Chris Rock on the music business

[emdub123]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

Music today sells THINGS. Is not even valued enough to be purchased.

I'm thinking about the ancient eastern spiritual teachings that tell us desire and attachment are the root cause of our suffering? To eliminate suffering from our lives, we must eliminate desire and attachment. There are many ways to look at it, but perhaps the (attachment to) fame and money killed the music? Maybe the removal of monetary value from music will bring back the altruism? Making music for the sake of making music, because we have a genuine need to express ourselves in this way?


Maybe this is already happening. Maybe what we're complaining about is that REAL music is being forcibly separated from money (and the means to make money) right before our eyes. Maybe we're longing for the day that you could make real music and real money at the same time.

[big country]

hopefully music will remain a viable trade

should all music be a viable trade is the question

I wouldn't want to pay for something that would bring me or society down

[EKG Productions]

So many people from the baby boomers generation praise the blues and classic rock because it is so real. I don't understand why rap doesn't get the same respect. Im sorry too many young African American men don't have the type of playfull memories to crank out such hits as "sweet home Alabama". I'm sorry the they don't "remember when they used to play with the brown eyed girl". Rap music was born out of the social conditions/plights of young black men. I realize alot of people would like to hear something different but until social conditions get better the message of rap music will not improve.

In reguards to the "bling" factor, keep in mind alot of rappers have never had anything before. Their families have nevered owned anything. IMHO they are simply celebrating having "something". To me this is no different than the super rich "CEO's" who own these megga pleasure Yachts. In the corperate world that is how you show off your wealth. In the rap world its the same thing only with chains, cars, clothes etc. You don't have to like it but realize the method behind the madness.

I think alot can be said about the Rap indystry. Never before has America seen so many wealty/creative/intelegent blacks. Yes some of it is negative but if you listen carefully we have a first hand window into the social ills of our society. It is up to the public how we take it. We can either use this window to strive for improvement or we can be judgemental and condem them for thier ill life experiences that are larger than the individual rappers that everyone loves to hate.

Berry Gordy WAS great for his time. But lets not forget that he also played a huge part in the creation of this messed up industry we are left with. He revolutionized the industry with his assembly line approach to making hits. Some great music came from that time indeed but the big picture is he may have laid down the template for disaster. One major reason all pop music sounds the same is because of Barry. Record Lables used his template to get us in this so called "mess". They use the same song writers and producers just as berry used Smokey Robinson to pen hit after hit. If you ask me alot of motown sounds verry similar. He went wild with "pay for play" for radio spins, the list goes on. I think given the circumstances of the times he did what he had to do but I do think we are seeing the consequences of his business model.

Last but not least is the exploitation of black music. Barry made some fantastic records. He defined the sound of an era that may never be duplicated in American music again but, he was a business man first. There is no doubt about that. Do a little research into the deals he gave his artist back then. He opperated very similar to the majors. Money and power played a large part in his operation as a Music Executive. At the end of the day all Barry then and the Mougles of today want/wanted is acceptance and respect in coperate America. This is a place blacks have only made it to in modern times. The music right now is playing second fiddle to the movement of these "Mougles" trying to get a foot into coperate America. Is that a good thing? That has yet to be determined. I think it dependes on which side of the issue you are on.

[henryrobinett]

Rap is extremely important and relevant. You didn't hear me dissing it.

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by crufty

What instruments aren't toys? Guitars? Drums? Tuba? That's toy 101 to any toddler Same thing goes for fast cars

Lets split the difference and call y2k the era of the soloist

But honestly, is it really that hard to find other people to play music with? The era of the internet, how hard is it to post "Violinist looking for quartert in Main St, USA" and get a response? Espicially with the accessibility and advent of myspace? Of off the top of my head I can think of five places within 2 miles I could go set up an act--*any* act, and I only live in a moderately sized city. Sure, they are small, and there's little or no pay...but it still could be done.

Still, I would agree that the increased accessibility has led to increased distraction. Americans, anyway, are living more distributed lives. Work here, eat there, sleep where? I can talk to anyone in the world all the time any time, and if I can't talk, I can text them. So stability in terms of groups low--I could see that. The home has become the center, leading people away from common hangouts, with the internet superseding face-to-face communication. Just a transition phase is my thought.

But if someone is a musician, and wants to learn a new technique--no longer does one have to travel to an art center as in the days of Bach / Beethoven. Find an internet poster and ask them to post a video on youtube. Pales in one sense to being there, yes, but does open the door to a broader audience. And if you are a grand master, post an equal video on youtube--now anyone in the world can watch you. It's not live, and that IS an issue. The days of arena rock may be over...

So that could be the crux: I view more opportunities as better, however, it does cloud gene pool. The stars are still stars, just lost in the mix.

It's not so much that it's hard to FIND musicians to play with. It's hard for YOUNGER musicians to find anyone to play with who's any good.

You learn to play BETTER by playing with great musicians. What you have today are what I call "cubicle musicians." They sit alone, for the most part in front of their computer monitors, or beatboxes and make up "beats." Or have some DJ inspired thing going in Ableton "Live" with scenes that make it seem as though it's being creative. Or you have a bunch of guys recycle, chop, auto-tune, quantize, create soundscapes, but have no idea what the hell they're doing and can't play jack shit.

There are no MORE opportunities than before. It only seems that way. There are less opportunities, as far as I can tell. That's what I'm saying. There's LESS music being made because there are less real musicians. Music in the schools, is absent around here. That was crucial to my learning to play music, as it was for every single musician I play with. It's gone. How are kids going to learn how to play? With Logic 8?? Where are they going to play? Mom's house? Myspace?

Personally I play all the time. But the musicians I play with are mostly 30-40+. Most of us are professional, meaning this is what we do for a living.

I don't know how you really LEARN a new technique on the internet. I needed teachers and people to show me and simply try. Of course it's not impossible, but that's what I think is so f**ked up about todays music and musicians. Music is a social activity; it always was anyway. It's about performance and sharing. You learn by playing in groups with other musicians and for other people. That's what was wonderful about the pre 90s. But by the time drum machines came along this notion of "I'll do it myself," took hold. The existential cubicle musician was born and music took a nose dive. Sure some cool things happened: Thomas Dolby did his one man shows to prove it was possible. Howard what'sit. But we went to the extreme to prove a point. It ceased to be a social, extroverting activity thing and became an introverted, entropy slope. The angst from having to argue and prove that YOU'RE Right after all to a dumb assed drummer or the other guitar player who told us what we were doing was all wrong; we'd prove them all wrong by doing it ourselves! Well I've been there. And I LEARNED so much more by having those arguments and having to eat crow once in a while because someone else had a better idea. Paul needed John so he wouldn't be so pretty and maudlin all the time. John needed Paul too. I liked them much better as a team.

I think fear and insecurity feed into making cubicle musicians. Once you're an adult it's really hard getting up in front of people and playing your music if you've never done it before. So it's easier to hide behind a screen, like so many people here hide behind their handles. Then you can almost anonymously throw up an MP3 to see how it goes. F**k man! That's not it. It's about playing music FOR people. There's NOTHING BETTER than getting your hands on that guitar, squeezing the strings with a loud, cranked amp and having a bunch of people, a crowd of screaming people, hanging on your every note. NOTHING beats it.

It's about being in a rehearsal pounding out a tune, your tune and getting your ego bruised because it's just not right. It's about making it right. It's about spending thousands of hours on your instrument making it right.

Music man. It's going down the toilet.

[tidepool]

I just saw this thread, thank you for posting it! What a great quote, laughed out loud!

I haven't read all the replies yet, but I am so glad Chris Rock is around, the man is so consistently on the money, smart & laugh out loud funny. Those attributes shouldn't be mutually exclusive, but there's a lot of humor today caters to knuckle-draggers or haters.

[themaidsroom]

i think rap has immense potential - in my humble opinion
it needs the 2007 version of the young
nina simone, the young muhammed ali and the young duke ellington and the
young amiri baraka to create the sgt. pepper of rap that it has not yet
delivered - i know people in this country and elsewhere are starving for
something that is deep and real - something that represents that the immense,
heavy and wonderful torch of great african-american music has been passed....
listen to "love power peace" - james brown and the jb's live in paris in 1972 -
listen to those chops - listen to those years of hard work that went into
every member of that band that enabled them to weave such a deep groove
that was so delicate and solid at the same time - that is live !! that is real !!

maybe i am too old, or i just don't get it, but i think the combination of
someone who could really rap, had the mind and the spirit and the balls
to be truly political and a real band of smoking mf's - this person could change the world.....


i mean no disrespect to anyone
i love to love music more than
anything else in this world



be well


- jack

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by emdub123

I'm thinking about the ancient eastern spiritual teachings that tell us desire and attachment are the root cause of our suffering? To eliminate suffering from our lives, we must eliminate desire and attachment. There are many ways to look at it, but perhaps the (attachment to) fame and money killed the music? Maybe the removal of monetary value from music will bring back the altruism? Making music for the sake of making music, because we have a genuine need to express ourselves in this way?


Maybe this is already happening. Maybe what we're complaining about is that REAL music is being forcibly separated from money (and the means to make money) right before our eyes. Maybe we're longing for the day that you could make real music and real money at the same time.

Sorry, but I think that is total bullshit. It's like telling a woman who is being raped that she's just attached to her ego. Let it go. Be one with the universe and don't be selfish.

There's is the concept of self worth. There is the concept of self integrity and not allowing yourself to be stepped on and taken advantage of by criminals and people who desire to devalue your worth by saying that what you do should be free. Well I should be allowed to put a price tag on what I produce. Everyone should have that right. Music is a business to me. It's how I make my living. So if John owns a fast food place when would it be OK for everyone to decide food should be free and he should just give it away? An how's John to live?

[teddy07x]

Originally Posted by Clayphish

Did anyone else unintentionally read that with Chris Rocks usual stand up delivery? lol

yes....

[themaidsroom]

i read it to some one on the phone like that.

[initialsBB]

Originally Posted by not_so_new

Let's say this, without a doubt more music and artists have survived from the 70's than will survive from today and that is because there are already more artists rememberd from the 70's than are even out in the general public right now....

GINORMOUS LIST OMITTED

I have said it before and I'll say it again. The Baby Boomer generation (people born between 1945 and 1964) are over THREE TIMES THE SIZE of Generation X! These are the people who were at the age of 18 between the years of 1963 and 1982, basically the precise span of time that was the "golden age" of rock. So naturally, during that period there were three times as many talented musicians, three times as many great bands, three times as many people in attendance at shows, three times as many albums potentially sold and therefore three times as much money potentially available to support the music scene.

And yet the boomers will always try to have us believe that they were a special chosen group who came of age at a magical, unique time that history will never see again. Meanwhile they continue to hold all of the financial and political power while f**king up the entire world and continually talking sh*t about the accomplishments of their children's generation.

[initialsBB]

Originally Posted by themaidsroom

i think rap has immense potential

See, this is the kind of condescending bullshit* I'm talking about. Hip Hop is about 30 years old now! It has pretty much exhausted most of its potential and is probably reaching the end of its lifespan. But of course, hip hop, metal, techno, hardcore, the internet, computers, videogames --- none of that Gen X stuff can possibly have any merit can it? We're all just a bunch of disconnected emotionless drones, hiding anonymously behind our computer screens while the real musicians are out there grooving together, connecting meaningfully and smelling each others funk.

* I thought the board software censored our posts until I noticed Henry's post above. I've been self-censoring for nothing.

[themaidsroom]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

GINORMOUS LIST OMITTED

I have said it before and I'll say it again. The Baby Boomer generation (people born between 1945 and 1964) are over THREE TIMES THE SIZE of Generation X! These are the people who were at the age of 18 between the years of 1963 and 1982, basically the precise span of time that was the "golden age" of rock. So naturally, during that period there were three times as many talented musicians, three times as many great bands, three times as many people in attendance at shows, three times as many albums potentially sold and therefore three times as much money potentially available to support the music scene.

And yet the boomers will always try to have us believe that they were a special chosen group who came of age at a magical, unique time that history will never see again. Meanwhile they continue to hold all of the financial and political power while f**king up the entire world and continually talking sh*t about the accomplishments of their children's generation.

i have read that the boomers are 5x as opposed to 3x

[EKG Productions]

initialsBB, Right on man that is the best way of thinking I think I've heard yet. It explains alot about the state our great nation.

[themaidsroom]

i am 41 - dead spot on generation x - i want to love music

i have seen gil scott heron perform - he is amazing - couldn't he be called
the first rapper ?


i bought a new french vinyl pressing of "it takes a nation of millions" - the seminal
classic -
2 years ago, and i liked it, but it did not hold up like i thought it would - i liked
that record when it came out.
i am white. i am middle class.
maybe that alters your perspective of my view
i just bought "ready to die" two years ago - i like that, but it is so dark and sad

i honestly believe, from the perspective of music , there is more to be learned
from stevie wonder 1968-1974 than the entire history of rap - rap has always
been recorded - it is something that was always very marketed - there would have been
no rap without mtv - it is very visual -
it has never fared well as a live performance medium - my suspicion is that anyone
really charismatic and smart didn't get through the door as we live in a world
like that - our generation does not have a nina simone, a malcolm x or a
muhammed ali - they don't exist - even one of them or 1/3 or 1/5 of them -
that may be more about the media than the art or the people or the culture

i believe mainstreet has been carefully watched for going on thirty years
why take chances ?

(look at what happened with bob marley - the love and peace and world communism guy
whose music is probably the most listened to on the planet in 2007
if bob marley was alive right now he would be a very, very powerful man who
could alter world events)



maybe my early years were so formed around hearing 70's music on the
radio that my mind is closed.......i worked on electronica to 2" 16 track several
times in the past month and i really like it....

i agree with you that the boomers control everything and have destroyed much in their
path - we will be listeing to "satisfaction" until we are in our seventies....or
longer


be well


- jack

[initialsBB]

Originally Posted by themaidsroom

i have seen gil scott heron perform - he is amazing - couldn't he be called
the first rapper ?

Yep, he and the Watts Prophets, Last Poets and some others. He's the best of them though.

Originally Posted by themaidsroom

i honestly believe, from the perspective of music , there is more to be learned
from stevie wonder 1968-1974 than the entire history of rap

That's a little unfair though, don't you think? Stevie's genius is pretty unique. That's like saying that there's more to be learned musically from Bach then from the whole of Rock & Roll. Well, yeah maybe that's true from a certain point of view but it's kind of looking at only part of the picture.

Originally Posted by themaidsroom

- rap has always
been recorded - it is something that was always very marketed - there would have been
no rap without mtv - it is very visual -
it has never fared well as a live performance medium -

Well, that's not really true. It started as a live thing and then actually had some growing pains in trying to make the transition onto records. And MTV certainly wasn't helping hip hop out at all for quite a while until it became an obviously unstoppable force.

Originally Posted by themaidsroom

our generation does not have a nina simone, a malcolm x or a
muhammed ali - they don't exist - even one of them or 1/3 or 1/5 of them -
that may be more about the media than the art or the people or the culture

i believe mainstreet has been carefully watched for going on thirty years
why take chances ?

I couldn't agree with you more there. Malcolm X or MLK will probably never happen again in this country and that level of control by the powers that be certainly isn't helping the arts either.

For the record, probably 80% of the music I listen to is from the '60s and '70s so I'm obviously a bit conflicted here.

[flwehr]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

It's not so much that it's hard to FIND musicians to play with. It's hard for YOUNGER musicians to find anyone to play with who's any good.

You learn to play BETTER by playing with great musicians. What you have today are what I call "cubicle musicians." They sit alone, for the most part in front of their computer monitors, or beatboxes and make up "beats." Or have some DJ inspired thing going in Ableton "Live" with scenes that make it seem as though it's being creative. Or you have a bunch of guys recycle, chop, auto-tune, quantize, create soundscapes, but have no idea what the hell they're doing and can't play jack shit.

There are no MORE opportunities than before. It only seems that way. There are less opportunities, as far as I can tell. That's what I'm saying. There's LESS music being made because there are less real musicians. Music in the schools, is absent around here. That was crucial to my learning to play music, as it was for every single musician I play with. It's gone. How are kids going to learn how to play? With Logic 8?? Where are they going to play? Mom's house? Myspace?

Personally I play all the time. But the musicians I play with are mostly 30-40+. Most of us are professional, meaning this is what we do for a living.

I don't know how you really LEARN a new technique on the internet. I needed teachers and people to show me and simply try. Of course it's not impossible, but that's what I think is so f**ked up about todays music and musicians. Music is a social activity; it always was anyway. It's about performance and sharing. You learn by playing in groups with other musicians and for other people. That's what was wonderful about the pre 90s. But by the time drum machines came along this notion of "I'll do it myself," took hold. The existential cubicle musician was born and music took a nose dive. Sure some cool things happened: Thomas Dolby did his one man shows to prove it was possible. Howard what'sit. But we went to the extreme to prove a point. It ceased to be a social, extroverting activity thing and became an introverted, entropy slope. The angst from having to argue and prove that YOU'RE Right after all to a dumb assed drummer or the other guitar player who told us what we were doing was all wrong; we'd prove them all wrong by doing it ourselves! Well I've been there. And I LEARNED so much more by having those arguments and having to eat crow once in a while because someone else had a better idea. Paul needed John so he wouldn't be so pretty and maudlin all the time. John needed Paul too. I liked them much better as a team.

I think fear and insecurity feed into making cubicle musicians. Once you're an adult it's really hard getting up in front of people and playing your music if you've never done it before. So it's easier to hide behind a screen, like so many people here hide behind their handles. Then you can almost anonymously throw up an MP3 to see how it goes. F**k man! That's not it. It's about playing music FOR people. There's NOTHING BETTER than getting your hands on that guitar, squeezing the strings with a loud, cranked amp and having a bunch of people, a crowd of screaming people, hanging on your every note. NOTHING beats it.

It's about being in a rehearsal pounding out a tune, your tune and getting your ego bruised because it's just not right. It's about making it right. It's about spending thousands of hours on your instrument making it right.
...

Best post I've read in a long time - thanks.

[big country]

I also think Oprah sucks !

maybe I am not cultured enough for rap or Opera

I should have the ability not to be forced to like a certain type of music

[henryrobinett]

LOL! Do you mean Opera or Oprah?

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by flwehr

Best post I've read in a long time - thanks.

Thank you!

[big country]

opera!

[Grizzly]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

Well I should be allowed to put a price tag on what I produce. Everyone should have that right. Music is a business to me. It's how I make my living. So if John owns a fast food place when would it be OK for everyone to decide food should be free and he should just give it away? An how's John to live?

The question is : did John start that business to make good food or to make good money ?...

I'm pretty sure the quality of the food can vary quite a lot accordingly...

Olivier.

[Phunkeman]

You have to understand that being a musician or any artist will develope various degrees of free thinking.

Abstract thought.

Problem solving from other perspecrives that is strange for folks who haven't devoloped our way of thinking.

Now the people who make laws and policy in this country do not support the arts of any kind.

Why?

Well Its easier to manipulate those who cannot decipher the hoaxs that come down the pipe. Than those pain in the ass artist (musician, actors, painters writers).

That's why most of the art programs have been cut drastically in public schools. There a lot of kids out there that have that "thing " to be an artist. Its just not being cultivated and nurtured. That why a lot of folks get into the home studio thing. To feed that need to create and be stimulated the way only the arts can.

In some countries we are the first to be rounded up and imprisoned.

Uh Oh I've said too much... gotta go

lololololol

[crufty]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

What you have today are what I call "cubicle musicians."
...snip...
There are no MORE opportunities than before. It only seems that way. There are less opportunities, as far as I can tell.

Concur 100%. I assume by opportunities you mean sustainable / paying ones--agree. There's no reason why people can't get together in the garage and jam out for local bar sets, but I agree that will only take musicianship so far. And don't knock the cubicle musician! It's a start...the difference is, when I was younger, if I made crummy bedroom / cubicle music as a young man, nobody was around to hear it Who knows how many of those cubicle musicians will graduate into more deeper art?

[crufty]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

There's is the concept of self worth. There is the concept of self integrity and not allowing yourself to be stepped on and taken advantage of by criminals and people who desire to devalue your worth by saying that what you do should be free.

I agree as well. The free market must be allowed to decide worth. But I do support folks who say things should be free. Viva la revolutione! Nothing wrong with mixing it up with the free market either, keeps things competitive for consumers.

But saying X should be free is a lot different then deciding X should be released for free when you don't own X tutt

[crufty]

Originally Posted by themaidsroom

maybe i am too old, or i just don't get it, but i think the combination of
someone who could really rap, had the mind and the spirit and the balls
to be truly political and a real band of smoking mf's - this person could change the world.....

Check out Ice Cube's first two solo albums - AmeriKKKa's Most Wanted and Death Certificate. I don't know about world changing, but anyone curious about rap should give those two albums a listen. Those albums, to me anyway, capture the essence of rap. To me, when Chris Rock talks about people getting their mogul on, he's talking about rappers moving away from what those albums were--slightly glorified, honest chronicles of current events--and into becoming businessmen.

Not that I'm wishing for those bygone days with 'tards shooting at the screen during screenings of Colors, nor am I saying one can't find relevant equivalents today...but that era is definitely gone.

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by Grizzly

The question is : did John start that business to make good food or to make good money ?...

I'm pretty sure the quality of the food can vary quite a lot accordingly...

Olivier.

But niether of those issues has any bearing on whether Johns food should be free or not. But I see your point. If John made food because his purpose was to make great food available to the public, as opposed to just another way f making making . . .

Smilarly with music, to a degree. But most professional musicians who do their art because they want to make great music, also do not want to simply give it away. We want some form of remuneration. And if it's simply TAKEN from you that's like a form of rape, without violence.

[not_so_new]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

GINORMOUS LIST OMITTED

I have said it before and I'll say it again. The Baby Boomer generation (people born between 1945 and 1964) are over THREE TIMES THE SIZE of Generation X! These are the people who were at the age of 18 between the years of 1963 and 1982, basically the precise span of time that was the "golden age" of rock. So naturally, during that period there were three times as many talented musicians, three times as many great bands, three times as many people in attendance at shows, three times as many albums potentially sold and therefore three times as much money potentially available to support the music scene.

And yet the boomers will always try to have us believe that they were a special chosen group who came of age at a magical, unique time that history will never see again. Meanwhile they continue to hold all of the financial and political power while f**king up the entire world and continually talking sh*t about the accomplishments of their children's generation.

Sorry man, that is a good argument but it is no excuse for the lack of quality music today.

I don't think it all comes down to sheer numbers but, fine, let's say that the number of 18 year olds at the time tipped the scale and that Baby Boomers are 3 time, or even 5 times larger than Gen X. Based on your numbers argument that means we should have 3 to 5 times less great music today but there would still be 20 bands or so (based on my GINORMOUS list ) that would have the staying power of say Zeppelin or The Eagles or John Lennon.

Britney Spears? Justin Timberlake? Creed? Nickelback?

Please…. It's a joke to even think of mentioning Britney in the same sentence as Paul Simon or John Lennon. The quality of music produced by Lennon over Britney has NOTING to do with the number of people alive back then. I like the music from today's artists to one degree or another but I would place money that in 50 years we will STILL be listening to The Who and Boston and almost all of the bands from today are going to be completely forgotten about.

My point is that there is much more to the fact that the 60's and 70's were the golden age of pop / rock than just the number of people in their teens and early 20's.

I am 39, I was a little kid in the 70's but I DISTINCTLY remember the impact music had on my older siblings lives and on the generation. To say it is all about the numbers is doing a great disservice to the magic of the period, and it was truly magical if you were alive to witness it.

And it is not nostalgia on my part, the fact that these artists are selling as much merch and CD's today as they are and still have a large chunk of the radio airwaves speaks volumes. And yes it is all about the kids in their teens and 20's from a sales standpoint. So why are so many of the artists from the 60's and 70's doing so well today? Must mean the "kids" today see the quality of the music from that generation as well.

[henryrobinett]

There is no qualitative difference between The Big Bopper and Britney, except that Britney is better. Or Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup. Each generation has their music. Most of it was always considered crap. You can idolize Buddy Holly all day and Peggy Sue might have a lot of sentimental and historical value but so does Run DMC.

You'd just be showing your bias by favoring The Eagles, et al.

[not_so_new]

Originally Posted by henryrobinett

There is no qualitative difference between The Big Bopper and Britney, except that Britney is better. Or Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup. Each generation has their music. Most of it was always considered crap. You can idolize Buddy Holly all day and Peggy Sue might have a lot of sentimental and historical value but so does Run DMC.

You'd just be showing your bias by favoring The Eagles, et al.

Really?

You can say that and it's all fair because it's just opinions but do you honestly believe in your hart of harts that Toxic is as timeless as Strawberry Fields?

Also, maybe the only way you can quantify such things is by sales right? In 100 years when the idea of "new" has worn off all these artists completely, which do you think will end up selling more, Zeppelin or Creed?

Again, it's not nostalgia on my part, the fact that these artists are selling as much merch and CD's today as they are and still have a large chunk of the radio airwaves speaks volumes. I saw a kid in the grocery store last night with a Zeppelin hoody on. I have never once seen a Nickelback pullover and I can almost guarantee you in 20 years I will not see one on a 15 year old pimple faced kid in a check out line.

For the record, I don't have much against Creed, Nickelback or Britney, I like Toxic a lot actually. I just don't think it is timeless music. Where is 'N Sync today? That's where Britney will be tomorrow, neither has staying power.

The 60's and 70's artists are proving day in and day out they have staying power… because they keep hanging around. So does Glen Miller, String of Pearls is TIMELESS, 80 years later we still recognize the melody. It just happens to be that the 60's and 70's have hundreds of "String of Pearls" types of timeless songs.

And I don't think they were better because they had more potential or sheer numbers. I think they were better because they were in an environment that fostered music and creativity over greed and money. Artists today have every bit of ability and potential, they just don't have the right environment to grow in.