SXSW Recap Part 1

Please excuse a couple of rants.

First rant: I'd like to comment on the negative spin coming out about crowds, barriers, traffic, etc. It reminds me of those letters to the editor after a marathon race where people complain that they can't believe the streets are closed for 6 hours on Sunday morning. This despite the fact that the race happens every year, there are news reports, signs posted on street closures, diagrams in the newspaper, etc. If people don't understand that SXSW is in a VERY concentrated area (basically a 1 mile radius around 6th and Red River) and plan accordingly it's their own fault, not SXSW. Don't drive into that area! AT ALL. IDIOTS.

Second Rant is regarding massive crowding/people. To understand what got us here, my opinion is that SXSW Music has evolved over time to encompass 4 categories of bands/people.
1. First there are the bands that just love to play music and the fans who come to hear them. They have dreams of success to help pay the bills but most likely they'll never be successful. But they don't care. That's still the majority (80%) of the bands that play SXSW today. You'll see them play house parties for locals and have a blast. You could have a great SXSW just by watching these guys play.
2. Next up is the bands with raw talent learning to master their craft, or bands that are one break away from national exposure. They don't have a PR team, a label, or anything. These are the bands that put SXSW on the map for the music industry as it's a perfect place for labels, bookers, promoters, and press to see new bands and nurture them to reach the next level. There's no buzz for these bands yet but they all hope to get discovered at SXSW. Us regular folk have a tough time researching these bands in advance as they look just like the bands in group 1 at first.
3. The success of SXSW has made it a perfect place for the latest category of bands: those with indie label or major label backing looking to get exposure to the crowds of bloggers and press that have come to dominate attendees. These are the buzz bands. These include bands with success overseas trying to break into the US market or new bands about to kick off a tour that want the exposure that SXSW brings. I tend to focus on these bands as they're the one's with songs posted on blogs and with information online that helps me plan my week. With luck I'll get to see some of the bands in group 2 during the day parties or showcases with the bands in group 3.
4. The last group of bands/people are the already multi-platinum artists that for some reason come to SXSW. I call this group the attention whores and their sycophants. They come to town in a blaze of glory and get all the headlines by the adoring press. Every year there are 5-10 parties that dominate all the attention and the crowds, which leads to the bad press about congestion. The Strokes just headlined ACL to a massive crowd that paid over $180 to get in. You think they'll draw a crowd to a free show in a venue that holds a fraction of that? Who would go to that show thinking it wouldn't be crowded? IDIOTS. Why do Kanye and Foo Fighters need to play SXSW? Do they really need more exposure? Attention whores.

So, do I think the Rachel Ray's and the Perez Hilton's and the headliners they invite should stay away? No chance. They deflect attention and press away from the bands I want to see. (Proof? Look at the Statesman's music critics' choices of top shows at SXSW. They get paid for that shit?) If they weren't here all the douchebags and trend-followers would be going to the day parties and showcases I want to attend. That would be horrible.

Rants over. The gist of my argument is that SXSW doesn't need to change at all. The great thing about the chaos is that it rewards those willing to make the effort to find the truly great music. To use a baseball analogy, music discovery is similar to spotting undervalued "Moneyball" players: avoid overvalued players and focus on the players currently undervalued that have the potential to be great.