The copycat, the originator, and the esoteric

All around where I live, it has become customary to host weekend outdoor concerts in the town centers. I enjoy going to them from time to time because it is often a great atmosphere.

Nine times out ten, the music is provided by a cover band. A cover band is a group of semi-pro musicians that play “covers,” meaning songs that are already hits. There are cover bands for about any genre you can imagine from oldies to what you hear on the radio right now. In a lot of cases, they play the songs as close to the original arrangement as possible. The only real difference is the considerable variance in talent compared to the musicians that actually made the song famous.

I was thinking recently about how many cover bands must exist just in Atlanta. There have to be thousands of them. With maybe a tiny number of exceptions, these are groups that are basically nameless. Their job is just to provide adequate music for events. They play music usually for free or maybe a pizza. In twenty years, they will either be disbanded or still playing the same events for a pizza. There is nothing wrong with any of that, but the reality is that cover bands have little upside potential in music. They have no upside because they are simply copycats.

There is another group of musicians that I would call originators. They are writing original songs or at least putting new spins on existing songs. You don’t see these musicians out doing the weekend concerts because frankly, they can’t get gigs. The masses do not want original songs. In fact, if you ever watch a cover band, they might try to do an original song but usually will sort of apologize for it before they do. It is quite funny actually.

So while the originators might seem to be in a worse position than the copycats, they really aren’t because they at least have upside potential. A small number of them rise to the top through talent (or connections) and become stars. These are the musicians you hear on the radio. They make the music that the copycats copy.

A perfect example of this is Jamie Grace, the CCM star. Her quick history is this: she uploaded original songs to YouTube and eventually built a fan base. Eventually, she became so famous on YouTube that she got attention from the industry and now she is where she is: one of the top musicians in Christian music. But make no mistake about it: for every Jamie Grace, there are thousands of originators you will never know trying to do the same thing.

There is something important you need to know about almost all originators and this is important: they usually work within the framework of marketability. When they write music, they are writing music that they believe will resonate with fans. In other words, they want to write music that will sell. They usually will not admit this but it is true. Go to any industry event and listen to the experts talk and you will hear that philosophy. Because Christian music is relatively small, this tendency is magnified. Turn on the local Christian radio station and listen and you will quickly notice that everything sounds pretty much alike. Even the Christian music industry itself recognizes this problem.

And then there is a last group of musicians that I am going to call the esoteric. These are the special originators who really go against the grain. They are a bit weird. No one likes their music. They never sell anything. Only the cream of the crop eventually builds a fan base and carves out a little niche.

And then for a few, one day the world wakes up and discovers their brilliance and they do something that is far bigger than anything a normal originator can do: they define what music is supposed to be. They don’t conform to what people what to listen to; they define new categories of music that people end up accepting. Think Stravinsky and Duke Ellington. In fact, the vast majority of famous musicians through history have been esoteric.

For those of us that make music on any kind of professional level, it is important to know how we relate to these categories. It will help our planning and frankly our sanity. By the way, it is OK to be some sort of combination between the categories. I actually think that is healthy from a financial perspective in particular because it limits the risk. If you want to be a true artist (esoteric) but have a family to feed, maybe taking a step back and producing something that you can actually sell is a good idea. On the other hand, if you find yourself bored by the safe defined world the originators operate in, take some risks and lean esoteric on a project.

I can’t tell you want to do. I am not saying there is a magic formula and a clear path to follow. But at least, this categorization might give you something to chew on.