Recently, there's been a lot of glum commentary about the plight of music websites and indeed music criticism, sparked by the radical and disruptive changes at Pitchfork and Bandcamp (and, to a lesser extent, Vice) - damage wreaked by greedy techbros and ignorant corporate bean-counters.
But, in the spirit of positivity that I try to channel round these parts, let's set all that to one side. We should all be doing more than merely mourning beloved sites and publications when they disappear; we should be celebrating those that we hold dear without having to be prompted to do so by threats to their existence, and paying tribute to the people whose passion keeps them going.
And so it was that I contacted Jeff Terich, who's now been fighting the good fight with the excellent Treble for more than two decades, to find about more about the site's past, present and future and canvass his opinions on music writing more generally.
*****
How did Treble start? What was the ethos/vision?
Treble began back in 2003 essentially with a suggestion from my brother, Matt, that he could build a website for me, and I'd kind of casually talked about starting a music website. I was still in college at the time, so my vision wasn't super sophisticated - essentially just: write about as much music as possible. At first, I roped in some friends, and my other brother Terry (who still contributes!) was doing a lot of writing at the time - he did a lot to establish the tone by writing with a lot of humor and thoughtfulness. I think from the get-go we had a considerably different approach than a lot of other critics, in part because we didn't include number or star ratings and wanted to let the writing speak for itself. As a writer, I was still pretty raw, but I think I still had a good idea of what I wanted Treble to be - namely, as much of a resource for readers seeking a greater depth of writing on independent artists as well as a site that (mostly, I hope) avoided a lot of critical and media cliches. We never really pivoted to video, for instance (though we did make some videos), so that's something.
Any sites/magazines/writers you looked up to when setting out? Did/do you take inspiration from music books too?
At the time, Pitchfork was still fairly young but everybody read it, so obviously that was an inspiration, being one of the first real music review sites on the internet. CMJ, Magnet, Alternative Press from 1994 to 1998-ish, SPIN around the same era, plus sites like Tiny Mix Tapes (RIP), Cokemachineglow (RIP) and Stylus (also RIP) that started around the same time or a little earlier that had some of that internet frontier spirit that kind of made it an exciting time to be writing about music.
How has Treble evolved over time?
Well, we pay our writers now, which is probably the most important thing, because they do amazing work. We've changed the look several times, added a lot more features, shuffled through many different writers over the years and changed our focus a few times. There was a point when we might have been a little more invested in mainstream pop, but that's waned a bit, in part because that world seems narrower now (even major labels are complaining about how few stars there are, which seems ironic because don't they *make* the stars?). But more importantly because advocating for smaller, independent artists is just something we're more passionate about, and while I'm not trying to cast aspersions - I honestly think it's important for all of us remaining music sites to be united and advocate on each other's behalf! - I don't think there's a lot of value in everyone covering the same things on the same schedule. That said, we've just written about Taylor Swift and Beyonce, so there's no hard-and-fast rule about this stuff. Just that we have something interesting to say, really. But it's healthy for an editorial outlet to re-evaluate their priorities every now and then.
How is Treble supported financially? What's the business model?
We're supported a handful of different ways, primarily through Patreon subscriptions, a webstore that's currently down for maintenance (and eventually some new merchandise), affiliate marketing sales and brand partnerships. We're not really driven by profits - everything we earn goes back to the writers or paying for the site's operational costs. We're not *opposed* to profits, either, but one step at a time...
What are the secrets to Treble's longevity? Are there any particular challenges you've faced along the way?
Stubbornness! Basically, I've kept it going for this long because I enjoy doing it. There were probably several times in the past when taking the offramp might have been the wise choice, but on the other hand, despite being a lot of work and not being a terribly profitable operation, it's made me a better writer, a better listener, a better editor, and so on. I've made lots of friends in the process - both writers and musicians. It's become something much bigger than me in a lot of ways, but it's also just been such a huge part of my life that it's not really a job or an obligation. It's far more personal than that.
What tips would you have for anyone thinking of starting up something similar?
Oh boy, uh, I don't even know where to start with this one. A lot of people are starting newsletters now and that's probably the smarter decision. Something like this becomes a lot of responsibility before you know it and most people would have quit by now. I don't know if that's admirable or ill-advised on my part, but it's still going. Short answer: start small.
Any favourite Treble articles/reviews you'd particularly like to direct people to?
The simplest answer is to direct readers to this Roundtable we did recently where we all picked some of our favorite writing on the site. I went a little overboard, but you know, I'm super proud of these writers and the work we do.
What does the future hold for Treble? Any new developments/regular features on the horizon?
Well, we're hoping to finish up our Treble 100 series very soon. I started a live column called In Concert that rotates between live reviews, meditations on concerts I've been to in the past, live albums and so on. It's a pretty fun thing to work on and has me thinking about music in a different way. Plus we've been doing lots of great features in general this year in a lot of capacities. As for bigger plans, nothing concrete to share, but we always have more ideas than we have time to implement them.
What role/function does music criticism have today? What, in your view, should a good review do?
I tell new writers all the time that our purpose is not to be a consumer guide. (I realize the irony in having affiliate links in reviews that are literally linking to sites where people can buy what we write about, but you make do with what you have.) But I think writing in the '70s, '80s, '90s ... good writing anyway, shouldn't have been that either. Good music writing/criticism shouldn't be solely focused on whether or not an album is good, in part because that's not an objective measure. We all have opinions and biases. But a good piece of writing will get into the nitty gritty of what an album is *about*, what makes it unique, what makes it interesting or not in the context of the landscape, the artist's overall body of work, thematically and musically. Sometimes there are narratives at play, sometimes it's more like trying to make sense of an abstract painting, but the idea is to engage with it and try to observe what's happening in the world of the album - and, if possible, understand it. My favorite reviews are those that observe something that makes me want to listen to an album differently or possibly think differently about my own assumptions. I like it when writing sheds light on something that I missed or never considered. One of my own editors told me that he loved it when something I wrote compelled him to go and listen to that album. I'd take it a step further and say that the best kind of review makes us not just want to listen to an album, but to lean in closer and get to know it better - even if we don't necessarily like it.
In what ways do you think streaming as a method of music consumption is affecting music creation? Is it affecting music writing too?
Streaming is a double-edged sword in that it gives people access to so much music that you can find literally anything you want at your fingertips, and yet it disincentivizes buying music and thus artists are paid significantly less. In that sense, I think that means a long-term career in music is less sustainable, though it was never terribly easy to make a living as a musician before. Your odds are better if your song is added to a popular playlist, but that's led to intermediaries who will get your song onto a playlist for a fee, and so on. That's never really sat right with me, but I suppose it's the reality of the landscape. Some people are also making high-volume uploads of short songs or generative meditation music which increases their likelihood of getting paid more. I'm not sure if it works, but it's definitely happening. I think streaming's effect on music writing is that anyone can basically give an album a test drive now, so it's less of a consumer-driven thing, in a way, though people tell me all the time that they bought an album because of something they read on Treble, so maybe that's not conclusive.
Any particular trends we can expect in 2024?
A lot of my favorite music this year has leaned toward a goth or noise rock aesthetic, or sometimes both. I, for one, will be celebrating Noise Goth Summer 2024.
Three bands/artists we should all be listening to this year?
Amiture, Gouge Away, Jlin.
*****
Big thanks to Jeff for his time. SWSL salutes Treble and its writers. Check it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment