Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who killed the rave?

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 854 posts

Re: Who killed the rave?

#361

Post by racl101 »

steveBK123 wrote: post #118

Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…

> And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream.

I think this is definitely the biggest reason.

The average YouTube video probably has serious electronic music going for it.

Back in the '80s and '90s you felt rebellious listening to that stuff. Now it's so common it borders on proverbial.

I'd probably go to a public venue that plays 90s and 2000s electronic music but for me it would be the equivalent of my boomer mom going to a Fleetwood Mac concert in the '90s. Just more nostalgia than a desire to relive the rave days. There's no way I could dance the way I used to in the '90s. There would need to be seating there for my old Xennial butt.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#362

Post by majormajor »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #170
jamestimmins wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's shocking how often the answer to "How come X changed?" is either the creation of the internet or the cost of real estate. Surprisingly often, it's both.

It's interesting how the creation of the internet still hasn't caused real estate prices to plummet. Even two years of covid couldn't do it.

The internet doesn't change "location location location" that much. It doesn't change weather, or scenery, physical entertainment options, in-person social opportunities, or backyards and amenities.

It's also created big windfalls - due to easy distribution/sales for online stuff - for more than enough people to drive up prices in many of the most-already-in-demand regions.

Ye olde rich person historically has traditionally addressed the "there are different pros/cons to the city than rurally" dilemma by having multiple properties. Which of course only eats into supply more. Is the percentage of people able to do that now higher or lower than it was when a country home required full-time live-in staff?

Re: Who killed the rave?

#363

Post by shermantanktop »

dehrmann wrote: post #256
post-it wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. Which, in turn, makes events that do happen more expensive, decreasing turnout. If there's a Friday night event for CA$15 with CA$5 drinks, I'm much more likely to go than if it costs CA$50 with CA$15 drinks.

And that makes the city less desirable, so fewer people live there, and RE prices find an equilibrium.

No, it makes it more desirable for older people who don't want raves down the block, and who also have more money, increasing the RE prices. The average age goes up, the number of interesting energetic people goes down, and the city becomes a cultural desert with high RE prices. Yes, that's an equilibrium, but Adam Smith's invisible hand just gave you a shitty city and undercut cultural innovation.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#364

Post by dnissley »

Tade0 wrote: post #191
wpm wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply is artificially limited.

Supply can't possibly keep up when real estate is used as an investment. As an analogy to the dead internet hypothesis I present the dead real estate market hypothesis. Increasingly it's just investors buying and selling properties from each other. And it's not just a hypothesis. China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma i…

Only if there is unlimited investors

Re: Who killed the rave?

#365

Post by zuminator »

One more guess: Part of the reason why people would go late-night dancing was for hookups. Nowadays, people meet partners via dating apps, so the prospect of a random encounter in a dark club is less appealing.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#366

Post by daedrdev »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #170
jamestimmins wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's shocking how often the answer to "How come X changed?" is either the creation of the internet or the cost of real estate. Surprisingly often, it's both.

It's interesting how the creation of the internet still hasn't caused real estate prices to plummet. Even two years of covid couldn't do it.

Many cities effectively ban or heavily restrict new housing developments that increase density.

I'm really not surprised real estate prices continue to rise when building new units is often an extremely expensive, risky process that in some areas can be stopped at any time with literally no reason required

Re: Who killed the rave?

#367

Post by vrosas »

mtalantikite wrote: post #309
vrosas wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What 20-something can afford to do that with any regularity? Practically every 20-something (and just as many 30+ somethings) I know in NYC DO do this very regularly, especially if they already live in wburg/bushwick. If they're not there, they're mixing it up at nowadays.

I guess the 20-somethings I know (and knew when I was also 20-something) are broke artists and models. They don't have $200 to spend on a night out every weekend. Nowadays certainly is affordable and there are others of course. People make it work. There were definitely expensive clubs that kids with money went to when I was young -- a friend ran sound at The Box and that was always wildly priced. But there was no sh…

Fair, my circles were a lot more the tech/finance/rich parents type. But yeah there's obviously a market for it.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#368

Post by xerox13ster »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #270
marssaxman wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities are not just where the jobs are, cities are where everything is. You'd likely have to offer double my salary before I'd consider exchanging my life here in the heart of it all for the lonely, empty, car-dependent barrenness of the suburbs.

I guess it depends on your idea of the suburbs. I can walk to a major grocery store, coffee shops, restaurants, and breweries, but have a quarter acre with fruit trees and gardens. Im happy to trade that for having to spend an hour in car/train a few times a year to see a show or museum. I would take a pay cut to work closer to home.

Like many in the suburbs have convinced themselves they're rural as a result of oil company propaganda (rural identity sells big mall crawler trucks), it sounds to me like you live in a central, quite urban area that's otherwise sparse on local options and have convinced yourself it's your extra special private enclave in the hills, completely separated from the economic center, despite it literally being your economic center.

Ditch the suburbanite identity politics and start advocating for the development of shows and museums in your local area that you could walk to, instead of taking your money away from your economic center at the benefit of oil companies (bc let's be real, suburban identity sells car dependence and even if you take the train, all the cultural momentum from the propaganda shaped your life decisions to move there and what's that train run on?).

Re: Who killed the rave?

#370

Post by Spivak »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #244
saberience wrote: post #227

I find it really hard to believe this and am questioning the data. I raved back in the early 2000s and I still rave now and the popularity is absolutely booming in a way I've never seen before and in more parts of the world. 15 years ago there was zero electronic music events in Dubai, now there are huge electronic music festivals there and it's clear a ton of people at those events are taking "something" that isn't…

The UAE is a microcosm and not representative of general trends imo.

I mean music festivals in the US are booming as well. EDC attendance more than doubled last year.
Post reply on HN