Who killed the rave?

What “rave” means (and why the article may be misframed)

• Many commenters say the FT piece is really about commercial nightclubs and late-licensed venues, not “raves” in the traditional sense.
• Strong disagreement over definitions:
  • One camp: a “real” rave is underground, usually illegal or semi‑legal, in warehouses, forests, quarries, deserts, etc., grassroots and drug‑tolerant, not on listings like Resident Advisor.
  • Another camp: “rave” now informally covers any big electronic dance event, including legal festivals and club nights.
• Several note that using RA/official listings to infer the health of underground events is inherently biased.

Is raving actually in decline?

• Some say fixed clubs, especially in big cities (Berlin, London, parts of Australia, Chile), are clearly struggling or closing: high rent, insurance, licensing, policing, and post‑covid cost spikes.
• Others report thriving underground or regional scenes: Midwest US, UK countryside, Southern Cone, parts of Germany, Spain, Nordics, California, NYC/Brooklyn, Seattle, Mexico, Australia “bush doofs,” etc.
• Festivals and one‑off “day raves” are widely reported as booming, even as weekly clubbing shrinks.

Economic and regulatory pressures

• Repeated themes:
  • Commercial real estate and gentrification push out long‑running venues; landlords prefer higher‑paying tenants.
  • Stricter licensing, noise complaints from new residents, public liability costs, and police hostility (especially to unlicensed events) raise risk and cost.
  • Some jurisdictions treat promoters as legally liable for attendees’ drug use, which chilled large events.
• Clubs depend on alcohol sales; EDM crowds buying mostly water or doing drugs off‑site are less profitable.

Generational and cultural change

• Younger people reported as:
  • More health‑conscious, sleep‑protective, and price‑sensitive; prefer earlier, shorter events.
  • Socializing more via phones, games, and dating apps, reducing dependence on night venues for meeting people.
  • Less tolerant of being filmed while vulnerable; constant cameras and “internet puritanism” make risk‑taking and casual hookups feel more dangerous.
• Counterpoint: heavy drug use persists in many scenes; what’s changed is format (festivals, home parties) and visibility.

Phones, vibe, and safety

• Many lament phones on dancefloors: documenting instead of dancing, self‑consciousness, weaker “vibe.”
• Some clubs and Berlin‑style venues now sticker cameras or require checking phones, which attendees praise.
• Underground organizers stress trade‑offs: great freedom and atmosphere, but real risks (drugs, medical issues, accidents) when there’s no formal security or EMS.