album Crash My Party sold more albums in its first week than any male country artist in the last nine years. Bryan’s August 2013 single “That’s My Kind of Night” reached #1 on the Hot Country Songs listings in its third week and #2 in Airplay for October 2013. While being a massive win for the country industry as a whole, prominent country star Zac Brown regarded it as “...the worst song I’ve ever heard.” If the model by which we are judging value and success stems from creating hits, then country certainly holds the belt.

The two most important words in EDM are “new” and “free.” When winners and losers are based upon sales, the automatic assumption is that if something sold poorly, it was of low quality. While this may be true in some cases, it makes comparisons slim within the shift that has led artists to give away music for free. When looking at key examples of American success based upon this model, one could point to recently Grammy-nominated artist Pretty Lights. While going into the depths of the value in delivering content for

free isn’t the purpose of this article, you can read more about the ideas and successes that have underlined this new model. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t a crusade against the sale of music, I’m simply defining the very different ways in which success is measured and sold between the twilight zones of EDM and country. As DAD states, “mainstream music is a corporate democracy, a game defined by choice creating a clearly defined winner and loser.” What needs to be pointed out is that an industry’s measurement of success by sale doesn’t define excellence. It also does not define what is in the best interest of fans, aspiring artists, or long-term sustainable profits. When comparing the limited amounts of visible country releases, to a wide variety of free EDM substitutes, the "choices" presented by the mainstream industry are merely an illusion.

As DAD notes, you won’t find country music divided into numerous and often times confusing subgenres. Even as someone spending the last half-decade immersed in electronic music culture I often find myself hopelessly surrounded by sounds that seem indefinable. As a listener of a wide range of electronic music it can be frustrating to sift and sort through the massive amounts of music-released daily, with value often times scattered few and far between. Ultimately there is a reason that EDM is so segregated, and that is because the content often evolves faster than our ability to classify and organize it. As DAD stated, EDM is very much temporal, in other words it is constantly happening and changing through time. While I agree this is problematic for gaining new audiences, strong sub genres provide niche content for retaining subscribers. In many ways the very existence of DAD, is to provide you with a guide through these genres and ultimately to the content that you desire. The coining of the term EDM has been a marketer's dream. From packaging to selling everything electronic, an essential pathway has been created into all things mainstream. This point of comparison to coined genres like country is in fact very relevant, but only in the mainstream realms. While scattered fan bases may be a hindrance to effectively defining market segments and directing content, for those who really dig deep to find music they love, they wouldn’t have it any other way.

EDM has never been accountable to anyone, and as a whole it never wanted to be. No one ever knew things would get this big, and ideals and expectations were not based around it being so. Why should any of that change now? One of the greatest statements made by the rise of electronic music was the freedom from image, freedom from perfection, and abstaining from the scrutiny and destructive nature of the public eye. EDM has been overwhelmingly free from the tyranny of the public eye, and up until recently the ever so tainted old-white-men-in-suits money. Over its short history EDM has been dynamically creative, but also mindlessly not-so-creative. This is in large part because of the fact that creators pursued their own sovereign visions beyond the dogma of big label money and influence. If you want to throw cake at your fans, you can do that. If you want to press play on a multi million-dollar light cube with an LED mouse head, you can do that. If you want to create an entire orchestrated masterpiece, utilizing historically accurate live instrumentation, featuring members from the Colorado Symphony Orchestra, you can do that, too. And, well, if you want to do absolutely nothing on stage, you can also do that. However, there is more depth to EDM than stage presence, and regurgitated cookie cutter acts who just happen to be really, really, really, really good looking. At the end of the day, you can just be you, because unlike country, the music travels further than the face.

While the basis of DAD’s article states that EDM has a lot to learn from country music, the arguments provided paint a much different picture. If we want to talk about winners and losers in a context that is truly relevant to an exploding digital age, then we cannot ignore the effect of a hyper-connected audience, rapidly changing markets, and a globally charged landscape. We also cannot forget the unchanging nature of the rural country lifestyle itself. Additionally, much of EDM represents very real progression of independent creators, and the decreasing influence of the mainstream industry as a whole. From this reader’s standpoint, the tone and provocative affirmations attached to the original article are a desperate attempt to declare a winner in very narrow and unflattering context. Ultimately, there is no amount of reasoning or comparison that puts these two heavyweights in context, because they don’t need to compete, and there is room on top for both. If DAD really does believe that country music is better than EDM in America, the only question left to answer is "Do Androids Square-dance?"