As It Is With Nashville’s Historic Places, So Should It Be w/ Music
The inside of Nashville’s historic Studio ‘A’
All of a sudden development and preservation in the City of Nashville, and specifically the mother brain of country music industry known as Music Row, has become the big hot button issue in a city struggling with rapid growth and raised attention along with the music that the city calls home. On Monday (7-28), the property at 30 Music Square West that houses the historic Studio ‘A’ at the center of the growth and preservation debate was sold to Bravo Development. Bravo’s assessment of the building is bleak, citing asbestos, bad plumbing and wiring, a leaky roof, and mold in the ducts. Though Bravo said initially it was their intention to attempt to preserve this historic studio even if the rest of the building was to be razed, they’re now saying their main intention is to resell the property as soon as possible to someone else. In fact as soon as the deal closed, 30 Music Square West was immediately up for sale again. The future of Studio ‘A’ still remains very much in question.
When Ben Folds, the renter and caretaker of Studio ‘A’ made a public outcry when he heard the building was to be sold, it started a full-fledged movement to help save many of the historic buildings on Music Row by attempting to get the city to grant a historic overlay on the district, helping to protect certain buildings and restrict development. The idea was a popular one amongst local residents, music fans, and civic leaders alike. But the idea wasn’t popular with 30 Music Square West’s previous owners—the estates of Owen Bradley and Chet Atkins. Owen Bradley’s brother, guitar player Harold Bradley, said that Chet and Owen built the building as an investment in the future of Music Row, with the intent of reselling it some day. Tighter restrictions on the building could potentially hurt its value, and the value of other buildings in the area.
It’s interesting that the primary voice of dissent in the preservation efforts of Music Row are the representatives of Chet Atkins and Owen Bradley—two Country Music Hall of Famers whose contributions to country music are towering, and also polarizing and controversial. If you were going to point to two men that set up the Music Row system that subjugated country music artists into a automated and antiseptic assembly line of making country music during the Countrypolitan or Nashville Sound era, it would be Owen and Chet. Ruled by bean counters from out-of-town, efficiency was the name of the Music Row game in the 60’s and 70’s, as well as a focus on appealing to certain demographics as opposed to letting the artists breathe through their own artistic expressions. The whole reason Studio ‘A’ was built was to have a big enough studio space to record the string instrumentation that found itself onto many of the country music recordings of the time. Chet Atkins, Owen Bradley, and their cohorts and underlings chose the songs, produced the records, and called virtually all the shots when it came to how country music was made. Forget creativity or the preservation of country music’s traditional sound, this was all about the money, and so it is only appropriate that the representatives for Owen and Chet bring the same sentiment when it comes to the preservation of Studio ‘A’.
The fight to save country music’s landmarks is nothing new. Preservationists have won some and lost some over the years. And many times the champions of country music’s historic landmarks are strange ones. Ben Folds is a pop music piano player, not a staunch country music purist. Country punks like Jason & The Scorchers, Th’ Legendary Shack Shakers, BR549, and Joe Buck and Layla were the first ones that bravely moved back into the crime-addled Lower Broadway area in the mid 90’s and revitalized one of Nashville’s most storied entertainment districts. There was once plans to bulldoze the Ryman Auditorium itself—the “Mother Church of Country Music.” It was barely saved from the wrecking ball. Can you imagine the outcry if the mere idea of razing the Ryman was broached today? The Lower Broadway area where the Ryman and the Country Music Hall of Fame sit, and Music Row a couple of miles farther west, constitute a country music holy land of sorts. And though sometimes buildings need to be bulldozed and perspective is needed in certain instances in the preservation debate, once these historic places are gone, there’s no bringing them back.
In the 80’s, 90’s, and into the 00’s, preservation was much less popular than it is today. People didn’t think twice about putting the wrecking ball to a building if it was in their way. Today people are much more careful when it comes to such matters. Preservation is very popular. But why is this popularity for preservation isolated only to country music’s historic places? Why is the same reverence and desire to preserve and restore not extended to the actual music itself—the very reason these buildings and places mean something in the first place?
Right now what is happening in country music is the equivalent of revving up an army of bulldozers on one side of Music Row, and driving across the entire district, leveling everything in their path. It can always be folly to fancy the time that you live in as never being worse. But when zooming out and looking at the big picture of country music, there has never been a period when the encroachment of other genres has been so rampant, that the move away from the roots of the music has been so rapid, and the perilous nature of how quickly this new “development” is happening has been so daunting. We are not talking about tiring arguments about taste, and modern versus traditionalism. We’re talking about the audio equivalent of the wholesale demolition of the landmarks and foundations of what makes country music, country music.
And even more alarming is the acceptance and ambivalence to this trend of rapid audio gentrification that might see country music completely lose its identity in mere months. There are no committees organizing to fight this trend like you have with Music Row preservationists. There are no mayoral candidates stumping on the idea of preserving the historic sound of country music like you have with Studio ‘A’. And what ceases to amaze is that the parallels between Nashville’s historic places coming under danger and the same happening for the music goes virtually unrecognized. In fact country music preservationists are ostensibly ostracized in the current country music climate—the whole Old Farts & Jackasses, “Country music must evolve” debate. The historic sound of country music isn’t just scoffed at, it’s insulted on a regular basis.
Of course country music must evolve, just as at times certain buildings must go if they have completely lost their functionality and the cost of preservation is not in accordance with the historic value. But there always has to be that measure, that attention and reverence paid to the past to where we don’t allow unchecked “evolution” to result in remorse of what was lost along the way.
Even from their graves, Chet Atkins and Owen Bradley’s stamp on country music remains: Out with the old and in with the new, and it’s all about the money. But country music isn’t owned by Chet, Owen, or anybody else; it is the property of the country music people. And the people of country should voice their grievances loudly about preservation, on the street and on the air. Because this is part of a healthy country music environment, and one that ultimately is about the universal desire to see the sustainability of country music well into the future.
July 29, 2014 @ 1:06 pm
Nice article trigger.
July 29, 2014 @ 1:45 pm
This is a great article, Trigger, I really like how you tied these two things together.
We are definitely moving towards a mono-genre, and it is an example of when being open-minded about everything isn’t always good. The target audience of current mainstream country is probably the most open-minded generation to date. We grew up learning to accept all different races, religions, and lifestyles; which is good. However, this mindset carried over to all aspects of life, including music. Maybe I am wrong, but I think this generation is more musically diverse than any other, even before mash-ups became popular we all claimed to be fans of more than one genre (technology and access to more music also helped this trend). The problem is that the music industry tried to capitalize on this and started mixing genres, and here we are. It is great to be a fan of more than one genre, but that doesn’t mean we do not enjoy the distinction between those genres.
It is the same as being accepting of another’s heritage, but still being proud of your own. I enjoy all types of music, but I also love the tradition and history involved with each that distinguishes it from another. Political correctness has caused my whole generation to be afraid of being different, and it has carried over to our music.
July 29, 2014 @ 2:11 pm
Good point. Although the melting pot ideal has made our country the greatest that has ever existed, the monogenre is a clear example of one of the few downsides of this ideal.
July 29, 2014 @ 2:46 pm
Agree with most of this except your conclusion. I don’t think PC has anything to do with the issue. My daughter (for example) was raised with all types of music, and remains a “fan” of most. Everything from Radiohead, LZ, Beatles, Broadway musicals, Prog Rock, folk, and soul. She even knows the music of Al Jolson! She has no “heritage” other than what she was exposed to and what she’s acquired on her own. Hell, she’d be dancing in lederhosen if she was proud of her heritage! Radio and charting companies created the genres for the profit motive as you said. But she hasn’t listened to terrestrial radio since she was a teen, now just turned 30. Mono genre doesn’t mean a thing to her since she explores new artists via Spotify or Songza. And she knows enough to support the artists with purchases of what she likes. And for the record (no pun intended), she REALLY likes Sturgill and Isbell. I wanted to bag the 2 hour drive to see Jason in June, but she insisted, we go. Can’t thank her enough!
July 29, 2014 @ 3:40 pm
The problem is that your daughter is an exception, as am I. Spotify is a great thing for a music fan, but it seems like few people take advantage of it. So many people I talk to either haven’t heard of it or only use it to listen to what they already know. Which is what I meant with my last thought about political-correctness in the sense that the fear of offending anybody causes people to stick with the crowd in all aspects of life just because its a safe middle ground, then they accept things like shitty music. I don’t mean being politically correct is wrong in the sense of not offending anybody for things they cannot change (race, ethnicity).
July 29, 2014 @ 4:03 pm
Basically, this whole generation is “open-minded” to whatever we are told to be open-minded to (ie Taylor Swift telling us to embrace her upcoming pop album), and still close-minded to anything not mainstream (like traditional country).
July 29, 2014 @ 4:53 pm
I disagree. There are many more outlets for non-mainstream music than there used to be, thanks to the Internet. This, along with increased interest in out-of-the-mainstream music, explains the rise of the micro-genres alongside the monogenre, as Trigger explained some time ago:
https://savingcountrymusic.com/the-future-of-music-the-mono-genre-micro-genres
The fundamental issue with traditional country is that it just does not (and never really intended to) appeal to young people. The genre was based not on themes of partying or abstract angst, but on deep storytelling, generally told from a middle-aged perspective.
July 29, 2014 @ 2:42 pm
Trigger –
I echo a number of your sentiments here, and with that I also add an artists’ perspective. I’m a young artist whose primary influences vary from Waylon and Hank Jr to Charlie Daniels to Garth and George Strait. These are the guys I grew up listening to, who influenced my early songwriting, and are present in things I do on stage. But, in recent years, I have grown and found some success… and in doing so, I went to Nashville and cut a record. When I cut that record, I listened to what some of the pros were saying, and in some cases it worked out, and in others, it didn’t. What I was left with, was an album that isn’t the best showcase of me and who I am. It’s not awful, but it’s definitely not my “best foot forward” – and I feel like a great deal of today’s mainstream can be summed up in that way. Dustin Lynch’s new single isn’t awful…but it isn’t the best song he could have out at the moment. The same is true of Luke Bryan. I’ve heard what Luke can do. Surely Roller Coaster isn’t the Pinnacle for him in 2014.
Your article paints a picture of the responsibility that all of us have as people associated to Country Music. Fans simply don’t DEMAND MORE these days. The “waning generation” of traditional country listeners don’t say as much as they need to with their dollars. Part of that is because they’ve decided to simply accept what they’re given. Giant Festivals all featuring the same canned acts, radio stations playing the same music, etc – this is what the industry is providing because this is what people will pay for. And of course, since the CountryPop fare is selling HUGE with younger listeners, the lack of the older listeners’ dollars is of no never mind.
So the question then turns to artists. Are there any artists who are willing to keep the “old country” alive while still evolving? The answer is yes. They exist. You’ve featured some of them in your articles. I myself am pushing back into that direction. A few tracks off my 2013 album showed those roots … and what I’m currently working on now does so even more. Here in Los Angeles, there is a groundswell called (using today’s popular delivery of the hashtag) #CaliforniaCountry – a number of artists who are pushing against the mainstream. We are beginning to be accepted by radio out here, though it’s doubtful that the Giant LA station KKGO will jump on board. Their DJs definitely toe the line of “whatever Nashville wants, we give.” Still, the discerning country fan in LA now has alternatives. We have a 3-day festival coming in September – near the site of the biggest Corporate Country Fest in California, Stagecoach. It’s exciting to be a part of such a movement here.
Texas has long kept their own version of Country Music alive. Hopefully, other markets will follow suit. Wherever there is a huge conglomerated effort to push art in one direction, there will be movements to fight that. What “they” have over “us” at the moment is centralized content and a well-built infrastructure of terrestrial radio and television. What “We” have is the ability to market in the open landscape of the internet…but learning to do so effectively has quite a curve. Still, with steadfast determination we will continue on that path.
It’s awesome to have YOU on the forefront of it.
Let’s Do This. yeahcomeon
July 29, 2014 @ 2:51 pm
Encouraging to hear/read, thank you.
July 29, 2014 @ 3:14 pm
I stopped reading at the beginning when you called yourself an “artist”. I freaking hate that word. It’s just something from the industry that tries so hard to make people seem much cooler and more important than they are. Most “artists” can’t paint, arrange music or write their own damn lyrics. Even on those stupid shows like “The Voice” the karaoke singers refer to themselves as “artists” now.
I heard that Florida Georgia Line idiot refer to himself as an artists once and you know it must really take an artist to come up with lyrics like “drive our truck to the beer party” or to play a couple of chords like you’re actually doing something useful on the guitar.
Anyone that calls themselves an “artist” is a looser.
July 29, 2014 @ 3:33 pm
I read your reply, and was preparing a sonnet to retort, but then noticed that you haphazardly called me a “looser.” I can only imagine you meant “loser”, and I thought maybe you were taking artistic license with your terminology. Then I realized you hate artists … so that couldn’t be the case.
So, I decided to pare back what I would say in reply, as I feared that I might not be understood. Here now, is my shortened reply:
Before I wrote music, I was a published poet. I have written every word and every progression on both my EP and my Album.
I’m an Artist. Deal with it.
July 29, 2014 @ 3:41 pm
.. Out of everything he wrote, you are grappling with semantics? Come on, now..
July 29, 2014 @ 4:12 pm
hahaha…yeah, I mean … I have my own issues with Recording Artists who record only other people’s material – but I try to put that aside. At the end of the day, my Voice will never be on par with someone like Vince Gill. That’s not the contribution I make. But, for some recording artists, that’s EXACTLY what they bring to the table. Maybe they don’t have the writing aspect, but they can sing and they can tell a memorable story, and move people with their voice. Well, then Recording Artist is a perfect title for them.
I won’t say FLGALine aren’t artists, though I despise 80% of what I’ve heard from them. They’re definitely creating a product that is moving people. They are making a contribution. My dislike of that contribution does not make it any less of a contribution.
But yes, I will nitpick semantics.
July 29, 2014 @ 4:24 pm
Well my response was actually directed to Phil, and was done so in the sense of “artist” that you just outlined.
July 29, 2014 @ 4:28 pm
My bad, Matt. I see it now. D’Oh!
July 29, 2014 @ 3:42 pm
Though I get what you’re saying Phil, I think your judgement on Dukes here with little to back it up is quite harsh.
July 29, 2014 @ 3:54 pm
Phil, do you believe that George Jones, George Strait, Waylon Jennings (in his peak during the 70s), and Patty Loveless are/were not artists?
July 29, 2014 @ 4:36 pm
Stop asking him/her the hard questions!
July 29, 2014 @ 7:22 pm
I’d honestly be shocked if any of the people you listed ever referred to themselves as an “artist”. In country music, the theme also always use to be that the singers were of the people and not above (or better than) the people.
July 30, 2014 @ 5:17 am
Yeah Phil, I agree with what you’re saying, but you better improve your spelling before you go calling people losers.
July 30, 2014 @ 6:43 am
Great post!
July 30, 2014 @ 6:50 am
My comment is directed at Dukes.
July 29, 2014 @ 4:48 pm
These landmarks are disappearing fast, LEAPING LIZARDS! 😮
July 29, 2014 @ 5:22 pm
Look, I don’t mind country artists respecting the history/past of country music and the traditional sounds of the 60s and 70s. That’s OK. The problem is when 2014 country artists try to make music that is lyrically and sonically very similar to 60s and 70s country music. Why is that a problem? Because it’s already been done before. If I wanted to listen o 60s & 70s-sounding country music, I wouldn’t pick up a 2014 country album, I would pick up 60s or 70s one. Why would I listen to the imitation when I already have the original? I do not mind artists having one or two traditional country songs on their albums as homage or a sign of respect for the foundation of country music, but I wouldn’t want to listen to an album full of sounds and lyrical themes that have been exhausted and used to death by the artists of a certain era, no matter how good it was.
So, no, I do not support the bullying of current country artists by traditional country music fans, who seem to think that every artist that doesn’t make traditional country music is not “country enough”.
July 29, 2014 @ 5:35 pm
The heart of country music is in empathetic storytelling and a soothing and melodic, rather than loud and rhythmic, musical base. With bro-country, the storytelling has been largely abandoned in favor of a checklist of country artifacts that is repeated with every song, and soft melodies have been replaced by loud rock riffs and rap beats. The worst offender when it comes to themes that have been exhausted and used to death is bro-country.
July 30, 2014 @ 1:15 am
“I do not support the bullying of current country artists by traditional country music fans, who seem to think that every artist that doesn”™t make traditional country music is not “country enough”.
Bullying, seriously?
Traditionally, in order to bully someone, it’s necessary to have some kind of power or advantage over them. Currently, there is a colossal conglomeration of industries, including some of the largest mass media corporations in the world, invested in promoting and celebrating pop-country. Both major radio corporations are fully and specifically dedicated to this task to the extent that their continued financial solvency basically depends on the popularity of the modern country format. Major record labels, publishing houses, and a powerful army of publicists are all at Music Row’s disposal. In short, “pop-country” music (I call it that for lack of a better term) is arguably the most powerful genre and musical industry in America right now. And if that’s not enough, there are a whole fleet of publications and blogs dedicated to praising every pop-country product that comes down the pike, regardless of its content, in addition to publishing editorials implying that “traditionalists” and all those who are are critical of movements like “bro-country” are close-minded, misguided, ignorant fools.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but the real assertion I see underlying this article and others like it is that musical traditions have value, and should have a place in influencing the development of established musical genres (specifically country) and defining its parameters moving forward.
In my experience, both the writers and fans who believe in the preceding statement have otherwise diverse musical viewpoints, and enjoy country music from a variety of styles and eras. Frankly, the debate over the current direction of country music isn’t between country music “traditionalists” and “progressives.” It’s between people who actually *like* country music of any recognizable derivation, and those people and organizations who don’t give a crap about it. Yes, there are harcore traditionalists out there, but they’re not fighting for their beloved genre of music to dominate popular culture and kick other pop genre’s asses, they’re fighting for survival.
Also, not to pick on this one comment too much, but the insinuation that independent or traditional country music fans want country music to sound exactly like it did in the 60’s and 70’s is the oldest, tiredest, dead horse trope around in the country music world. It’s also a strawman: personally speaking, never in my life, whether online or off, have I actually communicated with someone who held that opinion. So at the absolute least, it is not the majority viewpoint.
July 30, 2014 @ 5:30 am
Hey Ahmed,
Country music has a pretty specific sound. There are a few different styles within that sound, but those sounds have always worked together as Country music. The only reason that the term “Traditional Country” even exists, is because people began making any kind of music they wanted, and calling it “Country”. So, “traditional” began to be used as a way to identify actual Country music. Country music is a style or sound, not an era. I would love to be able, when asked what kind of music I like, to be able to say, “Country”, and have the asker know what I meant. But thanks to people like you, I guess that’ll never be possible again.
July 29, 2014 @ 8:15 pm
Great article, Trigger. Very well written.
July 29, 2014 @ 8:31 pm
Trigger ….you make an excellent point in your article above . We spend more time ( as a society ) fretting about losing a historical site than we do fretting about losing the history that created it. However ..there is one common denominator in each of these scenarios . $$$$$.
If the land is worth more than the building sitting on it in terms of $$$$ , THAT will be the determining factor in its value . And if pop music, thinly disguised as country music , can generate more $$$$ than actual country music ..THAT will be the determining factor in county music’s existence. As I’ve said in earlier posts , and as we are all well aware , like it or not, the most important word in ” music business” is BUSINESS .If you tap into a market for TV shows like Jerry Springer , Kardashians , Maury , Batchelor etc etc , as a businessman aren’t you obligated to exploit and expand that market for every $$$ you can generate ? Your job description, in all likelihood , does not have a clause mandating you to preserve, at all costs, the cultural values and social mores your audience MAY have once held in high esteem . Your job description will be to MAKE MONEY FOR THIS COMPANY and leave the ‘artistic merit’ , the message , the politics ,the religious beliefs ,the time-honored values , the history lesson and the education of a viewer/listener to some other party ….the artists, the state …or the listener herself. There are unlimited options for most people today when it comes to exploring, discovering , understanding and supporting the arts ( which includes MANY American-created music genres , of course ) . The focus needs to be on – 1. Making sure there are ALWAYS those options and -2. Making as many people as possible aware those options exist . To your credit , Trigger , I think you work in both of those camps quite admirably .
July 30, 2014 @ 6:48 am
Nashville needs to re-discover its own roots by promoting more traditional country music. Remind fans how great Hank and others like him were. Re-educate audiences and fans, especially new ones. Great music has a way of transcending boundaries (real and artificial), but it has to be heard to be remembered and celebrated.
August 1, 2014 @ 2:20 am
I was thinking about this article today: before I read it, it somehow never occurred to me to consider the parallels that exist between the campaign to save Music Row and the general ongoing effort to save country music.
I suppose if someone tried to undertake a “Save Country Music” social media campaign akin to the #SaveStudioA movement, it would be met with resistance from multiple directions. Saving Studio A is an easy cause to rally around for multiple reasons including the fact that, as the article states, preservation of old buildings is just generally popular, and because it’s not necessarily a genre-specific issue. A “saving country music” movement would be more controversial, because it would be an implied slight against pop-country, which has a huge fan base, who would argue vocally that country music doesn’t need saving. Others are ambivalent to country music and think it has never been good, regardless of how absurd and ignorant that opinion seems to us.
Regarding preserving the traditions of country music, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that some of the best and most critically acclaimed albums in the broader mainstream country world have also been some of the most traditional. (I’m thinking of artists like Kellie Picker and Ashley Monroe.) The frustrating thing is, these aren’t underground artists with niche appeal and a merch table full of lo-fi analog EPs recorded in a stairwell. They’re attractive, talented, 20-something women with the potential to be huge, lucrative stars in any other world except one in which the two radio giants aren’t pandering exclusively and myopically to a particular narrow demographic of nitwits who don’t like “girl singers,” except perhaps the ones that get nekkid in music videos.
I really think someone needs to create the Association of Independent Country Music to facilitate the promotion of these kinds of artists. I don’t know exactly how that would work, but someone needs to do it. It seems like we have left it to the Americana genre to carry on many of the traditions associated with classic country music, but over the years the definition of Americana has changed to the extent that many artists in that field have little country influence. There needs to be a specific country music infrastructure that is similar to Americana, except smarter and more actually aggressive promoting artists than Americana is. I’m thinking about the long term. We all know the popularity of checklist country is not sustainable. I would guess that rock music as a genre has survived with a core base of passionate fans despite its death as a mainstream foramat partly because of the independent rock infrastructure that thrived for years throughout the rise and fall of nu-metal, the Nickelback boom, and other disasters.