The Pop Corporation

You look back at old shows from previous decades and bands of all sizes were all playing on pretty basic set-ups. Some flashing lights, big amps, maybe a smoke machine, and that’s about it. However, something changed. Metal shows started going larger, bands that were referred to as ‘indie’ needed big screens and props, and pop went intergalactic throwing everything at the stage.

Again, you look back to previous years and obviously, Michael Jackson and Madonna had huge, all-encompassing shows, but artists not quite in that stratosphere were still working with a pretty basic set-up. Keep in mind that this was in the period when groups were still making a healthy living from record sales – there was more money floating around.

Now, far from this being a ‘it should be about the music, maaaaaaan‘ message, at some point, the show because as important at the music. We all love a good stage show, obviously, but in a period where musicians aren’t making the same money, then surely, fans would understand that costs need to be paired back. However, bands want to justify increased costs of stubs, because they’re not making money on streaming, so they want to give everyone the ol’ razzle dazzle. You see how this happened without thinking about it too hard.

Sadly, there’s a bit of a problem afoot.

Recently, Ginger Root was praised by fans after telling everyone he’d downgraded a show, transparently talking about low ticket sales and rearranging the show for a smaller venue. Fans saw the whole thing as a plus, preferring a more intimate setting. Maybe this was just a case of being a little too ambitious and Ginger Root showed some uncharacteristic honesty? Elsewhere, Leila Moss of The Duke Spirit had recently noted the “spiralling costs” of shows, and Michael Kiwanuka spoke of the financial strain of touring and the constant rising price of putting a gig on.

Now, there’s a lot of things out of the control of artists (and venues also – let us not be quite so hasty to have them foot all the blame, imperfect as many of them are), but you feel that one of the things that is spiralling truly out of control is what exactly is expected of a band before they walk onto stage. Looking back to the ’90s – the last true boom time for the recording industry – the likes of Blur weren’t putting a big show on until the tour for ‘The Great Escape’, by which time they’d already had a hugely successful LP in the shape of ‘Parklife’. Now, a band with no Top 10 records is expected to be a multimedia affair, and that’s not fair on the groups trying to claw their way to some kind of stability – the kind of stability that will allow them to reinvest their money into the creation of more music.

Again, looking at older shows – hip hop was always a real DIY affair and now, Kayne’s light box and Travis Scott’s enormo spectacles have seen the lower league performers feeling like they need to keep up. Nightclubs are no different, with audiences looking toward the stage where once upon a time, you might look to your friends rather than gawping at a motionless DJ playing records.

It’s not to say that older shows were better, or putting a bit of glitz on stage is bad – but something has to give in the current climate given the rate that venues are closing down, the out of control costs for the venues themselves, and of course, the level of financial investment bands feel they need to put into a stage show. Naturally, there’s plug-in-and-play venues and shows all over the place, just like there always has been, but as soon as a band gets a couple of albums out, there’s an expectation that it won’t just be some people singing some songs.

Mid-sized gigs now have more technology on stage than some of the A-list shows from decades past. Technology of course, is smaller, cheaper and more reliable, but it isn’t translating into more cost efficient shows for musicians at a certain level. You feel that, in 2025, musicians buying all that stage equipment would be more likely to recoup costs if they became a hire company for other bands needing the bells and whistles of a glitzy stage show.

If you get into a group after seeing them on TV at a festival, you could be forgiven for thinking that they’re loaded. A sun dappled field with thousands of people in it, watching a group sing their latest material – they must be doing alright for themselves, right?

Post-Covid, something changed which hasn’t been corrected yet. Arena shows are now charging over £100 for a ticket and that might be a sign of greed, but it also might be a sign of people panicking, making hay while the sun shines because they money, broadly speaking, is drying up fast. While Taylor Swift is making over a billion from her tours, grassroots venues can’t stay open. When people look at the whole of music and how much money it makes, it is a top heavy figure, and if you take Swift, Harry Styles, whoever out of the equation, the whole thing looks rather bleak.

When a band plays a show, everything costs money from travel, accommodation, eating food, van hire, replacing kit, whatever. The cost of living crisis hits musicians the same as anyone else. If fans are feeling the pinch, so are your favourite band. And sure, they can play local gigs – but fans wanting variety might not want to watch a local band play multiple times a month in the same, scant few venues in town.

Before they take to a stage, they’ve already been forking out money. They might need a tour manager, and if they’re a pop star, they’ll need to pay session musicians too. There’s agents, managers, crew, insurance, rehearsal spaces – everything. So, if some of these things are unavoidable, then do music fans need to tamp down what they expect to see on a stage? Being in the moment with the in-house flashing lights should be enough, and we should actively encourage it because, more music is better than splitting the band up because it financially ruined them.