The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
non-stop lamenting about modern music not being any good or whatever Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 20th December 2010
  #61
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batchainpuller78 View Post
so why record music if you don't like ties to past music & culture?
Fair question. But if you read my post again I wrote "pop-culture" not "culture", which aren't exactly the same. And again I've clouded my opinion with bad phrasing.......I should have said "who don't have such strong ties to past pop-culture"......

I guess one reason to record music would be because you love music?

Personally, I would prefer to have a day job outside the music industry that would allow me to free-lance and record/produce artists who I was actually interested in........compared to working in a studio somewhere having to record whoever walks in the door with a wallet just because it's my job..............screw that for a lifestyle heh
Old 20th December 2010
  #62
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by timlloyd View Post
I'm going to think about this for a while before responding. Hope that doesn't get taken as me running off lol.

For now, I'll just say that using an example of technical proficiency (your reference to the Berlin Academy of Music.........and I'm assuming that this is classical/jazz training) imho doesn't quite apply when talking about "popular music", which is what this thread is really about isn't it?

In my mind, technical skill doesn't have to be synonymous with whatever it is that makes music "good" in a given person's opinion.

Ah, and btw I wasn't presenting McAllister's book as a reference for my own opinion. I don't know if I agree with him or not; it was simply a counter-opinion to your statement that I thought might be relevant, bearing in mind that he's an anthropologist and I assume that you're not.

Tim I appreciate your response and am happy that you you are willing to hear me out.

The example I gave you is just to point out how important experience is. Keep in mind that this also applies to song writing. In general a group that can focus full time in songwriting will get better at it faster than a part time group - to the point where the part time group can never catch up. I throw up another statistic for you:


80% of NHL hockey players are born in the months of January, February, and March. The reason? Because they were on average bigger and more co-ordinated than kids born later in the year, they got more ice time and better coaching. That by the time these kids reached 14 years old and everyone's physic had caught up with each other, it was too late. Those born earlier in the year ( even if they may have had less God given talent) had more experience and were just simply better players. It was too late for the rest of them.

Apply this to the music industry.
Old 20th December 2010
  #63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batchainpuller78 View Post
Man I get your stance which is quite allright actually, see if you use a bit more words and phrase nicely!
and I love to have a beer and talk Soft Machine with you, but what I quoted there is an absolute crap statement.

If I only liked Gamelan music and be passionate about that, it's my ****ing right to make as much of it as I please.
and of course it is! but don't come on gearslutz and feel like it's your responsibility to let the current generation know that they're just wasting their time until real music like gamelan makes its way back onto the charts, and don't criticize people for producing using guitars and synths because they just don't sound as good as bells and gongs and that's an indisputable fact and you'd have to be deaf to think otherwise. do you see what i'm saying here? i'll spell it out for you: people do this literally every day in regards to genres like hip hop and chart pop, and they really have no right to say so because they fundamentally do not understand the music.

and i wish they would realize that what they're doing is not 'standing up for real music' but actually 'grumbling about kids today'.

it is frightening that people spouting out this kind of BS all the time might actually get a young band to walk into their studio somehow-- i've seen it happen. and i've also seen bands come to me after having the experience of working with someone contemptuous of modern music, and it's always such a huge relief for them to be working with someone who actually gets where they're coming from. that's really why i feel that if you agree with a lot of the statements in this thread that i'm arguing against, you should get out of the biz. you are doing the bands you're working with a huge disservice, and often causing talented people lots of frustration, time lost, and money.


Quote:
There is just a lot of that around, which albums of today will stand next to the masters of previous time?? only time will tell, you'll only be able to know in 10 years if you still play that 2005 album as much as that '71 Soft Machine record?
'test of time' makes no difference/is not important imo, but there are already several albums from 2005 that i've played many more times than the soft machine records i used to listen to excessively. so there you go
Old 20th December 2010
  #64
Lives for gear
 

Hey everybody! Nothing matters! Everything is equal to everything else! There's no difference between any one thing and any other thing! We're all the same! Things never get better or worse! It's always the same! Always! Every opinion is equally valid! Unless you're old in which case you're just stupid!

Did I already say everything matters?!
Old 20th December 2010
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Batchainpuller78's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
and of course it is! but don't come on gearslutz and feel like it's your responsibility to let the current generation know that they're just wasting their time until real music like gamelan makes its way back onto the charts, and don't criticize people for producing using guitars and synths because they just don't sound as good as bells and gongs and that's an indisputable fact and you'd have to be deaf to think otherwise. do you see what i'm saying here? i'll spell it out for you: people do this literally every day in regards to genres like hip hop and chart pop, and they really have no right to say so because they fundamentally do not understand the music.

and i wish they would realize that what they're doing is not 'standing up for real music' but actually 'grumbling about kids today'.

it is frightening that people spouting out this kind of BS all the time might actually get a young band to walk into their studio somehow-- i've seen it happen. and i've also seen bands come to me after having the experience of working with someone contemptuous of modern music, and it's always such a huge relief for them to be working with someone who actually gets where they're coming from. that's really why i feel that if you agree with a lot of the statements in this thread that i'm arguing against, you should get out of the biz. you are doing the bands you're working with a huge disservice, and often causing talented people lots of frustration, time lost, and money.




'test of time' makes no difference/is not important imo, but there are already several albums from 2005 that i've played many more times than the soft machine records i used to listen to excessively. so there you go

Nice twisting of the words there.
Not what I meant, but I hey don't worry I get what you mean and I guess vice versa.

And yes I agree that would be a huge disservice and they would equally frustrate me heck I even ask bands when they inform for bookings what kind of production they seek, if hear it's pop-chart stuff I actually advise them other places & people, I'm not interested in copy pasting their **** together or make them sound like this or that.
I recently had a few different bands with old school studio musicians in the band 'piece of cake' and such a joy, these guys come in they play their ****, you just need to sprinkle a bit of studio spices on there and it's ready and sounds great, I guess through the years I've just become more and more interested in recording a real performance.

Test of time surely makes a difference does the record have the power to keep on inspiring or touching your soul or mind in such a way through the years... if it does it could say something about the quality music.
Although for you it might be that and that record, for me it might be another set and so on, there is plenty of quality muic.... new generations get inspired as well by those 'old dinosaurs' like I have and you have and we all have when we discover an old record we really like.
If it has the power to do that surely it must be something?

Why did pop music go through all these retro-phases recently??

And you must not forget the information the past 10 years has been so volatile it's insane, maybe it's best not to worry about the test of time and staying power as huge chunks of this digital information age will be missing in the future, try accessing the information on your 80's floppy discs, what will have happened to all the info on your hard drive now in 20 years?
in 50? 100?
Who cares?? well what the **** are we all doing then? ****ing about?
Books will be there as well the ones that still get published, records are gonna be tricky too, so written music that could survive, well there's a whole electronic scene lost as not much notation going on there.. and yes some pop songs.. could very well be that Lady Gaga will be the child verses of 23thrd century people ??

The last period I had really had my head blown away with 'new' music was between 1997 & 2003, and the albums I liked on your list/link from last year are actually people already making music more than 10 years ago and are actually doing more of the same thing.

I don't know maybe show me to something that is very now, pop chart or other and is so amazing it kinda makes you forget about music previous recorded through history.
Old 20th December 2010
  #66
Lives for gear
 
Batchainpuller78's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by creegstor View Post
Hey everybody! Nothing matters! Everything is equal to everything else! There's no difference between any one thing and any other thing! We're all the same! Things never get better or worse! It's always the same! Always! Every opinion is equally valid! Unless you're old in which case you're just stupid!

Did I already say everything matters?!
heh

The stars are matter, we are matter, but it doesn't matter.

The late great Don van Vliet.
Old 20th December 2010
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
it is frightening that people spouting out this kind of BS all the time might actually get a young band to walk into their studio somehow-- i've seen it happen. and i've also seen bands come to me after having the experience of working with someone contemptuous of modern music, and it's always such a huge relief for them to be working with someone who actually gets where they're coming from.
This is one reason music has been stuck in neutral for 10 years now. The person recording shouldn't be shoe-horning a band's songs into a "modern" production any more than they should be shoe-horning the songs into a "retro" production. The producer should be doing nothing more than listening to what the band wrote and figuring out what best to do with that material. It shouldn't matter if the producer hates the latest Maroon 5 and it shouldn't matter if the producer hates The Jackson 5.

Listen to want the songs. Formulate a vision. Run with it.




Quote:
'test of time' makes no difference/is not important imo,
This is another reason music has been stuck in neutral for 10 years now.
Old 20th December 2010
  #68
^^ 'stuck in neutral'? if you say so. the last 10 yrs have been so incredible for music, but you know, feel free to believe whatever you want to. not interested in repeating myself yet another time in this thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batchainpuller78 View Post
I don't know maybe show me to something that is very now, pop chart or other and is so amazing it kinda makes you forget about music previous recorded through history.
there is a new album by diddy that came out like several days ago called 'last train to paris' that i would recommend if you are willing to try something probably very different than what you listen to. i think the last part of your statement is a pretty tall order but i will say i love this disc and think it sounds both incredible and very very modern, also has great songs and great singing throughout the entire record. keep in mind that many of the songs are straight up dance songs made to be played in the clubs, but i still think they work really well in the context of the album and are really well crafted. also contains plenty of x-rated language, so if you are offended by that, maybe don't check it out. but otherwise, if you do give it an honest listen from beginning to end, i'd be very interested to hear your thoughts/criticisms

great review of this album, too, for anyone who might be interested: http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment...rty_money.html

not trying to twist any of your words, by the way, you've been one of the more civil people in this thread so far (much more civil than myself, anyhow ). let me know if i've misunderstood anything you've said
Old 21st December 2010
  #69
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
there is a new album by diddy that came out like several days ago called 'last train to paris' that i would recommend if you are willing to try something probably very different than what you listen to. i think the last part of your statement is a pretty tall order but i will say i love this disc and think it sounds both incredible and very very modern
I know this can't be anything more than what I think Vs what you think, but that album sounds like it could have come out 10 years ago. Heard it before. Stuck in neutral.

How can there be innovation when the "rules" are:
No dynamics allowed
No tempo change allowed
Must use samples
Must tune
Must edit timing

It's been that way for years. It stuffs you into a very small box. Everything starts to sound the same and since it's been this way for so long, everything sounds instantly dated.

Honest question: How old are you? Do you remember any of the major "wow, that's never been done!" events as they happened? Like Bela Fleck making a career out of jazz banjo... Or Phish making a career out of 20 minute improvised guitar pop songs... Or Dr Dre releasing The Chronic and successfully hooking people from all walks of life?
Old 21st December 2010
  #70
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by timlloyd View Post
...new people are born who don't have emotional ties to past pop-culture, and this has consequences........and thankfully so imo...
But what happens when the new generation comes who don't have emotional ties to what is happening now? How do you think 2000-10 will be judged when it's key figures are fat, bald and past their sell-by dates? Bearing in mind that the Beatles, Led Zep and the Stones are still outselling almost everyone, do you honestly think they'll one day be replaced by Oasis? I don't.
Old 21st December 2010
  #71
Vintage this n that

I don't understand why so many Engineers wan't vintage everything but are constantly on a quest to produce new and fresh material... You would think that modern manufacturing and materials would allow us to have far better tools with which to work now days. I love my digital and analog gear equally. The fact that this stuff has become accessible to anyone who wants to have a crack is a good thing but the studios & record companies need to focus on the music and tallent, not on sex, poolside ass shaking and freakshows to sell records. Musical merrit is no longer in mix, just teen marketing...
Old 21st December 2010
  #72
Lives for gear
 
electricsound's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
Mahogany - Connectivity! (2006) : carefully constructed jet-set songs that conjure up cities and technology and futurism and design. has a great album cover too. dreamy and blippy.
dude, props. Mahogany are one of my favourite artists of the last ten years. Beautiful stuff.
Old 21st December 2010
  #73
Lives for gear
 

I don't know vince, I can't predict the future. Tbh, I don't care how someone else might judge the 2000-2010 decade in music. I've enjoyed it immensely and that's all that matters to me.
Old 21st December 2010
  #74
Don't confuse being worthy with being good.

There are lots of perfectly nice folk who work hard and still just will never have "it", it's not really their calling. No it's not fair, but that's life. Gems are few and far between, not everyone can be one.

If you want to blame anything then blame modern production, arrangement and songwriting, with it's crappy 80's synth sounds and uninspired 4 to the floor beats.

Fact of the matter is though that modern "pop" music is increasingly irrelevant in peoples lives. "Dinosaur" acts are huge people like Radiohead, Muse, U2 etc, hey great for them, not really great for listeners or the as an indicator about industry health. Those bands should be history at this point, irrelevant footnotes from the past, but they aren't, and it's not as if they're just doing reunion comeback tours either, which you'd have expected ten or twenty years ago.

You can like people personally all you want, you can even find quirky interesting bands to listen to that might be cool for you. But none of it matters. Pop music means popular music, not just what one geek likes. A lot of the indicators are that the state of the pop music industry (and hence modern pop music) is ****e right now. It's fair to criticize it. It's derivative pap, but it's what the industry continues to push as contrary to common sense they think it's a safe bet.

Frank Zappa was right, it was better when the suits didn't imagine they knew anything about music.
Old 21st December 2010
  #75
Lives for gear
 
T'Mershi Duween's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
^^ 'stuck in neutral'? if you say so. the last 10 yrs have been so incredible for music, but you know, feel free to believe whatever you want to. not interested in repeating myself yet another time in this thread
Not really stuck in neutral as much as devolving.

I really think the moment the "music died" (popular/rock based music) was the day that Kurt (or whoever killed him!) blew his brains out.

Now allow me a moment (hopefully not being too long winded and redundant) to give you an abbreviated, yet somewhat concise opinion of how we got to where we are now...

If you look at rock and roll as a genre, I think it's safe to say that 1955 was year zero.

There was Elvis (the big bang) who took hillbilly and black r&b/blues and sex appeal and changed the world. It was great and it was popular.

Then the Beatles did a few things that some people kinda liked and KA-BOOM! an evolutionary shift of such seismic proportions in popular (remember that word as it is crucial to this whole discussion!) music splintered into a million different vibrant, psychedelic and wonderful directions. So many bands and artists were inspired and an industry (music bizness) that up until that time had treated popular/rock music as a fad (only to be exploited for teenage $ and quickly discarded) woke up to the fact that:

A: This **** is blowing up on a world wide basis and influencing all the other arts!

B: It looks like it just might be around longer than an early 60's "dance craze"!

C: Serious people (critics, writers, social observers etc.) were treating this popular music as a legitimate art form!

So then music became big business... but the business side (while always a necessary evil for funding/distributing this terrible "noise" to the kids) was always a step behind what was happening (hey HEY hey) NOW. And it was kinda hard for record companies to prefabricate music for this culture of DFHs (dirty fu#king hippies) who were young and growing (wild in the streets).

Sure, there was disposable crap (our current morass) that was cheesy and cynically devised to "move units". The Archies (not even a real band!), The Monkees (almost a real band!), The Osmonds (ironically, the Jonas brothers of their time with Donny O. being the "Bieber" of his time) and other bubblegum stuff. Catchy and fun, but ultimately not cool. And the kids? Well most of them wanted to be cool! This was their culture. They were cynical of anyone over 30 and demanded unique and diverse sounds to boogie and get high to. heh

But oddly, all this cool recorded music wasn't just in the underground, buried away on late night FM stations. It was in the charts! Top 40! Mainstream! No ****!

The Doors, Marvin Gaye, Janis, Hendrix, Dylan and on and on. Great songs with depth and meaning (not always, but that was cool too because the music had passion) that sold and was popular. How in the hell did this happen?

But, (and this is where things start moving really fast) all kinds of music that was popular: soul, funk, psychedelic, progressive, glam-rock, hard rock... music that actually sold and was played on the radio and made big $ (a nice bonus!) was devoured and consumed in vast quantities and ushered in the era of ROCK STARDOM.

These were the Dionysian gods of their time. Rich rock stars roaming the earth like a band of aristocratic gypsies. Led Zep, The Stones, Queen, Deep Purple, Alice Cooper Band, Cheap Trick etc. Bands who rocked your ass, moved millions of "units" and flew around in their very own airliners (small private Lear jets were reserved for the coked-up managers/agents and entourage) playing world tours in huge stadiums to hundreds of thousands of screaming, rabid fans. Good times indeed...

But now, the art/commerce of big time ROCK/POP had become bloated, decadent and preposterous; out of the reach of the average rockin' teenage combo rehearsing in their garage with dreams of having their moment...

Then something interesting happened. The American fringe of the rock and roll scene (Iggy And The Stooges, Velvet Underground, New York Dolls, Ramones etc.), bands that were not even remotely mainstream (or played on the radio or got the BIG RECORD DEALS) were welcomed by British youth. Then in an ironic reversal of the British invasion (that earlier event that took the American art form of Rock and/or Roll and re-packaged it in a more modern, desirable and fashionable version that the USA ate up), those wacky Brits gave us two very important bands: The Damned (first official "Punk" single released) and more importantly (in an historical context) The Sex Pistols.

But, there was a villain lurking... gaining strength and becoming very popular at the same time. This musical "movement" was a precursor to our horrible current situation. DISCO.

And guess what? DISCO SUCKED! It was contrived, repetitious "dance music" made for white people without any natural rhythm to do cocaine and have unprotected sex to (see Frank Zappa's 'Dancin' Fool' for further details). It was not funky (we had Parliament/Funkadelic for that!) in the least. Vanilla and bland, it was made using tape loops with anonymous studio hacks "performing" it. Not all of it was too horrible (and looking back now, it all seems kinda charming and cool in an ironic kinda way, but I digress...).

So now you had three disparate camps. All hating each other. Mainstream rock, punk rock and disco.

In the foul year of our lord 1979 (which I think was one of the most interesting times in popular musical culture and probably when all of the last truly original innovations in popular rock music occurred), things were weird indeed!

Let me see if I can coherently explain this:

A. Disco sucked (a given). It was losing steam and popularity. And while elements of it were co-opted into mainstream pop, it was now considered a fad. Disco Duck anyone?

B. Punk did start making head-way into the mainstream. Post-punk (now re-branded as New Wave by the "suits") became more popular and certain bands were able to actually sell and get on the radio. The Cars, Blondie, Talking Heads, Devo, The Knack etc. It was a strange time for radio. Between the tired and unfashionable corporate rock of REO Speedwagon and Journey you had freaky punks (I was a teenager and this was my time!) sneaking in their short, weird New Wave songs. And guess what? They were popular! But not with everybody...

C. Metal (formerly hard rock) heads hated us punks. (Don't worry, we'll all make up later!) Depending how hip you were (and I was one hip cat!), you either dressed like a Status Quo fan from the early 70's with long hair and a jean jacket with Iron Maiden/Judas Priest/AC/DC/Van Halen (you pick) patches with optional studded leather/spiked accessories; or if you were an avant-garde rocker and wanted to have sex with girls that looked like Lene Lovich and Siouxsie Sioux like I did, you dressed like a cross between Ziggy Stardust and Johnny Thunders. Now we were ready for the new decade, the 80's. What would it bring? Surely music, fashion and art were going to keep evolving and changing. Breaking rules and pissing on the past in a mad, vibrant rush to find the newest ROCK AND ROLL THRILL.

Welcome to the 1980's music lovers and producers!

Although now a new, even more insidious enemy is lurking... What makes this enemy even more dangerous and destructive to the art of pop and rock (and all music in general) is that it has good intentions! And we all know where that road leads (and it's not backstage at a Mötley Crüe concert)!

This brand new entertainment is called MTV. And guess what? They play music videos! Now hicks in the fly-over states can learn how to dress like Duran Duran! It's music with visuals! Wow!

I thought it was the coolest **** ever. Now all my uncool friends that listen to the crap on mainstream radio could see all these new, innovative bands I had been telling them about. I had been trying to turn them on to all the cool new music I was discovering, but I would invariably show up at a party and bring my records (like everyone did back before the iPod isolation generation) only to be told to "Take that punk **** off, Terry!"

And what was that awful "punk ****" I was playing them? The debut album by a band called The Police.

Two years later these same clueless jocks and preps were running around singing "Roxanne". Ugh. I generally would hate a band after they got popular with the "straights". It happened after Queen became huge with 'News Of The World' and Pink Floyd with 'The Wall'.

Anyway, MTV was new, hip and 24 hours of music videos. They had late night shows like 120 Minutes that featured bands that I even personally knew (Athens ya'll!), they also showed concerts and had rock related news. Most of the VJs were planks, but I still loved it because it was all music all the time.

But once again, it became co-opted (and even faster than the preceding decade) by the "industry" and now only bands that had cool haircuts and were pretty were getting played. If you were fat and ugly, even if you were more talented than The Beatles, you were screwed. No air play for you!

But after being accused of being a little too white, MTV opened up their playlist to include crossover "black" artists like Prince, Lionel Richie etc. MTV helped to break Michael Jackson (already a huge and talented veteran star) to a new, younger audience with his expensive and innovative (at the time) videos. They were also helpful in exposing underground black music. A newer form (to those not in the know) of urban music. Rap.

Now, during most of the 80's, all the music that I dug (now called "alternative") didn't get any airplay on the radio. So while driving around looking for trouble, I would mainly listen to black radio stations. The 80's were a boom time for black music. Especially R&B. The production was great and I was getting more and more into electronic music and dance type stuff (the irony of hating disco was not lost on me btw! heh ) I had been into rap since the late 70's as drums were one of my main instruments and I loved funky breaks and beats. Grandmaster Flash, Run DMC, Slick Rick, Public Enemy, Boogie Down Productions etc. This **** was fresh and new and, again, a rebellion against the establishment. That's punk!

So, the late 80's... Music is crossing over and sampling (literally) all of these different genres. A very cool and interesting time.

The Beastie Boys were a bridge. They helped bring black and white youth together more so than any time since the late 60's/early 70's. It was a very hopeful and positive development. I was psyched. Hardcore punk, hair metal, real metal, underground weirdness, acid house, dub and electronic; even retro stuff that echoed the past but also brought a new twist to the rock and roll game. Diversity! Yes there was still cheesy pop (as always) but many choices and options were there. Music was very popular and important to young and old alike.

Which brings us to the 90's. I remember where I was when I first heard Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit'. I was driving around (once again looking for trouble) when I turned on the "classic" rock station. What wafted out was rough and demo sounding to me. In fact, I thought "Damn, they must be playing some local music!" I actually thought they were playing one of my friend's ****ty punk bands, lol! But it was Nirvana's brand new "single".

At this point I was in a mid level band signed with an indie label. I was also working on a solo album by myself, talking with A&R people and other assorted industry weasels. I had gotten lucky enough to find an entertainment attorney and I was getting ready to move to Atlanta ready for fame and fortune.

Then Nirvana blew up HUGE! Effectively throwing the industry on it's ear. Hair metal was out (thank Christ!) and this underground noise that I was involved in was suddenly "marketable". Great timing!

Now, I personally didn't think that Nirvana was that great of a band (I preferred the Melvins heh) but they did connect with a lot of people in a real and organic, non-hyped way. You cannot deny their impact. And because of them, bands that had previously been relegated to the independent labels (bands that I loved and knew), were now being signed faster than you could say "Smashing Pumpkins"!

Of course the music industry (always ready to exploit and harness youth culture) called this new movement Grunge. A stupid and meaningless label that mainly applied to bands from Seattle. But it was a hopeful time for us punk rockers. Now, after all those years of trying to change the mainstream, we had our foot in the door. It was our time.

1991... the year that punk broke.

Unfortunately, it was really going to be the decade that music became broken.

Okay, if any of you Gearslutz are still reading this War And Peace length epic post, hang on, cause I'm wrapping this **** up!

Kurt blows his brains out. Mass mourning ensues. All the bands that were signed to the majors (with a few notable exceptions) were dropped or left to flounder in contracts that binded them. Record companies decided that difficult artists were a pain in the ass. Media corporations were consolidated and boy bands were foisted upon a newer, younger (and much more gullible) audience.

Rap was thriving, as was a lot of pop. But something had died. Teen spirit perhaps?

Gangsta rap, while some of it was great (NWA, Dre, Tupac, Biggie), became the dominate flavor. Then the violence that had only been implied in the lyrics became all too real. People died. It also ushered in a very monochromatic and conservative sound into the hip hop culture that is still prevalent today.

The only innovative music that was happening (in my world) was electronic music and all the sub genres that were a part of it. This was the last progressive "movement" in modern music. But this kind of music was too strange and abstract for mass consumption. It served well for soundtracks to car commercials but did not catch on with the general public. But the "rave culture" from which this new "electronica" came was invaded by posers and, like rap, became the boring, conservative 4/4 monotony that is, ironically, the sound of pop today.

Add lip-syncing underage trollops, the Disney-fication of pop, illegal downloads, mp3s, stubborn record companies, auto-tune, easy loop making music software etc. and you find yourself...

Here.

In the 21st century.

So what now? I don't know. But this is the conundrum in which we find ourselves here on Gearslutz.

So sleepingbag, tell me how the last 10 years have been so incredible for music?

In my humble opinion, you are dead wrong.

We are DEVO.


Old 21st December 2010
  #76
Gear Nut
 
seany's Avatar
 

so that's it then? we may as well pack up and go home. what makes you think there won't be another moment when you can think " this is big and I was in from the start"? i think you are getting old.
Old 21st December 2010
  #77
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by seany View Post
so that's it then? we may as well pack up and go home. what makes you think there won't be another moment when you can think " this is big and I was in from the start"? i think you are getting old.
I'm not defeatist at all. Many good genres (early rock 'n' roll, Beatles, punk, grunge etc) were a reaction to something or made by people who all hated the same thing.
The key is first to accept we are living through crappy times, identify the problems (autotune, lack of atmosphere in recordings, no human feel, etc) and then do the opposite. If enough people are thinking the same way, you might have a movement of some kind, or at at least one genuinely original band, which then makes the old orthodoxy suddenly look very passe.
Of course if whatever results is any good, it will end up used in so many ads and TV shows that we'll soon end up hating it too. But hey, at least we had a break, and things are set up for the next genre.
Old 21st December 2010
  #78
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vincentvangogo View Post
I'm not defeatist at all. Many good genres (early rock 'n' roll, Beatles, punk, grunge etc) were a reaction to something or made by people who all hated the same thing.
The key is first to accept we are living through crappy times, identify the problems (autotune, lack of atmosphere in recordings, no human feel, etc) and then do the opposite. If enough people are thinking the same way, you might have a movement of some kind, or at at least one genuinely original band, which then makes the old orthodoxy suddenly look very passe.
Of course if whatever results is any good, it will end up used in so many ads and TV shows that we'll soon end up hating it too. But hey, at least we had a break, and things are set up for the next genre.
Jeez, didn't you get the memo?
Old 21st December 2010
  #79
Lives for gear
 
T'Mershi Duween's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by seany View Post
so that's it then? we may as well pack up and go home.

If you wanna be a whiny ass titty baby then sure, pack it in hoss! I'm doing great. I love life. I'm making music and making a living doing it! You?



Quote:
Originally Posted by seany View Post
what makes you think there won't be another moment when you can think " this is big and I was in from the start"?


I believe there will be! Hey man, I'm hoping for a musical renaissance. Hell, I'm hoping for a renaissance in all the arts! The things I wrote about rock/pop music can be applied (with various changes/alterations) to almost all the things I love. Movies mostly suck now. CGI is the auto-tune of movies. Television is beyond shallow. Nothing that's being "produced" by "artists" (even the good stuff) is recognized or lauded because of the dumbing down of the masses (I'm mainly talking about America, since that's where my parents fu#cked and where I was born). There is no longer a valid outlet for the dissemination of these great works of "art" or even a community/culture to support the growth and development of said "art". Attention spans are just too short nowadays. People have become post-literate and are way too deluged with electronic diversions that are the equivalent of solipsistic onanism for the mind. Where's the soul? Nothing seems to "connect" on an emotional or visceral level. Why is that? Why are the majority of young people content with this situation? Are they so brainwashed by corporate propaganda that they think that this is the golden age? Reality just does not support that view at all. Just look around you! Do the youth (whose time it is to seize) have no fresh ideas to bestow upon the world? Are they so fu#king lame and disconnected that they themselves have nothing to offer that's new and innovative and, most importantly, their own?

I mean, if conformity and aesthetic conservatism are the "in" thing now and Kanye/Ke$ha/Bieber are your high water mark then, you are doomed and pathetic and I truly feel sorry for your lot. Maybe your future offspring will realize how expendable and vapid your culture was and will rebel (like the kids did in the 60's) and come up with some good ****!


Quote:
Originally Posted by seany View Post
i think you are getting old.

And I think you are boring and common. And besides, we're all getting "old". I look forward to being a weird old dude!


You know what the best part of getting older is? Realizing how little you knew when you were young, dumb and clueless. May wisdom and eloquence, in it's purest sense, grab hold of you someday.


Fight the power, because the eons are closing rapidly.
Old 21st December 2010
  #80
Quote:
Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween View Post
Not really stuck in neutral as much as devolving.

I really think the moment the "music died" (popular/rock based music) was the day that Kurt (or whoever killed him!) blew his brains out.

Now allow me a moment (hopefully not being too long winded and redundant) to give you an abbreviated, yet somewhat concise opinion of how we got to where we are now...

If you look at rock and roll as a genre, I think it's safe to say that 1955 was year zero.

There was Elvis (the big bang) who took hillbilly and black r&b/blues and sex appeal and changed the world. It was great and it was popular.

Then the Beatles did a few things that some people kinda liked and KA-BOOM! an evolutionary shift of such seismic proportions in popular (remember that word as it is crucial to this whole discussion!) music splintered into a million different vibrant, psychedelic and wonderful directions. So many bands and artists were inspired and an industry (music bizness) that up until that time had treated popular/rock music as a fad (only to be exploited for teenage $ and quickly discarded) woke up to the fact that:

A: This **** is blowing up on a world wide basis and influencing all the other arts!

B: It looks like it just might be around longer than an early 60's "dance craze"!

C: Serious people (critics, writers, social observers etc.) were treating this popular music as a legitimate art form!

So then music became big business... but the business side (while always a necessary evil for funding/distributing this terrible "noise" to the kids) was always a step behind what was happening (hey HEY hey) NOW. And it was kinda hard for record companies to prefabricate music for this culture of DFHs (dirty fu#king hippies) who were young and growing (wild in the streets).

Sure, there was disposable crap (our current morass) that was cheesy and cynically devised to "move units". The Archies (not even a real band!), The Monkees (almost a real band!), The Osmonds (ironically, the Jonas brothers of their time with Donny O. being the "Bieber" of his time) and other bubblegum stuff. Catchy and fun, but ultimately not cool. And the kids? Well most of them wanted to be cool! This was their culture. They were cynical of anyone over 30 and demanded unique and diverse sounds to boogie and get high to. heh

But oddly, all this cool recorded music wasn't just in the underground, buried away on late night FM stations. It was in the charts! Top 40! Mainstream! No ****!

The Doors, Marvin Gaye, Janis, Hendrix, Dylan and on and on. Great songs with depth and meaning (not always, but that was cool too because the music had passion) that sold and was popular. How in the hell did this happen?

But, (and this is where things start moving really fast) all kinds of music that was popular: soul, funk, psychedelic, progressive, glam-rock, hard rock... music that actually sold and was played on the radio and made big $ (a nice bonus!) was devoured and consumed in vast quantities and ushered in the era of ROCK STARDOM.

These were the Dionysian gods of their time. Rich rock stars roaming the earth like a band of aristocratic gypsies. Led Zep, The Stones, Queen, Deep Purple, Alice Cooper Band, Cheap Trick etc. Bands who rocked your ass, moved millions of "units" and flew around in their very own airliners (small private Lear jets were reserved for the coked-up managers/agents and entourage) playing world tours in huge stadiums to hundreds of thousands of screaming, rabid fans. Good times indeed...

But now, the art/commerce of big time ROCK/POP had become bloated, decadent and preposterous; out of the reach of the average rockin' teenage combo rehearsing in their garage with dreams of having their moment...

Then something interesting happened. The American fringe of the rock and roll scene (Iggy And The Stooges, Velvet Underground, New York Dolls, Ramones etc.), bands that were not even remotely mainstream (or played on the radio or got the BIG RECORD DEALS) were welcomed by British youth. Then in an ironic reversal of the British invasion (that earlier event that took the American art form of Rock and/or Roll and re-packaged it in a more modern, desirable and fashionable version that the USA ate up), those wacky Brits gave us two very important bands: The Damned (first official "Punk" single released) and more importantly (in an historical context) The Sex Pistols.

But, there was a villain lurking... gaining strength and becoming very popular at the same time. This musical "movement" was a precursor to our horrible current situation. DISCO.

And guess what? DISCO SUCKED! It was contrived, repetitious "dance music" made for white people without any natural rhythm to do cocaine and have unprotected sex to (see Frank Zappa's 'Dancin' Fool' for further details). It was not funky (we had Parliament/Funkadelic for that!) in the least. Vanilla and bland, it was made using tape loops with anonymous studio hacks "performing" it. Not all of it was too horrible (and looking back now, it all seems kinda charming and cool in an ironic kinda way, but I digress...).

So now you had three disparate camps. All hating each other. Mainstream rock, punk rock and disco.

In the foul year of our lord 1979 (which I think was one of the most interesting times in popular musical culture and probably when all of the last truly original innovations in popular rock music occurred), things were weird indeed!

Let me see if I can coherently explain this:

A. Disco sucked (a given). It was losing steam and popularity. And while elements of it were co-opted into mainstream pop, it was now considered a fad. Disco Duck anyone?

B. Punk did start making head-way into the mainstream. Post-punk (now re-branded as New Wave by the "suits") became more popular and certain bands were able to actually sell and get on the radio. The Cars, Blondie, Talking Heads, Devo, The Knack etc. It was a strange time for radio. Between the tired and unfashionable corporate rock of REO Speedwagon and Journey you had freaky punks (I was a teenager and this was my time!) sneaking in their short, weird New Wave songs. And guess what? They were popular! But not with everybody...

C. Metal (formerly hard rock) heads hated us punks. (Don't worry, we'll all make up later!) Depending how hip you were (and I was one hip cat!), you either dressed like a Status Quo fan from the early 70's with long hair and a jean jacket with Iron Maiden/Judas Priest/AC/DC/Van Halen (you pick) patches with optional studded leather/spiked accessories; or if you were an avant-garde rocker and wanted to have sex with girls that looked like Lene Lovich and Siouxsie Sioux like I did, you dressed like a cross between Ziggy Stardust and Johnny Thunders. Now we were ready for the new decade, the 80's. What would it bring? Surely music, fashion and art were going to keep evolving and changing. Breaking rules and pissing on the past in a mad, vibrant rush to find the newest ROCK AND ROLL THRILL.

Welcome to the 1980's music lovers and producers!

Although now a new, even more insidious enemy is lurking... What makes this enemy even more dangerous and destructive to the art of pop and rock (and all music in general) is that it has good intentions! And we all know where that road leads (and it's not backstage at a Mötley Crüe concert)!

This brand new entertainment is called MTV. And guess what? They play music videos! Now hicks in the fly-over states can learn how to dress like Duran Duran! It's music with visuals! Wow!

I thought it was the coolest **** ever. Now all my uncool friends that listen to the crap on mainstream radio could see all these new, innovative bands I had been telling them about. I had been trying to turn them on to all the cool new music I was discovering, but I would invariably show up at a party and bring my records (like everyone did back before the iPod isolation generation) only to be told to "Take that punk **** off, Terry!"

And what was that awful "punk ****" I was playing them? The debut album by a band called The Police.

Two years later these same clueless jocks and preps were running around singing "Roxanne". Ugh. I generally would hate a band after they got popular with the "straights". It happened after Queen became huge with 'News Of The World' and Pink Floyd with 'The Wall'.

Anyway, MTV was new, hip and 24 hours of music videos. They had late night shows like 120 Minutes that featured bands that I even personally knew (Athens ya'll!), they also showed concerts and had rock related news. Most of the VJs were planks, but I still loved it because it was all music all the time.

But once again, it became co-opted (and even faster than the preceding decade) by the "industry" and now only bands that had cool haircuts and were pretty were getting played. If you were fat and ugly, even if you were more talented than The Beatles, you were screwed. No air play for you!

But after being accused of being a little too white, MTV opened up their playlist to include crossover "black" artists like Prince, Lionel Richie etc. MTV helped to break Michael Jackson (already a huge and talented veteran star) to a new, younger audience with his expensive and innovative (at the time) videos. They were also helpful in exposing underground black music. A newer form (to those not in the know) of urban music. Rap.

Now, during most of the 80's, all the music that I dug (now called "alternative") didn't get any airplay on the radio. So while driving around looking for trouble, I would mainly listen to black radio stations. The 80's were a boom time for black music. Especially R&B. The production was great and I was getting more and more into electronic music and dance type stuff (the irony of hating disco was not lost on me btw! heh ) I had been into rap since the late 70's as drums were one of my main instruments and I loved funky breaks and beats. Grandmaster Flash, Run DMC, Slick Rick, Public Enemy, Boogie Down Productions etc. This **** was fresh and new and, again, a rebellion against the establishment. That's punk!

So, the late 80's... Music is crossing over and sampling (literally) all of these different genres. A very cool and interesting time.

The Beastie Boys were a bridge. They helped bring black and white youth together more so than any time since the late 60's/early 70's. It was a very hopeful and positive development. I was psyched. Hardcore punk, hair metal, real metal, underground weirdness, acid house, dub and electronic; even retro stuff that echoed the past but also brought a new twist to the rock and roll game. Diversity! Yes there was still cheesy pop (as always) but many choices and options were there. Music was very popular and important to young and old alike.

Which brings us to the 90's. I remember where I was when I first heard Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit'. I was driving around (once again looking for trouble) when I turned on the "classic" rock station. What wafted out was rough and demo sounding to me. In fact, I thought "Damn, they must be playing some local music!" I actually thought they were playing one of my friend's ****ty punk bands, lol! But it was Nirvana's brand new "single".

At this point I was in a mid level band signed with an indie label. I was also working on a solo album by myself, talking with A&R people and other assorted industry weasels. I had gotten lucky enough to find an entertainment attorney and I was getting ready to move to Atlanta ready for fame and fortune.

Then Nirvana blew up HUGE! Effectively throwing the industry on it's ear. Hair metal was out (thank Christ!) and this underground noise that I was involved in was suddenly "marketable". Great timing!

Now, I personally didn't think that Nirvana was that great of a band (I preferred the Melvins heh) but they did connect with a lot of people in a real and organic, non-hyped way. You cannot deny their impact. And because of them, bands that had previously been relegated to the independent labels (bands that I loved and knew), were now being signed faster than you could say "Smashing Pumpkins"!

Of course the music industry (always ready to exploit and harness youth culture) called this new movement Grunge. A stupid and meaningless label that mainly applied to bands from Seattle. But it was a hopeful time for us punk rockers. Now, after all those years of trying to change the mainstream, we had our foot in the door. It was our time.

1991... the year that punk broke.

Unfortunately, it was really going to be the decade that music became broken.

Okay, if any of you Gearslutz are still reading this War And Peace length epic post, hang on, cause I'm wrapping this **** up!

Kurt blows his brains out. Mass mourning ensues. All the bands that were signed to the majors (with a few notable exceptions) were dropped or left to flounder in contracts that binded them. Record companies decided that difficult artists were a pain in the ass. Media corporations were consolidated and boy bands were foisted upon a newer, younger (and much more gullible) audience.

Rap was thriving, as was a lot of pop. But something had died. Teen spirit perhaps?

Gangsta rap, while some of it was great (NWA, Dre, Tupac, Biggie), became the dominate flavor. Then the violence that had only been implied in the lyrics became all too real. People died. It also ushered in a very monochromatic and conservative sound into the hip hop culture that is still prevalent today.

The only innovative music that was happening (in my world) was electronic music and all the sub genres that were a part of it. This was the last progressive "movement" in modern music. But this kind of music was too strange and abstract for mass consumption. It served well for soundtracks to car commercials but did not catch on with the general public. But the "rave culture" from which this new "electronica" came was invaded by posers and, like rap, became the boring, conservative 4/4 monotony that is, ironically, the sound of pop today.

Add lip-syncing underage trollops, the Disney-fication of pop, illegal downloads, mp3s, stubborn record companies, auto-tune, easy loop making music software etc. and you find yourself...

Here.

In the 21st century.

So what now? I don't know. But this is the conundrum in which we find ourselves here on Gearslutz.

So sleepingbag, tell me how the last 10 years have been so incredible for music?

In my humble opinion, you are dead wrong.

We are DEVO.


You're using Dragon, right? or is this for college credit?
Old 21st December 2010
  #81
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by creegstor View Post
heh
Old 21st December 2010
  #82
i can't believe you will go through the trouble to type out a book length detailed history of rock music and are familiar with the history enough and yet can't see the analogs between rock's development and hip hop's development

just like rock started in the 50's and yet y'all are talking about the late 60's and 70's as the peak, so did hip hop start in the very early eighties and now we're at the point where ultra mainstream artists are putting out concept albums and really exploring the boundaries by folding all different types of music into hip hop.. just like the beatles folding, say, sitars into rock music. we went from sugarhill gang to public enemy to wu tang to jay z to outkast and now? i'm a huge kanye fan (to name just one example) and yeah, i think his impact right now is just as much as any the legends of rock y'all keep mentioning. he is undoubtedly a huge presence in the new generation of music fans. your opinion of him really doesn't matter, it's very obvious at this point that he'll be around for a while and will have people making the same tired message board posts in the future, about how music sucks now but used to be so much better because remember when big mainstream artists like kanye used to release groundbreaking albums like 808s or mbdtf??? but no, that's different, because.....? because you don't listen to it or understand it. that's the only difference. has nothing to do with the quality of the music.

rock isn't the paradigm anymore

no one is sitting around waiting for someone to come along and reinvent the guitar solo , that's over

just like your parents' and grandparents' fragile old ears weren't able to hear past the noise and energy of rock and roll enough to appreciate what was so new and exciting about it, your fragile old ears can't hear past all the trappings of hip hop enough to be able to appreciate it on its own terms

i don't really feel the need to convince you of this though, now that i've seen the walls that you've built for yourself that will likely prevent you from ever enjoying any new music again. not my problem. i know it's a losing argument to try to get anyone to actually change their thought process here, and i honestly truly don't have any desire to make you listen to music that you're not gonna like or appreciate no matter what i do. my own and my generation's love of the new music being released every year is all the convincing i need, so if you need more than that, feel free to believe you've won this argument.

but it's so to see people who just plain do not understand what they're talking about going through such great lengths to try and convince me that things were so much better in their day--they weren't

btw, there was plenty of just plain dumb music back in the day, too. 'how much is that doggie in the window' was a number one billboard hit in 1953. but things were so much better then, huh

this discussion is the same BS that's been going on for thousands of years, and time and again your side's been proven wrong

not interested
Old 21st December 2010
  #83
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

All this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
i can't believe you will go through the trouble to type out a book length detailed history of rock music and are familiar with the history enough and yet can't see the analogs between rock's development and hip hop's development

just like rock started in the 50's and yet y'all are talking about the late 60's and 70's as the peak, so did hip hop start in the very early eighties and now we're at the point where ultra mainstream artists are putting out concept albums and really exploring the boundaries by folding all different types of music into hip hop.. just like the beatles folding, say, sitars into rock music. we went from sugarhill gang to public enemy to wu tang to jay z to outkast and now? i'm a huge kanye fan (to name just one example) and yeah, i think his impact right now is just as much as any the legends of rock y'all keep mentioning. he is undoubtedly a huge presence in the new generation of music fans. your opinion of him really doesn't matter, it's very obvious at this point that he'll be around for a while and will have people making the same tired message board posts in the future, about how music sucks now but used to be so much better because remember when big mainstream artists like kanye used to release groundbreaking albums like 808s or mbdtf??? but no, that's different, because.....? because you don't listen to it or understand it. that's the only difference. has nothing to do with the quality of the music.

rock isn't the paradigm anymore

no one is sitting around waiting for someone to come along and reinvent the guitar solo , that's over

just like your parents' and grandparents' fragile old ears weren't able to hear past the noise and energy of rock and roll enough to appreciate what was so new and exciting about it, your fragile old ears can't hear past all the trappings of hip hop enough to be able to appreciate it on its own terms

i don't really feel the need to convince you of this though, now that i've seen the walls that you've built for yourself that will likely prevent you from ever enjoying any new music again. not my problem. i know it's a losing argument to try to get anyone to actually change their thought process here, and i honestly truly don't have any desire to make you listen to music that you're not gonna like or appreciate no matter what i do. my own and my generation's love of the new music being released every year is all the convincing i need, so if you need more than that, feel free to believe you've won this argument.

but it's so to see people who just plain do not understand what they're talking about going through such great lengths to try and convince me that things were so much better in their day--they weren't

btw, there was plenty of just plain dumb music back in the day, too. 'how much is that doggie in the window' was a number one billboard hit in 1953. but things were so much better then, huh

this discussion is the same BS that's been going on for thousands of years, and time and again your side's been proven wrong
And then;

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
not interested
Old 21st December 2010
  #84
not interested in repeating all my points, not interested in replying to everything in that long post (believe me, there's a lot to call out in there but w/e), not at all interested in getting you/him to become a kanye fan or anything like that, VERY interested in getting you to understand why what a lot of you are saying shows a lack of perspective, but not really interested in arguing anymore

Old 21st December 2010
  #85
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepingbag View Post
but not really interested in arguing anymore

Is anyone arguing? Nah, just exchanging opinions. heh

You know, the local dinasour rock station here is currently playing their A to Z playlist. There was so much music done back then without the assistance of computers. But in all these cases, even some of the not so good music, these people learned to sing, learned to play their instruments, and made music that was unique. You can instantly hear the signature sound of whatever particular group you are listening to, and can/could hear it when they played it live as well.

Is this the case with the latest batch of current musicians/bands? There are exceptions of course, but for the most part, I say no, on so many levels.
Old 21st December 2010
  #86
maybe yeah, but depends on your point of view. someone who listened to a lot of jazz singers + crooners before rock broke probably wouldn't agree that many rock bands have vocalists who 'can sing'... or 'play their instruments' for that matter. tons of great music made by people who never learned more than a few chords.

kind of what i'm saying here. things are different and need to be evaluated on different terms, and as musicians we should be more open to that than most people. i want to reiterate that i'm not trying to take away from the greatness of the classic/legendary bands of yore. but they are on the same spectrum as current bands/artists, not some entirely other thing

my point is that if you're really paying attention to modern music there is without a doubt so much amazing talent, i'm just shocked that on a board of producers, engineers, and musicians, so many people don't care to pay attention

that's all i've got to say, really!
Old 21st December 2010
  #87
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

I typed in a random date from 1966 and these were all in the UK top twenty that week.

Walker Brothers- The Sun Ain't Gonna Shine Anymore
Spencer Davis Group - Somebody Help Me
Kinks- Dedicated Follower Of Fashion
Yardbirds- Shapes Of Things
The Who- Substitute
Small Faces- Sha La La Lee
Cilla Black- Alfie
Beach Boys- Barbara Anne
Dusty Springfield- You Don't Have To Say You Love Me
Nancy Sinatra- These Boots Are Made For Walking.

Two months later you had:

Frank Sinatra- Strangers In The Night
Rolling Stones- Paint it Black
Troggs- Wild Thing
Merseys- Sorrow
Mamas and Papas- Monday Monday
Percy Sledge- When A Man Loves A Woman
Beach Boys- Sloop John B
Bob Dylan- Rainy Day Women
Yardbirds- Over Under Sideways Down
Lovin' Spoonful- Daydream

50% of the charts - bona fide classics.
Old 21st December 2010
  #88
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

4 decades later:

Nelly Furtado- Maneater
Sandi Thom- I Wish I Was A Punkrocker
Embrace- World At Your Feet
Gnarls Barkley- Crazy (oh my God a good one!!!!)
Pink- Who Knew
Keane- Is It Any Wonder
Crazy Frog - We are The Champions Ding A Dang Dong
Morrissey- The Youngest Was The Most Loved
Busta Rhymes- Touch It
The Streets- Never Went To Church
Old 21st December 2010
  #89
Lives for gear
 
vincentvangogo's Avatar
 

Music is as good as it's ever been?
Old 22nd December 2010
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vincentvangogo View Post
Music is as good as it's ever been?
Dude, I did what you just did for every week from when charts began up to the present day for both the UK and the US. I did it to show a friend of mine the startling decline of popular music. He was a hardline "music is as good as it's ever been and the reason it seems worse is because people only remember the good stuff yada yada bullsh*t", so I challenged him and we went through the charts cataloging into unknown (very few), bad, average, good and classic. Despite massively different backgrounds (I'm very eclectic with no genre barriers, and he's a dyed-in-the-wool rock guy, albeit with very good taste) we disagreed on the status of, I think, 3 songs. (He's the music director for a great radio station and is good at being impartial on the value of a piece of music.)

By the time we hit the late 80s it was starting to get a bit hairy for his argument and by the time we hit the early 90s? ... forget about it, it's a veritable wasteland of mediocrity. Long before we hit the 2000's he unequivocally recanted his original position and agreed that music is getting worse, seriously worse. The funny part is I remember how shocked he ended up at how obvious it actually is.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Flying_Dutchman / So much gear, so little time
3

Forum Jump
Forum Jump