I cannot, however, agree with mushymanrob when it comes to the OP's question. For me, Seventies music with all its faults is a million times better than anything from the last few years.
Because as you constantly said it's all down to personal taste, and while seventies music doesn't appeal as much to my taste buds as sixties music does (something you and I share), modern music just doesn't appeal to those taste buds at all. Simple as that.
Because as you constantly said it's all down to personal taste, and while seventies music doesn't appeal as much to my taste buds as sixties music does (something you and I share), modern music just doesn't appeal to those taste buds at all. Simple as that.
Looking back, I'm not so sure that 1976 holds up as well as previous years. The calm before the (punk) storm maybe?
That's what I meant by the sag in the middle (of the decade). Punk reinvigorated it. Even more so was the growth of genuinely indie labels bringing out new talent that the majors' AR (wo)men would never catch.
mushymanrob: for every act you cite as good, there were three that were rubbish.
Maybe, maybe not. There are also artists who release a good record and a bad one. There are cheesy artists that some love and some hate. There are whole genres that sometimes the majority of the population just bypass. It's not their thing or they assume it isn't.
mushymanrob: and if the 70's were so good, why were nearly all the top glam acts failed 60's acts?
That would be a very narrow criteria to use to dismiss a decade. Most 70's music not being Glam Rock, despite quite a few acts having chart success in the first half on the decade.
mushymanrob: and then there was the rock n roll revivalists, mud, shoddywaddy (sic), rubettes etc etc etc... hardly original! and that glamed up style was hated by the original teds i knew.
Maybe it was Hollywood - things like George Lucas' American Graffitti that sparked all that type of thing. Or the generational nostalgia that have people delving back a couple of decades - recent pop influenced by 80's Synth Pop, the Two-Tone movement drawing from early 60's Jamaican Ska.
mushymanrob: the 70's were mostly shite.
mgvsmith: The last comment is just stupid if you consider the vast range of quality music mentioned earlier. You keep referring to chart music as if that defines the 70s and you are confusing variety with quality.
Agree with mgvsmith. mushymanrob, no, not a chance! It was a very rich decade for music. You say you like Trance and some current Pop and that dance-oriented sounds have lessened your interest / cause you to get bored with the older music you liked from the 60's and 70's. Additionally, your views of 70's music appear to be drawn from living though it and what was going on in the charts. Most people's knowledge of music comes that way and through what we hear in the shops, cafés on TV etc.and most radio shows only play stuff that's in the UK Top 40 or stuff that used to be!
I remember the Punk vs Disco thread which I took some part in and how you dismissed what was happening in the USA and wanted to concentrate on the UK only. Music is not only that which the individual wants to deal with - it's the whole picture. No one person would have a broad enough perspective to speak definitively about the popular music of an entire decade. An assembly of knowledgeable collectors and scholars of a variety of genres could give some useful insight. There are no musical boundaries except those that we impose ourselves based on our personal musical prejudices.
ItsNick: What about bands/singers like Electric Light Orchestra, Abba, 10cc, Thin Lizzy, Roxy Music, Bowie, Elton, Sweet, Slade, Tubeway Army, Pistols, Clash, Suzi Quatro, Nazareth, Doobie Brothers, Showaddywaddy, Rod Stewart, Donna Summer, Sham 69, Carly Simon, Smokie, Kraftwerk, The Jacksons, Buzzcocks, Kate Bush, Jethro Tull, Boney M, Queen, John Miles, X-Ray Specs, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Wings.
I could go on. This was only the commercial side of the 70s. You may not like some of these artists but it shows the variety that was around then and I bet you all know at least One song by any of these.
70s music is a hundred times better than todays and a hundred times better than 90s shite.
I think some of those artists are truly awful. I'd rather listen to '90s shite' such as Massive Attack's Unfinished Sympathy than anything by many of those ones listed.
ItsNick: The 50s-80s were the golden age of music. Things were always changing. They made songs with great memorable melodies. The 90s onwards was when they started taking the emphasis of melody and putting more importance on sound ie. everything had to have a dance beat behind it. The songs with good melodies were there but they were much fewer and further between.
Many would probably dispute the inclusion of the 80s due to the over-reliance on programming over live instrumentation.
mvsmith: Modern (chart) music is awash with mediocrity and homogeneity that's what defines it but I won't dismiss it in the same terms as you do the 70s.
That's what I hear too. I suppose people have always followed formulae but homogeneity really sums up the things I hear through mainstream sources. For me it seems like almost zero listenable records penetrate the charts and playlists. (I know you wouldn't agree with that). However, as with every other decade there is great music you have to did a little deeper for.
mushymanrob: you seventies lovers ignore the crap and cite the minority of good tracks then hold the whole decade up as great. it wasnt.
I can't speak for anyone else apart from myself but I'm a seventies lover but not the seventies lover stereotype you're thinking of... the one who loves 95% of what they play on those golden oldies radio stations and who always whines that modern music is rubbish (usually without looking for any that may not be). Having said that the 70's (not ONLY the 70's - but the 70's is what we're discussing here) is, to the extent of my musical knowledge and taste, far ahead of the 14 years we've had of the 21st century. Far, far ahead.
Why? Well because the pinnacle of 70's sounds reach higher highs for me than my favourites of today. I love that vibe. What vibe? I don't know exactly: it's not like all the 70's music I listen to sounds the same but there's something in there and I know it's in some of those great tracks I haven't even discovered yet. There's a richness, an attention to detail, a subtlety a slow burn with a lot of the stuff. A relaxed, effortless thing. A craft, a deep knowledge of arrangement, composition. Not that sense of having learned by listening hard to a few records over and over and trying to emulate them. Just the natural flowing ideas and jamming, risk-taking, not trying to force out a hit record but recording for the love of the jam. Too much modern music is over-compressed, in your face, exhausting and so darned cynical: let's knock this out and hope it makes us rich.
mushymanrob: the artists and alike i highlighted prove the point and theres nothing as bad as our kid, the dooleys, smurfs, wombles, etc in our charts nowdays.
I don't remember Our Kid, unfortunately I do remember The Dooleys but the others - The Smurfs, The Wombles, The Muppets, The Goodies etc. is just fun music aimed at young kids and it's all easier to sit through than Crazy Frog or Bob The Builder or Teletubbies.
mushymanrob: we dont have the utter tripe either that can be readily found in the early 70's.
We certainly do! We've had LMFAO, Ke$ha, Iggy Azalea, Frankie. What we don't have is much that isn't cynically contrived to be 'cool'. There aren't many children's records now or parody music: innocent stuff for the youngsters, even the primary school kids are listening to and watching stupid videos of heavily sexualised crap that isn't suitable for them. Pop stars hoeing for dolla $$$ because they have little to offer.
mushymanrob: doesnt urban/hip hop appeal to the chav classes mainly?
You could probably say the same about dance music. Even Bob Marley because they like the marijuana connection more than the music. I don't even know what Urban is supposed to be... the most ridiculous term ever.
mushymanrob: ha! theres one period in pop music history i disliked more then the early-mid 70's, its 88-93 !
But if you're a keen music fan and truly enjoy sounds from the 60's to present you wouldn't 'dislike' ANY period. You would appreciate what appeals to you and recognise that certain periods had more going on than others but that every year a LOT of records are released.
mushymanrob: but anyone can go through any year and suggest 'these' are classics. who says they are?...
The person making the claim and chances are, if they are well-known songs, many others. There will be many detractors too. Such is the nature of things.
mushymanrob: ill give you 72
Hang on! Now YOU'VE decided which opinions are valid. you've become the self-appointed arbiter of taste! Maybe I should be the arbiter of taste. (We're all biased but at least I recognise that Jimmy Ruffin's "What Becomes Of The Broken Hearted" is an infinitely better record that Abba's "Waterloo"! Or better indeed than anything else they ever recorded.
CLL Dodge: 70's music started great, sagged a bit in the middle, then became great again at the end.
Not at all. It may *seem* to, based on limited personal listening choices but the notion that any year in the seventies did not throw out a huge number of great records is crazy.
mushymanrob: its all about personal opinion... and mine is that on the whole, i prefer the good stuf from the last tenears to most of the good stuff from the 70's... what you call good 70's, i dont! the 70's is cack compared to the 60's imho, so being a lover of 60's styles the 70's styles are just a joke, a second best, and just dont appeal to me.
Again it would be totally down to genres you listen to. Or maybe most of what you own has always been music that charted in the UK rather than genre focused? I'd say a lot of my music collection is comprised of stuff the has never bothered mainstream charts. This ratio has probably been on the increase as I age and my awareness increases. It's not really something I ever give much thought to as charts mean nothing apart from dictating what music you will be bombarded with from external sources beyond your control, as you move around your daily business. Some you may like, much you will loathe.
mushymanrob: i like more modern great tracks because i have not yet tired of them. they are cut more from the same cloth as the 60's acts i love - ie reasonably serious, melodic, well constructed pop.
I suspect you are not actively investigating old music that is 'new' to you, just checking out the new sounds as they arrive? I wonder if you buy albums or mostly have selected what you've bought from the singles that have entered the charts over the decades?
Looking at music from the perspective of the charts is like looking at movies based on whether they've been nominated or won an Oscar or have performed to a certain level at the box office i.e. a bit limited. It's the reason Star Wars will be more talked about than a Tarkovsky flim. Not necessarily because it's better.
mushymanrob: and i told you, im bored of 70's music, even the bits i liked. >> many of me favs from the 70's im really tired of...they no longer excite me.
I think that the people who dismiss modern music completely are not properly equipped to comment on this thread: you need to be able to compare and contrast two things you have an appreciation for to make a reasoned judgement as to why you would tend to choose era 'A' over era 'B'. Due to yourself being more or less completely burnt out on 70's music I believe you have disqualified yourself too. There's no longer anything to compare.
mvsmith remains enthusiastic about older music unlike yourself so can be more objective. I do too but I confine myself mostly to black music genres now, having been quite punk and new wave oriented as a youth, so I tend to ignore the mainstream to a large extent and just merrily indulge in what pleases me. I detest Beyoncé, Rihanna, Dizzie Razcal, Nicki Minaj, Chipmunk, Tinchy Stryder and all that sort of nasty, unlistenable, commercial pop racket but I enjoy old fogies like Jill Scott, Blak Twang, MF Doom, Roots Manuva, Bahamadia, Erykah Badu who arrived in the 90's. I like Jah9 who's only been around a few years and is in her early 20's and Michael Kiwanuka but that's because they have some talent and something to say and don't release pitiful garbage like "Single Ladies" or "Rude Boy". Basically people who can compose a good track and aren't about to work with shite producers now or ever due to having a bit of integrity.
mgvsmith: I do get this general point that people of a certain age always think back to their youth and view it through rose-tinted spectacles (or hear it through rose-tinted earphones, whatever). But it is also true to say that some eras (and they don't necessarily fit into decades neatly) are more important than others. Music doesn't develop evenly year on year, it comes in waves (1976/7, for example).
When I buy 1970's music in 2010 or 2012 that I've never heard before maybe I'm listening to it with a nostalgic ear too but I assume that the reason I enjoy it so much is purely because it was a great decade for music which logically extended from the developments of the 60s. I know what you're referring to by '1976/7' (the advent of Punk and New Wave); I could cite '1972/3' as important in the development of Reggae but mushymanrob and some others would say that '73 was a mediocre year and base this view on chart hits of the time.
mgvsmith: It's not binary, preferring the 70s doesn't actually mean you have to dislike the current music. I just think the 70s were better. I used to think the 80s were better again and I'm in two minds about that now.
Strong cases can be presented for the 50's, 60's, 70's or 80's in my opinion. (and I know what I said to ItsNick above re: the 80's). One thing I'm in no doubt about: the 90's onwards doesn't surpass or equal any of those previous decades.
mgvsmith: As I said above, one starts with personal taste but to asses something you have to be able to appreciate what is good and bad outside personal taste. Not easy.
I find Metal music particularly challenging.
I suppose it depends what you want or need to achieve. I just ignore what I don't like and what I feel I won't listen to often. I still buy the odd rock album but they don't tend to get played enough to justify growing the collection. I'd rather plough money into different sounds. I hardly buy films for the same reason. I might watch a film once a year but I won't study them, dissecting them scene by scene .
I view metal as follows - it was okay in to seventies, went wrong in the eighties and went wrong in a different way in the nineties. What's currently happening, I don't know.
mushymanrob: 76 was goddamn awful.... i dont think youll find many serious music lovers extoling the virtues of that dead year.
WHAT!?! Utter, utter twaddle. It was full of great music like any other year in the 70's - and there's no such thing as a dead year: twelve months of countless labels all over the place releasing all sorts of music and .... nothing at all worth buying? I really am beginning to think you only buy singles from the charts like a lot of the kids who post on here!
CLL Dodge: That's what I meant by the sag in the middle (of the decade). Punk reinvigorated it. Even more so was the growth of genuinely indie labels bringing out new talent that the majors' AR (wo)men would never catch.
There was no sag in the middle if the decade is considered properly. Every year of the seventies amazing records were being released. It's not like the entire 1970's in music can be fitted into some convenient little scenario like:
a) Prog Rock was great and then Punk came along and the tuneless fools ruined everything.
b) Prog Rock and naff pop rubbish dominated at first and then the inspired punks came along and gave the scene a firm kick up the ass.
I'm not claiming that this is exactly what you're saying of course but that sort of thinking is so one-dimensional it could come from an NME journalist.
Some big albums released in 1976 which I own:
REGGAE
The Abyssinians - Satta Masa Gana
Burning Spear - Man In The Hills
The Gladiators - Trenchtown Mix Up
The Heptones - Night Food
Justin Hinds & The Dominoes - Jezebel
Max Romeo - War Ina Babylon
Peter Tosh - Legalize It
(more reggae)
NATTY CULTURAL DREAD | Big Youth
RASTA PON TOP | Twinkle Brothers
RASTAMAN VIBRATION | Bob Marley & The Wailers
RIGHT TIME | Mighty Diamonds
C.B. 200 | Dillinger
NATTY REBEL | U. Roy
SUPER APE | Upsetters
BLACKHEART MAN | Bunny Wailer
M.P.L.A. | Tapper Zukie
SOUL, FUNK or JAZZ
Al Green - Full of Fire
Bootsy's Rubber Band - Stretchin' Out
Charles Mingus - Mingus Dynasty
Gil Scott-Heron & Brian Jackson - It's Your World
Joan Armatrading - Joan Armatrading
Jorge Ben - África Brasil
Marvin Gaye - I Want You
Miles Davis - Pangaea
Ornette Coleman - Dancing in Your Head
Parliament - The Clones of Dr. Funkenstein
Stevie Wonder - Songs in the Key of Life
some of the biggest selling singles from Billboard's R&B chart (I have these too but mostly on their respective albums):
Aretha Franklin - Something He Can Feel
Brass Construction - Movin'
Candi Staton - Young Hearts Run Free
Curtis Mayfield - Only You Babe
Diana Ross - Love Hangover
Dorothy Moore - Funny How Time Slips Away
Dorothy Moore - Misty Blue
The Emotions - Flowers
The Emotions - I Don't Wanna Lose Your Love
Harold Melvin & The Blue Notes - Wake Up Everybody
The Isley Brothers - Harvest for the World
James Brown - Get Up Offa That Thing
Lou Rawls - You'll Never Find Another Love Like Mine
Marvin Gaye - I Want You
Norman Connors - You Are My Starship
Parliament - Give Up The Funk (Tear The Roof Off The Sucker)
Rose Royce - Car Wash
Rufus featuring Chaka Khan - Sweet Thing
No obscurities there... I plucked it from web lists.
Awful year?! Yeah, right! Can't be much from the last 5 or 10 years to rival that!
One thing I'm in no doubt about: the 90's onwards doesn't surpass or equal any of those previous decades.
I'd argue the early 90's is a very strong period for music - certainly better than the late 80's. The later half of the 90's granted isn't so good (going purely on what was selling).
Doesn't that show that you can't judge an era's music purely on its singles chart?
Indeed so but I was contrasting the rich, varied & often innovative music that comprised the 70s mainstream, with the dull, unimaginative & formulaic mainstream of today.
Indeed so but I was contrasting the rich, varied & often innovative music that comprised the 70s mainstream, with the dull, unimaginative & formulaic mainstream of today.
It'll suit many in the industry that the mainstream is in the state it is today. It's easier for them and they are in control. Major labels always are in it purely for the money whereas some smaller indies are run like cottage industries by people with passion for music. Of course, the big guys have seen a huge hit in their profits this century due to piracy and want to do what they can to correct that.
If you can pluck a few 'beautiful people' from modelling agencies or wherever and get a stylist to dress them, a choreographer to give them moves, autotune to hide their vocal inadequacy, add a 'hot' producer and a video with plenty of flesh on display you don't even need decent songs or musical talent. The added bonus is that you can tell them what to do because it's not like they're going to know what they want themselves. Why have to deal with a band who have their own ideas and write their own material, when you can just assemble some act that may sell even better, you can pull all the strings and they're less likely to answer back when told what to do?
If you're good they won't sign you but if you're good and they think they can market you to the masses and earn big for them, they will. If they don't get that expected return you don't get to stay under contract, they won't spend that time on you any more.
Indeed so but I was contrasting the rich, varied & often innovative music that comprised the 70s mainstream, with the dull, unimaginative & formulaic mainstream of today.
no you didnt sir... you were just posting a random list to highlight what we already know that there was variety back then. it was ME who posted lists of modern day music, and guess what, there was more variety then even i expected.
no one has yet said why those tracks i listed off that website are inferior to those you posted from the 70's... oh wait, no one can, because they are just as good a pop as the 70's material.
the modern stuff is just different, and whether its good or not is down to personal taste and not something that can be scientifically judged.
no you didnt sir... you were just posting a random list to highlight what we already know that there was variety back then. it was ME who posted lists of modern day music, and guess what, there was more variety then even i expected.
no one has yet said why those tracks i listed off that website are inferior to those you posted from the 70's... oh wait, no one can, because they are just as good a pop as the 70's material.
the modern stuff is just different, and whether its good or not is down to personal taste and not something that can be scientifically judged.
The sort of judgement beyond the personal isn't scientific judgement it is aesthetic judgement. It's a different sort of method. And I partially described it in an earlier post.
I would include: Musicianship (technical ability of musicians and producers) , originality (relationship with earlier works) musicality ( structure/form of music, relationship with other genres), influence ( influence on other musicians/works), context ( relationship with other forms, social or cultural relevance).
ar rahman ft pussy cat dolls - jai ho (you are my destiny)
taylor swift - love story
kid cudi - day and night
killers - human
temper trap - sweet disposition
dizzy rascal - holiday
I don't really know many of these songs. But you've picked a Kings of Leon song that their fanbase hate with a passion - and the same could be said of The Killers track you've chosen. Other than that I only know the Lady Gaga track (surely 'Bad Romance' is her great song?) and the Lilly Allen one. I've never even heard of 'Kid Cudi' let alone his/her/their song.
Is this really representative of the greatness of 2009? Because I pretty much know all the 70's tracks that are being listed here - perhaps this just highlights how deposable modern chart music is.....
Oh and I wasn't born till 76 - so 70's music is hardly my generation either.
mushymanrob: and if the 70's were so good, why were nearly all the top glam acts failed 60's acts?
That would be a very narrow criteria to use to dismiss a decade. Most 70's music not being Glam Rock, despite quite a few acts having chart success in the first half on the decade.
i was obviously referring to the glam acts, this charge certainly doesnt apply to the punk generation.
mushymanrob: and then there was the rock n roll revivalists, mud, shoddywaddy (sic), rubettes etc etc etc... hardly original! and that glamed up style was hated by the original teds i knew.
Maybe it was Hollywood - things like George Lucas' American Graffitti that sparked all that type of thing. Or the generational nostalgia that have people delving back a couple of decades - recent pop influenced by 80's Synth Pop, the Two-Tone movement drawing from early 60's Jamaican Ska.
oh im in no doubt it was nostalgia by these artists for a musical style they heard when they were young. glam reveered the 50's, post punk reveered the 60's. in the 90's the 70's were fashionable again..
mushymanrob: the 70's were mostly shite.
mgvsmith: The last comment is just stupid if you consider the vast range of quality music mentioned earlier. You keep referring to chart music as if that defines the 70s and you are confusing variety with quality.
Agree with mgvsmith. mushymanrob, no, not a chance! It was a very rich decade for music. You say you like Trance and some current Pop and that dance-oriented sounds have lessened your interest / cause you to get bored with the older music you liked from the 60's and 70's. Additionally, your views of 70's music appear to be drawn from living though it and what was going on in the charts. Most people's knowledge of music comes that way and through what we hear in the shops, cafés on TV etc.and most radio shows only play stuff that's in the UK Top 40 or stuff that used to be!
not quite, i still love my 60's... hence the rare 60's thread . im bored of the 70's music, including most punk and new wave, because i guess it just isnt good enough to like forever in comparison to other styles that do excite me.
I remember the Punk vs Disco thread which I took some part in and how you dismissed what was happening in the USA and wanted to concentrate on the UK only. Music is not only that which the individual wants to deal with - it's the whole picture. No one person would have a broad enough perspective to speak definitively about the popular music of an entire decade. An assembly of knowledgeable collectors and scholars of a variety of genres could give some useful insight. There are no musical boundaries except those that we impose ourselves based on our personal musical prejudices.
this all depends upon how deep any individual wants to take their interest. a mixture of laziness , time restraints, just practicalities, mean that you do have to know where to stop. i am uk based, its whats happening here that matters most to me.
ItsNick: What about bands/singers like Electric Light Orchestra, Abba, 10cc, Thin Lizzy, Roxy Music, Bowie, Elton, Sweet, Slade, Tubeway Army, Pistols, Clash, Suzi Quatro, Nazareth, Doobie Brothers, Showaddywaddy, Rod Stewart, Donna Summer, Sham 69, Carly Simon, Smokie, Kraftwerk, The Jacksons, Buzzcocks, Kate Bush, Jethro Tull, Boney M, Queen, John Miles, X-Ray Specs, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Wings.
I could go on. This was only the commercial side of the 70s. You may not like some of these artists but it shows the variety that was around then and I bet you all know at least One song by any of these.
70s music is a hundred times better than todays and a hundred times better than 90s shite.
I think some of those artists are truly awful. I'd rather listen to '90s shite' such as Massive Attack's Unfinished Sympathy than anything by many of those ones listed.
which highlights what ive been saying, 'good' is in the ear of the beholder. its all down to personal taste, and most music fans regard their taste as superior to everyone elses and their music is naturally the best....the music/style they dont like is the worst, its crap... so which era is the best?... the one you all individually like of course.
mvsmith: Modern (chart) music is awash with mediocrity and homogeneity that's what defines it but I won't dismiss it in the same terms as you do the 70s.
That's what I hear too. I suppose people have always followed formulae but homogeneity really sums up the things I hear through mainstream sources. For me it seems like almost zero listenable records penetrate the charts and playlists. (I know you wouldn't agree with that). However, as with every other decade there is great music you have to did a little deeper for.
didnt glam follow a formula? new wave? punk? two tone? disco?
mushymanrob: you seventies lovers ignore the crap and cite the minority of good tracks then hold the whole decade up as great. it wasnt.
I can't speak for anyone else apart from myself but I'm a seventies lover but not the seventies lover stereotype you're thinking of... the one who loves 95% of what they play on those golden oldies radio stations and who always whines that modern music is rubbish (usually without looking for any that may not be). Having said that the 70's (not ONLY the 70's - but the 70's is what we're discussing here) is, to the extent of my musical knowledge and taste, far ahead of the 14 years we've had of the 21st century. Far, far ahead.
why?
you see, if that were true for me, id be a 'modern music hater'... im not, there has been some fantastic tracks in this centuary... 7 nation army for one pisses all over just about anything from the 70's.. would a real music lover not recognise its worthiness?
Why? Well because the pinnacle of 70's sounds reach higher highs for me than my favourites of today. I love that vibe.
this is where we differ, and it highlights personal taste, it doesnt prove either then or now is 'better'.
mushymanrob: the artists and alike i highlighted prove the point and theres nothing as bad as our kid, the dooleys, smurfs, wombles, etc in our charts nowdays.
I don't remember Our Kid, unfortunately I do remember The Dooleys but the others - The Smurfs, The Wombles, The Muppets, The Goodies etc. is just fun music aimed at young kids and it's all easier to sit through than Crazy Frog or Bob The Builder or Teletubbies.
crazy frog qualifies, but bob the builder and teletubbies are not of the modern age ie last ten years!
mushymanrob: we dont have the utter tripe either that can be readily found in the early 70's.
We certainly do! We've had LMFAO, Ke$ha, Iggy Azalea, Frankie. What we don't have is much that isn't cynically contrived to be 'cool'. There aren't many children's records now or parody music: innocent stuff for the youngsters, even the primary school kids are listening to and watching stupid videos of heavily sexualised crap that isn't suitable for them. Pop stars hoeing for dolla $$$ because they have little to offer.
no... those acts are proper acts, not like the smurfs, wombles, st winifreds school choir, etc.
mushymanrob: doesnt urban/hip hop appeal to the chav classes mainly?
You could probably say the same about dance music. Even Bob Marley because they like the marijuana connection more than the music. I don't even know what Urban is supposed to be... the most ridiculous term ever.
really? it speaks for itself, urban is like heavy metal, a referance to the sounds the artists heared.
mushymanrob: ha! theres one period in pop music history i disliked more then the early-mid 70's, its 88-93 !
But if you're a keen music fan and truly enjoy sounds from the 60's to present you wouldn't 'dislike' ANY period. You would appreciate what appeals to you and recognise that certain periods had more going on than others but that every year a LOT of records are released.
what? are you suggesting to be a real music fan you must like everything?... sorry i dont! i didnt like grunge, i dont like 'metal', for eg...but im not saying they are crap.
i like anything that appeals to me, that i can connect with and understand, ive been that/this way since early boyhood and listening to my mums radio in the early 60's. some styles appeal to me, others dont. my least favoured years were 88-93. for me they were crap, i didnt like the style at all. this, like my dislike of the 70's is a personal statement, not a factual one.
mushymanrob: ill give you 72
Hang on! Now YOU'VE decided which opinions are valid. you've become the self-appointed arbiter of taste! Maybe I should be the arbiter of taste. (We're all biased but at least I recognise that Jimmy Ruffin's "What Becomes Of The Broken Hearted" is an infinitely better record that Abba's "Waterloo"! Or better indeed than anything else they ever recorded.
no im just throwing it back at the seventiesphiles!
i HATE what becomes of the broken hearted, its dull, dreary, plods on, i know people like it (it came 2nd in that motown countdown ffs) but i dont understand why. 'waterloo' on the other hand is a great pop song, upbeat, melodic, and just great. ... but imho its far from abbas best... 'the name of the game' is sublime, 'the eagle' is wonderful, almost a folk song.. so i strongly disagree with you there (and on this point i expect some support...lol)
mushymanrob: i like more modern great tracks because i have not yet tired of them. they are cut more from the same cloth as the 60's acts i love - ie reasonably serious, melodic, well constructed pop.
I suspect you are not actively investigating old music that is 'new' to you, just checking out the new sounds as they arrive? I wonder if you buy albums or mostly have selected what you've bought from the singles that have entered the charts over the decades?
erm... the rare 60's classics thread? im going through a record collector catalogue and c4 times a week posting tracks most of which ive never heard before... so yes, i am exploring the 60's for 'new' old sounds. i do the 60's because i love the style of the mid 60's. im unlikely to try the 70's as i dont like most of what i do know!
i got very disillusioned with albums, i bought loads in the early 70's, on the back of singles released. very few albums had the sort of material i liked. never mind the bollocks was great... but other albums by the jam, police. focus, elo, cockney rebel, and more were real let downs.
mushymanrob: and i told you, im bored of 70's music, even the bits i liked. >> many of me favs from the 70's im really tired of...they no longer excite me.
I think that the people who dismiss modern music completely are not properly equipped to comment on this thread: you need to be able to compare and contrast two things you have an appreciation for to make a reasoned judgement as to why you would tend to choose era 'A' over era 'B'. Due to yourself being more or less completely burnt out on 70's music I believe you have disqualified yourself too. There's no longer anything to compare. [/quote]
ah yes, but the difference is i KNOW what i dont like.... most of the people knocking modern music have little clue about it. even the op doesnt... i agree with you, people cant knock modern music if they dont know what they are on about. i do.
mvsmith remains enthusiastic about older music unlike yourself so can be more objective. I do too but I confine myself mostly to black music genres now, having been quite punk and new wave oriented as a youth, so I tend to ignore the mainstream to a large extent and just merrily indulge in what pleases me. I detest Beyoncé, Rihanna, Dizzie Razcal, Nicki Minaj, Chipmunk, Tinchy Stryder and all that sort of nasty, unlistenable, commercial pop racket but I enjoy old fogies like Jill Scott, Blak Twang, MF Doom, Roots Manuva, Bahamadia, Erykah Badu who arrived in the 90's. I like Jah9 who's only been around a few years and is in her early 20's and Michael Kiwanuka but that's because they have some talent and something to say and don't release pitiful garbage like "Single Ladies" or "Rude Boy". Basically people who can compose a good track and aren't about to work with shite producers now or ever due to having a bit of integrity.
part of it for me is that i like to associate certain tracks with certain memories at a fixed point in my past. i still love 'keep on running' but that was from early 66, and to me belongs as part of my memory from 66. i dont want to listen to it now and have a shared memory , it belongs with memories of 66, not 2014.
i didnt much like my adolescence, so music from those times will always be at a disadvantage, but not written off. this trait of mine though has kept my eye on current music, for everytime in the past i tried to give up on it, i found id missed something great! plus doing music quizes i needed to keep my eye on modern music. but nothing too deep, cant be arsed and time doesnt allow it. ive found though that theres always something good around, maybe not much at times, maybe more at others.
mgvsmith: It's not binary, preferring the 70s doesn't actually mean you have to dislike the current music. I just think the 70s were better. I used to think the 80s were better again and I'm in two minds about that now.
Strong cases can be presented for the 50's, 60's, 70's or 80's in my opinion. (and I know what I said to ItsNick above re: the 80's). One thing I'm in no doubt about: the 90's onwards doesn't surpass or equal any of those previous decades.
im not so sure this is true... theres good new music in every decade, and whilst its more obvious in the 60's and 70's, there was still alot in the 90's... dance for starters took off in several new directions from rave, jungle, house, trance, etc... even uk garage!
mushymanrob: 76 was goddamn awful.... i dont think youll find many serious music lovers extoling the virtues of that dead year.
WHAT!?! Utter, utter twaddle. It was full of great music like any other year in the 70's - and there's no such thing as a dead year: twelve months of countless labels all over the place releasing all sorts of music and .... nothing at all worth buying? I really am beginning to think you only buy singles from the charts like a lot of the kids who post on here!
erm, i WAS a kid in 76!
nah, 76 was dire chartwise. one of the deadest years ever. even some 70's fans agree on that!
I don't really know many of these songs. But you've picked a Kings of Leon song that their fanbase hate with a passion - and the same could be said of The Killers track you've chosen. Other than that I only know the Lady Gaga track (surely 'Bad Romance' is her great song?) and the Lilly Allen one. I've never even heard of 'Kid Cudi' let alone his/her/their song.
Is this really representative of the greatness of 2009? Because I pretty much know all the 70's tracks that are being listed here - perhaps this just highlights how deposable modern chart music is.....
Oh and I wasn't born till 76 - so 70's music is hardly my generation either.
sorry dude, how can you compare the 70's to modern music if you dont know some of these biggest selling tracks?
not knowing (some of) these tracks doesnt validate the 70's as being better, it highlights your lack of knowlege sorry!
The sort of judgement beyond the personal isn't scientific judgement it is aesthetic judgement. It's a different sort of method. And I partially described it in an earlier post.
I would include: Musicianship (technical ability of musicians and producers) , originality (relationship with earlier works) musicality ( structure/form of music, relationship with other genres), influence ( influence on other musicians/works), context ( relationship with other forms, social or cultural relevance).
but who i qualified to arbitrate on which tracks are 'ggod' under these criteria? what happes if a pannel of 'experts' disect tracxks from the 70's and modern day tracks and come to the conclusion that modern day tracks have as much or more of those qualities listed? but its a loaded dice, modern music would be hard to be original, or yet influencial.
but just how original was 70's music? the whole rock thing began in the 60's, as did reggae, punk borrowed heavily from garage and 60's sounds. even electro started in the 60's ..
my argument with disco is that it was an evolutionary step in dance music... id suggest that most 70's styles were similar... a progression from what the 60's started.
Tells you all you need to know about 70's vs Modern when Last years biggest song commercially and most likely to be remembered fondly in a few years time was Get Lucky..........a 70's tribute track.
Tells you all you need to know about 70's vs Modern when Last years biggest song commercially and most likely to be remembered fondly in a few years time was Get Lucky..........a 70's tribute track.
Oh...I'd forgotten about that one....how did it go? ;-)
I know but you put in the context of "If the seventies were so good ..."... so I'm saying that it doesn't change anything regarding how good or bad an entire decade was.
this all depends upon how deep any individual wants to take their interest. a mixture of laziness , time restraints, just practicalities, mean that you do have to know where to stop. i am uk based, its whats happening here that matters most to me.
I wouldn't rush to call it laziness - only so many hours in the day and so much cash in the bank. I know people who buy singles for three figure sums. Not me. If it's on a CD I'll get it that way. You do what you can.
Most of us listen to English language music primarily. '77 Punk was more a British thing (as well all know) and Disco more American hence the necessity to consider the US in that thread. The lion's share of the good stuff (Disco) was coming from the USA BUT coming to here and influencing us. Most US music is in English and most makes it over. Thankfully too!
which highlights what ive been saying, 'good' is in the ear of the beholder. its all down to personal taste, and most music fans regard their taste as superior to everyone elses and their music is naturally the best....the music/style they dont like is the worst, its crap... so which era is the best?... the one you all individually like of course.
I don't have a favourite era myself, there's too much in any one to neglect it. I have been neglecting the 90's to present for a while because I've been soaking up so many 60's and 70's reissues and, to a lesser extent because I was buying heavily in the 90's anyway. Every decade has so much good stuff. This current one is frustrating because of the amount of things that don't get a physical release. The scene isn't healthy at the moment because artists and small labels often can't afford to gamble on issuing their music for very limited sales.
didnt glam follow a formula? new wave? punk? two tone? disco?
Everything does to some extent. I'd see Two Tone and Glam Rock and Punk as more formulaic than New Wave and at times, Disco. But there are always records that are more different than others such as The Boiler by Rhoda & The Special AKA or Poptones by P.I.L. or Is It all Over My Face by Dinosaur L.
you see, if that were true for me, id be a 'modern music hater'... im not, there has been some fantastic tracks in this centuary... 7 nation army for one pisses all over just about anything from the 70's.. would a real music lover not recognise its worthiness?
I loved that and their cover of "I Don't Know What To Do With Myself" but 'pisses all over just about anything from the 70's' - no, I certainly couldn't go that far.
crazy frog qualifies, but bob the builder and teletubbies are not of the modern age ie last ten years!
I know but I wanted some more recent(ish) examples of how kids novelty records don't even have the craft of something like "Funky Gibbon" or "Wombling Free" ;-)
no... those acts are proper acts, not like the smurfs, wombles, st winifreds school choir, etc.
I was citing them as utter tripe which is precisely what I believe them to be. The fact that they are not novelty acts for kiddies is, in a way, unfortunate but they are acts for immature tastes. Val Doonican or Des O'Connor are 'proper' too, of course.
really? it speaks for itself, urban is like heavy metal, a referance to the sounds the artists heared.
Yes, I realised I should have clarified - I do know what they mean by it - I just dispute it. It's not 'Urban' at all: it's just a convenient, lazy term for contemporary R&B and Hip Hop which of course, is also created and listened to rural areas and not just the inner city. (More ghettoisation).
what? are you suggesting to be a real music fan you must like everything?
Well, of course I wasn't saying that! I was saying that people who like a broad range of music over a broad time span might have eras where there wre more or fewer records coming out that they like but not none at all. You say in reference to '88-'93 that you didn't like 'the style' but there's NEVER been a singular style on the go. You see where I'm coming from? People who 'don't like modern music' decide this based on what is getting airplay usually. Maybe you didn't like '88-'93 based on what daytime radio was spinning. But it's far from the whole story... Of course there are choices - dig deeper for better stuff, or just play the older stuff you do like but unless you do the former (investigate) you can't really dismiss an era just as the 'modern music haters' can't unless they've tried and failed to find an alternative to what they detest.
imho its far from abbas best... 'the name of the game' is sublime, 'the eagle' is wonderful, almost a folk song.. so i strongly disagree with you there (and on this point i expect some support...lol)
I expect you'd get lots of support but I'd maintain that Abba are hugely overrated. At the time they were embarrassing, now they can they sound a bit more acceptable in the wake of the truly dreadful mainstream pop of the 00's. I don't know "The Eagle" but I agree that "Name of The Game" is one of the better singles. Also "S.O.S." It (NOTG) still suffers from cheesy arrangement in the chorus with the acoustic guitar and trumpet and would be better if it was covered by someone else. Also I'd take your 'for every good one there were three bad ones' rule and apply it to Abba.
erm... the rare 60's classics thread? im going through a record collector catalogue and c4 times a week posting tracks most of which ive never heard before... so yes, i am exploring the 60's for 'new' old sounds. i do the 60's because i love the style of the mid 60's. im unlikely to try the 70's as i dont like most of what i do know!
Cool, that's good to know. I must take some time to check it.
i got very disillusioned with albums, i bought loads in the early 70's, on the back of singles released. very few albums had the sort of material i liked. never mind the bollocks was great... but other albums by the jam, police. focus, elo, cockney rebel, and more were real let downs.
Fair enough. There are people who only buy 45's and those who only buy 33's but that's entirely up to them. Artists I like, I tend to like much of their output but of course there are still stand outs - and they are not always singles. Sometimes people's choices are more song/track driven.
part of it for me is that i like to associate certain tracks with certain memories at a fixed point in my past. i still love 'keep on running' but that was from early 66, and to me belongs as part of my memory from 66. i dont want to listen to it now and have a shared memory , it belongs with memories of 66, not 2014.
That makes perfect sense - music as the soundtrack to life - to some extent a consumable, like your dinner and then... move on... Maybe I'm fracturing it a bit by listening to 'era-inappropriate' sounds but I do listen to contemporary things as well.
There's no doubt about it that there is an emotional connection and some things hit you and some don't. Often when people don't like a genre they say, "But it all sounds the same". It's like the type of instrumentation or vocal is instantly off-putting for them. Then there are the people who like most music and those who like none.
in the 90's... dance for starters took off in several new directions from rave, jungle, house, trance, etc... even uk garage!
I'm someone who liked Chicago House (c. 1985-1989) with its Disco and Gospel / R^&B influences and didn't much care for 'dance' / Rave etc. when the Brits and Europeans started on their own takes of it. It just seemed mostly bad and totally intertwined with drugs - a distortion of its origins. BUT of course the 90's are hugely important to millions of dance fans: it is THE era for them.
nah, 76 was dire chartwise. one of the deadest years ever. even some 70's fans agree on that!
Me too but those albums and singles I listed at the end of my post were all '76 and would say otherwise. (Although an appreciation of Reggae or Soul may be required). I'd imagine people who like other genres could vouch for the year too. Maybe not...
but who i qualified to arbitrate on which tracks are 'ggod' under these criteria? what happes if a pannel of 'experts' disect tracxks from the 70's and modern day tracks and come to the conclusion that modern day tracks have as much or more of those qualities listed? but its a loaded dice, modern music would be hard to be original, or yet influencial.
but just how original was 70's music? the whole rock thing began in the 60's, as did reggae, punk borrowed heavily from garage and 60's sounds. even electro started in the 60's ..
my argument with disco is that it was an evolutionary step in dance music... id suggest that most 70's styles were similar... a progression from what the 60's started.
You could apply that thinking to the 60's in the context of the 50's too. (Taking the 50's as the catalyst for what evolved in the subsequent decade).
Comments
why?..
Why?
Because as you constantly said it's all down to personal taste, and while seventies music doesn't appeal as much to my taste buds as sixties music does (something you and I share), modern music just doesn't appeal to those taste buds at all. Simple as that.
Emerson, Lake & Palmer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyJBNZ4i4Yc
Status Quo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbhqaqAk7N8
Queen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04854XqcfCY
Bowie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRc2_-BCljQ
The Eagles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0G1Ucw5HDg
Santana
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoz8iXjfH4Y
ABBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxmCCsMoD0
Now for the punky ones
The Stranglers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuT5KUA7iaY
The Sex Pistols
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqrAPOZxgzU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6GDdKrQ8EI
Tom Robinson Band
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGrnEc_3mYo
Jonathan Richman & The Modern Lovers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdZAQwIMx7k
1977? That was the year of...
The Clash
Marquee Moon
Aja
Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols
Exodus
Pink Flag
My Aim is True
Talking Heads: 77
Low and Heroes
and for the fans of more obscure music...
Rumours
fair play sir!
I know but I'm looking at the top 100 best selling singles of the year.
I'm an old punk
Fixed.
That's what I meant by the sag in the middle (of the decade). Punk reinvigorated it. Even more so was the growth of genuinely indie labels bringing out new talent that the majors' AR (wo)men would never catch.
I can appreciate both of those. I may well investigate further. Thanks for posting.
Maybe, maybe not. There are also artists who release a good record and a bad one. There are cheesy artists that some love and some hate. There are whole genres that sometimes the majority of the population just bypass. It's not their thing or they assume it isn't.
mushymanrob: and if the 70's were so good, why were nearly all the top glam acts failed 60's acts?
That would be a very narrow criteria to use to dismiss a decade. Most 70's music not being Glam Rock, despite quite a few acts having chart success in the first half on the decade.
mushymanrob: and then there was the rock n roll revivalists, mud, shoddywaddy (sic), rubettes etc etc etc... hardly original! and that glamed up style was hated by the original teds i knew.
Maybe it was Hollywood - things like George Lucas' American Graffitti that sparked all that type of thing. Or the generational nostalgia that have people delving back a couple of decades - recent pop influenced by 80's Synth Pop, the Two-Tone movement drawing from early 60's Jamaican Ska.
mushymanrob: the 70's were mostly shite.
mgvsmith: The last comment is just stupid if you consider the vast range of quality music mentioned earlier. You keep referring to chart music as if that defines the 70s and you are confusing variety with quality.
Agree with mgvsmith. mushymanrob, no, not a chance! It was a very rich decade for music. You say you like Trance and some current Pop and that dance-oriented sounds have lessened your interest / cause you to get bored with the older music you liked from the 60's and 70's. Additionally, your views of 70's music appear to be drawn from living though it and what was going on in the charts. Most people's knowledge of music comes that way and through what we hear in the shops, cafés on TV etc.and most radio shows only play stuff that's in the UK Top 40 or stuff that used to be!
I remember the Punk vs Disco thread which I took some part in and how you dismissed what was happening in the USA and wanted to concentrate on the UK only. Music is not only that which the individual wants to deal with - it's the whole picture. No one person would have a broad enough perspective to speak definitively about the popular music of an entire decade. An assembly of knowledgeable collectors and scholars of a variety of genres could give some useful insight. There are no musical boundaries except those that we impose ourselves based on our personal musical prejudices.
ItsNick: What about bands/singers like Electric Light Orchestra, Abba, 10cc, Thin Lizzy, Roxy Music, Bowie, Elton, Sweet, Slade, Tubeway Army, Pistols, Clash, Suzi Quatro, Nazareth, Doobie Brothers, Showaddywaddy, Rod Stewart, Donna Summer, Sham 69, Carly Simon, Smokie, Kraftwerk, The Jacksons, Buzzcocks, Kate Bush, Jethro Tull, Boney M, Queen, John Miles, X-Ray Specs, Siouxsie and the Banshees, Wings.
I could go on. This was only the commercial side of the 70s. You may not like some of these artists but it shows the variety that was around then and I bet you all know at least One song by any of these.
70s music is a hundred times better than todays and a hundred times better than 90s shite.
I think some of those artists are truly awful. I'd rather listen to '90s shite' such as Massive Attack's Unfinished Sympathy than anything by many of those ones listed.
ItsNick: The 50s-80s were the golden age of music. Things were always changing. They made songs with great memorable melodies. The 90s onwards was when they started taking the emphasis of melody and putting more importance on sound ie. everything had to have a dance beat behind it. The songs with good melodies were there but they were much fewer and further between.
Many would probably dispute the inclusion of the 80s due to the over-reliance on programming over live instrumentation.
mvsmith: Modern (chart) music is awash with mediocrity and homogeneity that's what defines it but I won't dismiss it in the same terms as you do the 70s.
That's what I hear too. I suppose people have always followed formulae but homogeneity really sums up the things I hear through mainstream sources. For me it seems like almost zero listenable records penetrate the charts and playlists. (I know you wouldn't agree with that). However, as with every other decade there is great music you have to did a little deeper for.
mushymanrob: you seventies lovers ignore the crap and cite the minority of good tracks then hold the whole decade up as great. it wasnt.
I can't speak for anyone else apart from myself but I'm a seventies lover but not the seventies lover stereotype you're thinking of... the one who loves 95% of what they play on those golden oldies radio stations and who always whines that modern music is rubbish (usually without looking for any that may not be). Having said that the 70's (not ONLY the 70's - but the 70's is what we're discussing here) is, to the extent of my musical knowledge and taste, far ahead of the 14 years we've had of the 21st century. Far, far ahead.
Why? Well because the pinnacle of 70's sounds reach higher highs for me than my favourites of today. I love that vibe. What vibe? I don't know exactly: it's not like all the 70's music I listen to sounds the same but there's something in there and I know it's in some of those great tracks I haven't even discovered yet. There's a richness, an attention to detail, a subtlety a slow burn with a lot of the stuff. A relaxed, effortless thing. A craft, a deep knowledge of arrangement, composition. Not that sense of having learned by listening hard to a few records over and over and trying to emulate them. Just the natural flowing ideas and jamming, risk-taking, not trying to force out a hit record but recording for the love of the jam. Too much modern music is over-compressed, in your face, exhausting and so darned cynical: let's knock this out and hope it makes us rich.
mushymanrob: the artists and alike i highlighted prove the point and theres nothing as bad as our kid, the dooleys, smurfs, wombles, etc in our charts nowdays.
I don't remember Our Kid, unfortunately I do remember The Dooleys but the others - The Smurfs, The Wombles, The Muppets, The Goodies etc. is just fun music aimed at young kids and it's all easier to sit through than Crazy Frog or Bob The Builder or Teletubbies.
mushymanrob: we dont have the utter tripe either that can be readily found in the early 70's.
We certainly do! We've had LMFAO, Ke$ha, Iggy Azalea, Frankie. What we don't have is much that isn't cynically contrived to be 'cool'. There aren't many children's records now or parody music: innocent stuff for the youngsters, even the primary school kids are listening to and watching stupid videos of heavily sexualised crap that isn't suitable for them. Pop stars hoeing for dolla $$$ because they have little to offer.
mushymanrob: doesnt urban/hip hop appeal to the chav classes mainly?
You could probably say the same about dance music. Even Bob Marley because they like the marijuana connection more than the music. I don't even know what Urban is supposed to be... the most ridiculous term ever.
mushymanrob: ha! theres one period in pop music history i disliked more then the early-mid 70's, its 88-93 !
But if you're a keen music fan and truly enjoy sounds from the 60's to present you wouldn't 'dislike' ANY period. You would appreciate what appeals to you and recognise that certain periods had more going on than others but that every year a LOT of records are released.
mushymanrob: but anyone can go through any year and suggest 'these' are classics. who says they are?...
The person making the claim and chances are, if they are well-known songs, many others. There will be many detractors too. Such is the nature of things.
mushymanrob: ill give you 72
Hang on! Now YOU'VE decided which opinions are valid. you've become the self-appointed arbiter of taste! Maybe I should be the arbiter of taste.
CLL Dodge: 70's music started great, sagged a bit in the middle, then became great again at the end.
Not at all. It may *seem* to, based on limited personal listening choices but the notion that any year in the seventies did not throw out a huge number of great records is crazy.
mushymanrob: its all about personal opinion... and mine is that on the whole, i prefer the good stuf from the last tenears to most of the good stuff from the 70's... what you call good 70's, i dont! the 70's is cack compared to the 60's imho, so being a lover of 60's styles the 70's styles are just a joke, a second best, and just dont appeal to me.
Again it would be totally down to genres you listen to. Or maybe most of what you own has always been music that charted in the UK rather than genre focused? I'd say a lot of my music collection is comprised of stuff the has never bothered mainstream charts. This ratio has probably been on the increase as I age and my awareness increases. It's not really something I ever give much thought to as charts mean nothing apart from dictating what music you will be bombarded with from external sources beyond your control, as you move around your daily business. Some you may like, much you will loathe.
mushymanrob: i like more modern great tracks because i have not yet tired of them. they are cut more from the same cloth as the 60's acts i love - ie reasonably serious, melodic, well constructed pop.
I suspect you are not actively investigating old music that is 'new' to you, just checking out the new sounds as they arrive? I wonder if you buy albums or mostly have selected what you've bought from the singles that have entered the charts over the decades?
Looking at music from the perspective of the charts is like looking at movies based on whether they've been nominated or won an Oscar or have performed to a certain level at the box office i.e. a bit limited. It's the reason Star Wars will be more talked about than a Tarkovsky flim. Not necessarily because it's better.
mushymanrob: and i told you, im bored of 70's music, even the bits i liked. >> many of me favs from the 70's im really tired of...they no longer excite me.
I think that the people who dismiss modern music completely are not properly equipped to comment on this thread: you need to be able to compare and contrast two things you have an appreciation for to make a reasoned judgement as to why you would tend to choose era 'A' over era 'B'. Due to yourself being more or less completely burnt out on 70's music I believe you have disqualified yourself too. There's no longer anything to compare.
mvsmith remains enthusiastic about older music unlike yourself so can be more objective. I do too but I confine myself mostly to black music genres now, having been quite punk and new wave oriented as a youth, so I tend to ignore the mainstream to a large extent and just merrily indulge in what pleases me. I detest Beyoncé, Rihanna, Dizzie Razcal, Nicki Minaj, Chipmunk, Tinchy Stryder and all that sort of nasty, unlistenable, commercial pop racket but I enjoy old fogies like Jill Scott, Blak Twang, MF Doom, Roots Manuva, Bahamadia, Erykah Badu who arrived in the 90's.
mgvsmith: I do get this general point that people of a certain age always think back to their youth and view it through rose-tinted spectacles (or hear it through rose-tinted earphones, whatever). But it is also true to say that some eras (and they don't necessarily fit into decades neatly) are more important than others. Music doesn't develop evenly year on year, it comes in waves (1976/7, for example).
When I buy 1970's music in 2010 or 2012 that I've never heard before maybe I'm listening to it with a nostalgic ear too but I assume that the reason I enjoy it so much is purely because it was a great decade for music which logically extended from the developments of the 60s. I know what you're referring to by '1976/7' (the advent of Punk and New Wave); I could cite '1972/3' as important in the development of Reggae but mushymanrob and some others would say that '73 was a mediocre year and base this view on chart hits of the time.
mgvsmith: It's not binary, preferring the 70s doesn't actually mean you have to dislike the current music. I just think the 70s were better. I used to think the 80s were better again and I'm in two minds about that now.
Strong cases can be presented for the 50's, 60's, 70's or 80's in my opinion. (and I know what I said to ItsNick above re: the 80's). One thing I'm in no doubt about: the 90's onwards doesn't surpass or equal any of those previous decades.
mgvsmith: As I said above, one starts with personal taste but to asses something you have to be able to appreciate what is good and bad outside personal taste. Not easy.
I find Metal music particularly challenging.
I suppose it depends what you want or need to achieve. I just ignore what I don't like and what I feel I won't listen to often. I still buy the odd rock album but they don't tend to get played enough to justify growing the collection. I'd rather plough money into different sounds. I hardly buy films for the same reason. I might watch a film once a year but I won't study them, dissecting them scene by scene .
I view metal as follows - it was okay in to seventies, went wrong in the eighties and went wrong in a different way in the nineties.
mushymanrob: 76 was goddamn awful.... i dont think youll find many serious music lovers extoling the virtues of that dead year.
WHAT!?! Utter, utter twaddle. It was full of great music like any other year in the 70's - and there's no such thing as a dead year: twelve months of countless labels all over the place releasing all sorts of music and .... nothing at all worth buying? I really am beginning to think you only buy singles from the charts like a lot of the kids who post on here!
CLL Dodge: That's what I meant by the sag in the middle (of the decade). Punk reinvigorated it. Even more so was the growth of genuinely indie labels bringing out new talent that the majors' AR (wo)men would never catch.
There was no sag in the middle if the decade is considered properly. Every year of the seventies amazing records were being released. It's not like the entire 1970's in music can be fitted into some convenient little scenario like:
a) Prog Rock was great and then Punk came along and the tuneless fools ruined everything.
b) Prog Rock and naff pop rubbish dominated at first and then the inspired punks came along and gave the scene a firm kick up the ass.
I'm not claiming that this is exactly what you're saying of course but that sort of thinking is so one-dimensional it could come from an NME journalist.
Some big albums released in 1976 which I own:
REGGAE
The Abyssinians - Satta Masa Gana
Burning Spear - Man In The Hills
The Gladiators - Trenchtown Mix Up
The Heptones - Night Food
Justin Hinds & The Dominoes - Jezebel
Max Romeo - War Ina Babylon
Peter Tosh - Legalize It
(more reggae)
NATTY CULTURAL DREAD | Big Youth
RASTA PON TOP | Twinkle Brothers
RASTAMAN VIBRATION | Bob Marley & The Wailers
RIGHT TIME | Mighty Diamonds
C.B. 200 | Dillinger
NATTY REBEL | U. Roy
SUPER APE | Upsetters
BLACKHEART MAN | Bunny Wailer
M.P.L.A. | Tapper Zukie
SOUL, FUNK or JAZZ
Al Green - Full of Fire
Bootsy's Rubber Band - Stretchin' Out
Charles Mingus - Mingus Dynasty
Gil Scott-Heron & Brian Jackson - It's Your World
Joan Armatrading - Joan Armatrading
Jorge Ben - África Brasil
Marvin Gaye - I Want You
Miles Davis - Pangaea
Ornette Coleman - Dancing in Your Head
Parliament - The Clones of Dr. Funkenstein
Stevie Wonder - Songs in the Key of Life
some of the biggest selling singles from Billboard's R&B chart (I have these too but mostly on their respective albums):
Aretha Franklin - Something He Can Feel
Brass Construction - Movin'
Candi Staton - Young Hearts Run Free
Curtis Mayfield - Only You Babe
Diana Ross - Love Hangover
Dorothy Moore - Funny How Time Slips Away
Dorothy Moore - Misty Blue
The Emotions - Flowers
The Emotions - I Don't Wanna Lose Your Love
Harold Melvin & The Blue Notes - Wake Up Everybody
The Isley Brothers - Harvest for the World
James Brown - Get Up Offa That Thing
Lou Rawls - You'll Never Find Another Love Like Mine
Marvin Gaye - I Want You
Norman Connors - You Are My Starship
Parliament - Give Up The Funk (Tear The Roof Off The Sucker)
Rose Royce - Car Wash
Rufus featuring Chaka Khan - Sweet Thing
No obscurities there... I plucked it from web lists.
Awful year?! Yeah, right! Can't be much from the last 5 or 10 years to rival that!
Doesn't that show that you can't judge an era's music purely on its singles chart?
I'd argue the early 90's is a very strong period for music - certainly better than the late 80's. The later half of the 90's granted isn't so good (going purely on what was selling).
...and that horrible, over-processed drum sound that was fashionable at the time.
Indeed so but I was contrasting the rich, varied & often innovative music that comprised the 70s mainstream, with the dull, unimaginative & formulaic mainstream of today.
It'll suit many in the industry that the mainstream is in the state it is today. It's easier for them and they are in control. Major labels always are in it purely for the money whereas some smaller indies are run like cottage industries by people with passion for music. Of course, the big guys have seen a huge hit in their profits this century due to piracy and want to do what they can to correct that.
If you can pluck a few 'beautiful people' from modelling agencies or wherever and get a stylist to dress them, a choreographer to give them moves, autotune to hide their vocal inadequacy, add a 'hot' producer and a video with plenty of flesh on display you don't even need decent songs or musical talent. The added bonus is that you can tell them what to do because it's not like they're going to know what they want themselves. Why have to deal with a band who have their own ideas and write their own material, when you can just assemble some act that may sell even better, you can pull all the strings and they're less likely to answer back when told what to do?
If you're good they won't sign you but if you're good and they think they can market you to the masses and earn big for them, they will. If they don't get that expected return you don't get to stay under contract, they won't spend that time on you any more.
no you didnt sir... you were just posting a random list to highlight what we already know that there was variety back then. it was ME who posted lists of modern day music, and guess what, there was more variety then even i expected.
no one has yet said why those tracks i listed off that website are inferior to those you posted from the 70's... oh wait, no one can, because they are just as good a pop as the 70's material.
the modern stuff is just different, and whether its good or not is down to personal taste and not something that can be scientifically judged.
The sort of judgement beyond the personal isn't scientific judgement it is aesthetic judgement. It's a different sort of method. And I partially described it in an earlier post.
I would include: Musicianship (technical ability of musicians and producers) , originality (relationship with earlier works) musicality ( structure/form of music, relationship with other genres), influence ( influence on other musicians/works), context ( relationship with other forms, social or cultural relevance).
I don't really know many of these songs. But you've picked a Kings of Leon song that their fanbase hate with a passion - and the same could be said of The Killers track you've chosen. Other than that I only know the Lady Gaga track (surely 'Bad Romance' is her great song?) and the Lilly Allen one. I've never even heard of 'Kid Cudi' let alone his/her/their song.
Is this really representative of the greatness of 2009? Because I pretty much know all the 70's tracks that are being listed here - perhaps this just highlights how deposable modern chart music is.....
Oh and I wasn't born till 76 - so 70's music is hardly my generation either.
i was obviously referring to the glam acts, this charge certainly doesnt apply to the punk generation.
oh im in no doubt it was nostalgia by these artists for a musical style they heard when they were young. glam reveered the 50's, post punk reveered the 60's. in the 90's the 70's were fashionable again..
not quite, i still love my 60's... hence the rare 60's thread . im bored of the 70's music, including most punk and new wave, because i guess it just isnt good enough to like forever in comparison to other styles that do excite me.
this all depends upon how deep any individual wants to take their interest. a mixture of laziness , time restraints, just practicalities, mean that you do have to know where to stop. i am uk based, its whats happening here that matters most to me.
which highlights what ive been saying, 'good' is in the ear of the beholder. its all down to personal taste, and most music fans regard their taste as superior to everyone elses and their music is naturally the best....the music/style they dont like is the worst, its crap... so which era is the best?... the one you all individually like of course.
didnt glam follow a formula? new wave? punk? two tone? disco?
why?
you see, if that were true for me, id be a 'modern music hater'... im not, there has been some fantastic tracks in this centuary... 7 nation army for one pisses all over just about anything from the 70's.. would a real music lover not recognise its worthiness?
this is where we differ, and it highlights personal taste, it doesnt prove either then or now is 'better'.
crazy frog qualifies, but bob the builder and teletubbies are not of the modern age ie last ten years!
no... those acts are proper acts, not like the smurfs, wombles, st winifreds school choir, etc.
really? it speaks for itself, urban is like heavy metal, a referance to the sounds the artists heared.
what? are you suggesting to be a real music fan you must like everything?... sorry i dont! i didnt like grunge, i dont like 'metal', for eg...but im not saying they are crap.
i like anything that appeals to me, that i can connect with and understand, ive been that/this way since early boyhood and listening to my mums radio in the early 60's. some styles appeal to me, others dont. my least favoured years were 88-93. for me they were crap, i didnt like the style at all. this, like my dislike of the 70's is a personal statement, not a factual one.
no im just throwing it back at the seventiesphiles!
i HATE what becomes of the broken hearted, its dull, dreary, plods on, i know people like it (it came 2nd in that motown countdown ffs) but i dont understand why. 'waterloo' on the other hand is a great pop song, upbeat, melodic, and just great. ... but imho its far from abbas best... 'the name of the game' is sublime, 'the eagle' is wonderful, almost a folk song.. so i strongly disagree with you there (and on this point i expect some support...lol)
erm... the rare 60's classics thread? im going through a record collector catalogue and c4 times a week posting tracks most of which ive never heard before... so yes, i am exploring the 60's for 'new' old sounds. i do the 60's because i love the style of the mid 60's. im unlikely to try the 70's as i dont like most of what i do know!
i got very disillusioned with albums, i bought loads in the early 70's, on the back of singles released. very few albums had the sort of material i liked. never mind the bollocks was great... but other albums by the jam, police. focus, elo, cockney rebel, and more were real let downs.
mushymanrob: and i told you, im bored of 70's music, even the bits i liked. >> many of me favs from the 70's im really tired of...they no longer excite me.
I think that the people who dismiss modern music completely are not properly equipped to comment on this thread: you need to be able to compare and contrast two things you have an appreciation for to make a reasoned judgement as to why you would tend to choose era 'A' over era 'B'. Due to yourself being more or less completely burnt out on 70's music I believe you have disqualified yourself too. There's no longer anything to compare. [/quote]
ah yes, but the difference is i KNOW what i dont like.... most of the people knocking modern music have little clue about it. even the op doesnt... i agree with you, people cant knock modern music if they dont know what they are on about. i do.
part of it for me is that i like to associate certain tracks with certain memories at a fixed point in my past. i still love 'keep on running' but that was from early 66, and to me belongs as part of my memory from 66. i dont want to listen to it now and have a shared memory , it belongs with memories of 66, not 2014.
i didnt much like my adolescence, so music from those times will always be at a disadvantage, but not written off. this trait of mine though has kept my eye on current music, for everytime in the past i tried to give up on it, i found id missed something great! plus doing music quizes i needed to keep my eye on modern music. but nothing too deep, cant be arsed and time doesnt allow it. ive found though that theres always something good around, maybe not much at times, maybe more at others.
im not so sure this is true... theres good new music in every decade, and whilst its more obvious in the 60's and 70's, there was still alot in the 90's... dance for starters took off in several new directions from rave, jungle, house, trance, etc... even uk garage!
erm, i WAS a kid in 76!
nah, 76 was dire chartwise. one of the deadest years ever. even some 70's fans agree on that!
sorry dude, how can you compare the 70's to modern music if you dont know some of these biggest selling tracks?
not knowing (some of) these tracks doesnt validate the 70's as being better, it highlights your lack of knowlege
but who i qualified to arbitrate on which tracks are 'ggod' under these criteria? what happes if a pannel of 'experts' disect tracxks from the 70's and modern day tracks and come to the conclusion that modern day tracks have as much or more of those qualities listed? but its a loaded dice, modern music would be hard to be original, or yet influencial.
but just how original was 70's music? the whole rock thing began in the 60's, as did reggae, punk borrowed heavily from garage and 60's sounds. even electro started in the 60's ..
my argument with disco is that it was an evolutionary step in dance music... id suggest that most 70's styles were similar... a progression from what the 60's started.
Oh...I'd forgotten about that one....how did it go? ;-)
I wouldn't rush to call it laziness - only so many hours in the day and so much cash in the bank. I know people who buy singles for three figure sums. Not me. If it's on a CD I'll get it that way. You do what you can.
Most of us listen to English language music primarily. '77 Punk was more a British thing (as well all know) and Disco more American hence the necessity to consider the US in that thread. The lion's share of the good stuff (Disco) was coming from the USA BUT coming to here and influencing us. Most US music is in English and most makes it over. Thankfully too!
I don't have a favourite era myself, there's too much in any one to neglect it. I have been neglecting the 90's to present for a while because I've been soaking up so many 60's and 70's reissues and, to a lesser extent because I was buying heavily in the 90's anyway. Every decade has so much good stuff. This current one is frustrating because of the amount of things that don't get a physical release. The scene isn't healthy at the moment because artists and small labels often can't afford to gamble on issuing their music for very limited sales.
Everything does to some extent. I'd see Two Tone and Glam Rock and Punk as more formulaic than New Wave and at times, Disco. But there are always records that are more different than others such as The Boiler by Rhoda & The Special AKA or Poptones by P.I.L. or Is It all Over My Face by Dinosaur L.
(I'd tried to illustrate that in another paragraph but as you know it's just personal preference).
I loved that and their cover of "I Don't Know What To Do With Myself" but 'pisses all over just about anything from the 70's' - no, I certainly couldn't go that far.
I know but I wanted some more recent(ish) examples of how kids novelty records don't even have the craft of something like "Funky Gibbon" or "Wombling Free" ;-)
I was citing them as utter tripe which is precisely what I believe them to be. The fact that they are not novelty acts for kiddies is, in a way, unfortunate but they are acts for immature tastes. Val Doonican or Des O'Connor are 'proper' too, of course.
Yes, I realised I should have clarified - I do know what they mean by it - I just dispute it. It's not 'Urban' at all: it's just a convenient, lazy term for contemporary R&B and Hip Hop which of course, is also created and listened to rural areas and not just the inner city. (More ghettoisation).
Well, of course I wasn't saying that! I was saying that people who like a broad range of music over a broad time span might have eras where there wre more or fewer records coming out that they like but not none at all. You say in reference to '88-'93 that you didn't like 'the style' but there's NEVER been a singular style on the go. You see where I'm coming from? People who 'don't like modern music' decide this based on what is getting airplay usually. Maybe you didn't like '88-'93 based on what daytime radio was spinning. But it's far from the whole story... Of course there are choices - dig deeper for better stuff, or just play the older stuff you do like but unless you do the former (investigate) you can't really dismiss an era just as the 'modern music haters' can't unless they've tried and failed to find an alternative to what they detest.
I expect you'd get lots of support but I'd maintain that Abba are hugely overrated. At the time they were embarrassing, now they can they sound a bit more acceptable in the wake of the truly dreadful mainstream pop of the 00's. I don't know "The Eagle" but I agree that "Name of The Game" is one of the better singles. Also "S.O.S." It (NOTG) still suffers from cheesy arrangement in the chorus with the acoustic guitar and trumpet and would be better if it was covered by someone else. Also I'd take your 'for every good one there were three bad ones' rule and apply it to Abba.
Cool, that's good to know. I must take some time to check it.
Fair enough. There are people who only buy 45's and those who only buy 33's but that's entirely up to them. Artists I like, I tend to like much of their output but of course there are still stand outs - and they are not always singles. Sometimes people's choices are more song/track driven.
That makes perfect sense - music as the soundtrack to life - to some extent a consumable, like your dinner and then... move on... Maybe I'm fracturing it a bit by listening to 'era-inappropriate' sounds but I do listen to contemporary things as well.
There's no doubt about it that there is an emotional connection and some things hit you and some don't. Often when people don't like a genre they say, "But it all sounds the same". It's like the type of instrumentation or vocal is instantly off-putting for them. Then there are the people who like most music and those who like none.
I'm someone who liked Chicago House (c. 1985-1989) with its Disco and Gospel / R^&B influences and didn't much care for 'dance' / Rave etc. when the Brits and Europeans started on their own takes of it. It just seemed mostly bad and totally intertwined with drugs - a distortion of its origins. BUT of course the 90's are hugely important to millions of dance fans: it is THE era for them.
Me too but those albums and singles I listed at the end of my post were all '76 and would say otherwise. (Although an appreciation of Reggae or Soul may be required). I'd imagine people who like other genres could vouch for the year too. Maybe not...