Out of touch person makes a post complaining about not being in touch with music shocker!...zzz. These 'modern music is rubbish' threads are boring and just another example of why Digital Spy is such a terrible place to discuss and discover music. This music forum is easily the worst example of music out there. It is literally full of people that are either into nothing but crap chart music or old moaners complaining they hate 'new' music and how it doesn't compare to music 'in the day'. Not buying the whole 'there is more quality and diversity in my day' argument either. Being an 80's baby and growing up in the 90s and 00's there was just as much crap in the charts then as there is now. Find an honest person who grew up in the 60's, 70's etc and thy would say the same thing. There are so many genres these days and so many different sounds compared to the 70s and earlier, and the internet has made finding new and different music so much easier that I find the whole 'modern music is rubbish' argument a bad joke that's long ran it's course.
You will always be attached to the music you grew up with when you were younger, that's natural - it's up to you whether you're someone who likes to be challenged and find something new or you're happy to stagnate and whinge about modern music while you're stuck playing the same album on vinyl ad nauseaum. Either get off this forum and try harder in finding something you like because it's not likely you'll will find it on here or just accept you're just getting older and stick to listening to the same music you grew up with.
Exactly the kind of message I was trying to put through in my post. Well said SpaceToilets.
Yeah, the 'younger' listeners don't seem to quite get that.
For me the quality and diversity of music in the 70s was the best.
No, the "younger" listeners get how things have changed (or are too young to know how things were before) so haven't got such a blinkered, top 40-centric view of music. Whether the most popular stuff was better in the past is beside the point really because in a time when you can listen to pretty much anything whenever you want really cheaply or for free, the traditional idea of the single or the "top 40" songs being something you place a lot of value on or being a way to judge the diversity or overall quality of music seems really old-fashioned.
I'm not "young" but I've always taken the view that I don't really care what most other people like, I'm only concerned with what I like. So it's quite natural for me to look around for stuff I like rather than waiting for it to be fed to me and then moaning that other people have shit taste in music .
Music used to be an art form, a way of expressing yourself through well written lyrics, unfortunately its now all about the money most artists don't even bother to sing there own songs nowadays they just mime:rolleyes::( .
Out of touch person makes a post complaining about not being in touch with music shocker!...zzz. These 'modern music is rubbish' threads are boring and just another example of why Digital Spy is such a terrible place to discuss and discover music. This music forum is easily the worst example of music out there. It is literally full of people that are either into nothing but crap chart music or old moaners complaining they hate 'new' music and how it doesn't compare to music 'in the day'. Not buying the whole 'there is more quality and diversity in my day' argument either. Being an 80's baby and growing up in the 90s and 00's there was just as much crap in the charts then as there is now. Find an honest person who grew up in the 60's, 70's etc and thy would say the same thing. There are so many genres these days and so many different sounds compared to the 70s and earlier, and the internet has made finding new and different music so much easier that I find the whole 'modern music is rubbish' argument a bad joke that's long ran it's course.
You will always be attached to the music you grew up with when you were younger, that's natural - it's up to you whether you're someone who likes to be challenged and find something new or you're happy to stagnate and whinge about modern music while you're stuck playing the same album on vinyl ad nauseaum. Either get off this forum and try harder in finding something you like because it's not likely you'll will find it on here or just accept you're just getting older and stick to listening to the same music you grew up with.
I can't speak for any of the other fogeys, they can do that themselves. I would agree with the idea that people value the music they grow up with. That's being nostalgic and that applies to other aspects of your life besides the music you remember. You'll feel that too sometime.
I'm interested in the history of pop music right up to today. I listen extensively and widely to modern music and I'm always looking to hear what is influential, what will last and what is good. For instance I don't like Grunge all that much but I recognise it's significance and how it moved rock along in the 90s.
But the 00s have been a bit disappointing. Big changes in the culture around pop music and plenty of developments in technologies of production and distribution, yet no big paradigm shifts which we got in the 60s, 70s and 80s. That's all.
No, the "younger" listeners get how things have changed (or are too young to know how things were before) so haven't got such a blinkered, top 40-centric view of music. Whether the most popular stuff was better in the past is beside the point really because in a time when you can listen to pretty much anything whenever you want really cheaply or for free, the traditional idea of the single or the "top 40" songs being something you place a lot of value on or being a way to judge the diversity or overall quality of music seems really old-fashioned.
I'm not "young" but I've always taken the view that I don't really care what most other people like, I'm only concerned with what I like. So it's quite natural for me to look around for stuff I like rather than waiting for it to be fed to me and then moaning that other people have shit taste in music .
If you are only concerned with what you like, that's a judgement on what you like. That's fine. I am interested in evaluative factors that help me assess what is good in art/music as well. That's a perfectly reasonable and not that old-fashioned a position. The chart is only the first place I looks and evaluate. Pop charts are an integral part of the history of pop.
The quality has declined because the consumers and the technology have changed. Now music is designed for quick consumption like fast food, then it moves without blinking to the next single....and the next....and the next and the next. Download technology has closed the time period between releases so nothing has an opportunity to bed in and make a long term mark in culture. I do think that quality has generally declined. Every era has always had its good and bad, but the good of today is nowhere near the good of past eras.
None of those are anywhere near the charts but they are some of the best songs I've ever heard. This is already one of my favourite years since 1993 and we're only half way through. The charts aren't important to me, there's so much more to discover, old and new. Those who limit themselves just to "what's popular" are missing out on a big wide world of music. And that's sad.
If you are only concerned with what you like, that's a judgement on what you like. That's fine. I am interested in evaluative factors that help me assess what is good in art/music as well. That's a perfectly reasonable and not that old-fashioned a position. The chart is only the first place I looks and evaluate. Pop charts are an integral part of the history of pop.
Judging current chart music is easy but if you're using that judgement to draw conclusions about all current music then it's not a very clever thing to do really. The point I've been trying to make is that it's not as representative of what's happening in music as it used to be years ago.
I'd be interested to know if you think there's a lack of diversity in current music generally or if it's only lacking in current chart music?
Not impressed with what mainstream radio has offered in 2012 and so far this year 2013. There are very FEW songs that I like and it's like meh IMO. I'm 19 and I like to listen to old music that are from the 80's, 90's and of course 2000's. I use to buy some good songs from 2010 and 2011 but now its less in 2012 and 2013. I don't know but maybe my taste is preferring old music more than new music.
Judging current chart music is easy but if you're using that judgement to draw conclusions about all current music then it's not a very clever thing to do really. The point I've been trying to make is that it's not as representative of what's happening in music as it used to be years ago.
I'd be interested to know if you think there's a lack of diversity in current music generally or if it's only lacking in current chart music?
Diversity is lacking in current chart music but I think everyone agrees on that. Outside the charts, there is a lot of quality and some diversity but little real experiment. In many of the the big genres there's been very little happening for some years, like reggae and country/dixieland rock for example. There were some great experiments with rap and rock a few years ago but they have faded a bit.
In rock music musicianship is generally great but many bands have a tendency to growl and augment without much purpose now. However, the symphonic rock groups are generally great to listen to and there's a certain grandeur to that music which is new. But if you watched Glastonbury there does seem to be a girls rock band thing emerging with Haim, Savages and Deap Vally and those bands sound quite diverse to me.
There's a lot of retro influenced music around but Daft Punk have shown how to be creative with that ( and be successful in the charts, too)
Diversity is lacking in current chart music but I think everyone agrees on that. Outside the charts, there is a lot of quality and some diversity but little real experiment. In many of the the big genres there's been very little happening for some years, like reggae and country/dixieland rock for example. There were some great experiments with rap and rock a few years ago but they have faded a bit.
I don't think you can really expect great new advances in music any more. That's just setting yourself up to be disappointed. I mean new types of experimental music at this stage would probably be some pretty weird stuff and I like a good tune myself.
Nothing is truly original any more either (in that it doesn't sound like anything you've heard before) but I don't think that matters as long as the quality is there and the artists are clever with their influences and are putting their own spin on things. Thankfully there are lots of artists around like that so there's plenty to enjoy about current music.
There is something for every taste and moment out there.
Retune those ears!
I so get tired tired of hearing that same old line...'the music was so much better in my day'
Appreciate the past but don't live in it!
Never has there been a time when so much music is available to listen to. Enjoy finding something new.
never has there been a time when you had to search out 'good' music... and thats the point. i cant fathom why mainstream charts are bereft of 'good' music.
i dont want to live in the past, but when the present has little to offer then theres not much of an alternative.
Not impressed with what mainstream radio has offered in 2012 and so far this year 2013. There are very FEW songs that I like and it's like meh IMO. I'm 19 and I like to listen to old music that are from the 80's, 90's and of course 2000's. I use to buy some good songs from 2010 and 2011 but now its less in 2012 and 2013. I don't know but maybe my taste is preferring old music more than new music.
this is worrying in many ways. through the 60's - 80's we listened to our music, music that these generations created themselves, from beat through to rave and all the genres/styles in between.
young people listening to retro in preferance to modern smacks of lack of anything interesting, 'good' or new in modern music.
never has there been a time when you had to search out 'good' music... and thats the point. i cant fathom why mainstream charts are bereft of 'good' music.
i dont want to live in the past, but when the present has little to offer then theres not much of an alternative.
.
That's not strictly true, yes there was more quality in the charts in the 60s (although that wouldn't be hard as there's just about zero quality in the charts now) but there was also a lot of good stuff that didn't trouble the charts and probably would have required "searching" for. If you take for example the "Nuggets" compilation albums they're full of good bands such as The Sonics, 13th Floor Elevators etc etc who never really made any chart impressions but were still bloody good. There was also still a lot of crap about then. If you go through some of those "Number ones of the Sixties" type compilations there's some truely awful stuff.
To be honest I don't really see why it's an issue. The charts are crap so I don't listen to them, end of. I adore music though and there's lots and lots of new stuff I do listen to. It doesn't bother me one jot whether a band I like does well in the charts. It seemingly doesn't bother them either as new bands keep on appearing and keep on releasing new stuff/touring etc. It's not hard to "discover" new bands through websites, seeing them in support slots etc. I'm perfectly happy and would be perfectly happy if the charts just didn't exist.
Out of touch person makes a post complaining about not being in touch with music shocker!...zzz. These 'modern music is rubbish' threads are boring and just another example of why Digital Spy is such a terrible place to discuss and discover music. This music forum is easily the worst example of music out there. It is literally full of people that are either into nothing but crap chart music or old moaners complaining they hate 'new' music and how it doesn't compare to music 'in the day'. Not buying the whole 'there is more quality and diversity in my day' argument either. Being an 80's baby and growing up in the 90s and 00's there was just as much crap in the charts then as there is now. Find an honest person who grew up in the 60's, 70's etc and thy would say the same thing. There are so many genres these days and so many different sounds compared to the 70s and earlier, and the internet has made finding new and different music so much easier that I find the whole 'modern music is rubbish' argument a bad joke that's long ran it's course.
You will always be attached to the music you grew up with when you were younger, that's natural - it's up to you whether you're someone who likes to be challenged and find something new or you're happy to stagnate and whinge about modern music while you're stuck playing the same album on vinyl ad nauseaum. Either get off this forum and try harder in finding something you like because it's not likely you'll will find it on here or just accept you're just getting older and stick to listening to the same music you grew up with.
That's not what's happening though. Older forum members are complaining that modern music isn't challenging enough & that what's being fed to us is mostly bland, corporate shite. The same older FMs actually are actively looking elsewhere for new stuff that doesn't fit the ever narrowing confines of the mainstream.
I'm an older (much older) music fan and although I can and do find new music to listen to none of it is what I'd consider mainstream or chart - when I'm in the car we often switch the radio off and plug my ipod in as that has much more diverse music than is ever played on the radio - I listen to the chart show sometimes and all I can think for a lot of the records is what is this s**t
To be honest I don't really see why it's an issue. The charts are crap so I don't listen to them, end of. I adore music though and there's lots and lots of new stuff I do listen to. It doesn't bother me one jot whether a band I like does well in the charts. It seemingly doesn't bother them either as new bands keep on appearing and keep on releasing new stuff/touring etc. It's not hard to "discover" new bands through websites, seeing them in support slots etc. I'm perfectly happy and would be perfectly happy if the charts just didn't exist.
Yeah, we can complain about the state of current chart music and moan that the music industry doesn't work the way it used to ad nauseam but it doesn't get you anywhere. Surely the aim of any music fan is to find good new music you enjoy listening to and it shouldn't really matter where that comes from or how popular it happens to be with other people. If the traditional sources aren't delivering you look for new sources
.
Music used to be an art form, a way of expressing yourself through well written lyrics, unfortunately its now all about the money most artists don't even bother to sing there own songs nowadays they just mime:rolleyes::( .
It's always been about the money but I suppose more cynical and less talented types have been attracted to the music biz in greater numbers than ever since the quality of much of the music that enters the mainstream seems to have taken a nosedive. In some cases it does seem like anyone can do it (make music).
I can't speak for any of the other fogeys, they can do that themselves. I would agree with the idea that people value the music they grow up with. That's being nostalgic and that applies to other aspects of your life besides the music you remember. You'll feel that too sometime.
I'm interested in the history of pop music right up to today. I listen extensively and widely to modern music and I'm always looking to hear what is influential, what will last and what is good. For instance I don't like Grunge all that much but I recognise it's significance and how it moved rock along in the 90s.
But the 00s have been a bit disappointing. Big changes in the culture around pop music and plenty of developments in technologies of production and distribution, yet no big paradigm shifts which we got in the 60s, 70s and 80s. That's all.
Your interest is very different from my own - I'm far less concerned with (although not oblivious to) what has been influential over the years and my agenda is to continue discovering music in the styles that I enjoy. Some genres I have explored quite deeply whereas with others, I've only scratched the surface. As a teenager at school in the early 80s I was discovering different styles and not pursuing them too deeply because of limited cash. 'Red' by Black Uhuru was my first reggae album but I can't recall when I got around to having a second one as most of my cash would be going on punk and then post punk music thanks to regular listening to John Peel. I think I was about twenty before I bought an instrumental jazz album, possibly Herbie Handcock's 'Speak Live a Child'.
I'd tend to agree that the 00's have been somewhat lacking but I don't follow electronic music and that may be where much of the innovation is taking place. Certainly there are new genres cropping up - what they represent and what they are named, I'm less sure of. Unfortunately it had reached the stage where I tend to know whether I'm going to be feeling something, or not. I like soul music; impassioned vocals, gospel-trained singers and enjoyed the House and NJ Garage music of the 80's but I dislike a great deal of EDM and although I love Hip Hop and Reggae I don't always care for beats and rhythms that deviate too far from what I consider those genres to be about. I can't listen to anything where autotune has been employed as a vocal effect. So, much of the current music I enjoy (such as Neo-Soul) may not seem to be the most ground-breaking or contemporary compared to other things out there. Things never stay the same and new producers can have a huge influence on the direction the genre they are working in will take. I enjoyed quite a lot of contemporary R'n'B in the 90s but by the end of the decade acts like Destiny's Child. Missy Elliott and Timbaland pretty much destroyed things for me. Now artists considered R'n'B seem to have a totally different sound and perform on uptempo commercial dance beats. 90's R&B seems to have dissolved into some sort of unpleasant Pop-Dance fiasco.
Nearly everything coming out now that I enjoy would be considered retro to some degree and much of my music buying now focuses on reissues of the 'slightly more obscure' to the 'extremely unheard' area of music, mostly of the 60's to 80's. There is so much great older music for most of us still to discover that it would make no odds to me if new recordings just ceased to be. Of course I would miss the work of various people who are still cutting it but it is turning into a situation of diminishing returns. So many new artists coming along seem to be influenced by the junk current big guys who have ruined the scene.
I don't see the 21st Century as a time of great entertainment releases, more as a time when we have easy and cheap technology which lets us learn more about the works of the past that we preferred.
If you are only concerned with what you like, that's a judgement on what you like. That's fine. I am interested in evaluative factors that help me assess what is good in art/music as well. That's a perfectly reasonable and not that old-fashioned a position. The chart is only the first place I looks and evaluate. Pop charts are an integral part of the history of pop.
Is the chart even as significant as it was at the end of the last century? I've no idea. Also, no idea of what enters the chart of where a chart run down is broadcast. (I know I'm older and don't give a damn for much of what is mainstream but if something like TOTP was still on - maybe there is something - I'd probably watch it).
In many of the the big genres there's been very little happening for some years, like reggae and country/dixieland rock for example. There were some great experiments with rap and rock a few years ago but they have faded a bit.
This is where it is a case of 'different strokes for different blokes'; I don't like the Rap/Rock thing at all but then I often dislike genres being fused together - what music journalists often consider 'innovation'. The result for me is that when the new gimmick catches on, it has a negative affect on the sound of what you liked before. Once something is popular the pressure is on to 'go there'. In the seventies many R&B acts went Disco for a while, probably down to commercial considerations. I enjoy some Disco very much but there is also much that I detest and artists such as James Brown or Curtis Mayfield certainly didn't produce their best work in that genre.
never has there been a time when you had to search out 'good' music...
Yes! Absolutely. However we though some of the mainstream sounds were great and some were pants. Now the kids are the same but us oldsters think nearly everything that goes on heavy mainstream rotation is rubbish. Of course, more great music never bothered the charts than did but at least SOME did reach our attention that way.
It's always been about the money but I suppose more cynical and less talented types have been attracted to the music biz in greater numbers than ever since the quality of much of the music that enters the mainstream seems to have taken a nosedive. In some cases it does seem like anyone can do it (make music).
.
not strictly true ...
in the early 60's groups/artists created music because they were inspired by what was coming out of america. creating music was their motive, money took over by necessity
Being an 80's baby and growing up in the 90s and 00's there was just as much crap in the charts then as there is now. Find an honest person who grew up in the 60's, 70's etc and thy would say the same thing.
Ah yes but with the 80s and 90s although there was a lot of crap in the mainstream there was a lot of good and legendary stuff as well. I wouldn't say that about 00s, but thats my personal opinion.
'. Not buying the whole 'there is more quality and diversity in my day' argument either. Being an 80's baby and growing up in the 90s and 00's there was just as much crap in the charts then as there is now. Find an honest person who grew up in the 60's, 70's etc and thy would say the same thing. There are so many genres these days and so many different sounds compared to the 70s and earlier, and the internet has made finding new and different music so much easier that I find the whole 'modern music is rubbish' argument a bad joke that's long ran it's course.
.
what a load of crap! (but what else would you expect in a 'toilet'? ) lol
if you dont think there was more diversity and quality in the mainstream singles charts 60's - 80's then you show a staggering lack of knowlege of that era. now no one is saying it was all quality, yes, the charts have always been full of twee pop nonsense, but 'back then' there was also some fantastic , new, inovative, fresh music.
so many genres these days?... WHERE? oh yes hidden away.. :yawn: what new original genres are there? the period you dismiss had loads, from rock n roll through to rave. where today is the quality of the smiths? beatles? jam? ian dury? kinks? and a hundered other acts in todays mainstream? ..... yeah nowdays you have to search for it.... well get this buster, there was 'better' stuff back then too which you had to search for..
as i see it, if you have to search for 'good' music, then music is in a pretty poor state, and IF its there, why doesnt it make mainstream? theres been next to nothing new in the last 25 years, just re-hash OUR sounds compared to the 25 years prior. what happened in the past was the 'da kidz' embraced new sounds, they/we got behind the latest style, we even had a variety of choice at any one given time. it meant that specific times could be defined by the music and associated fashion of the day. where is that now? you young buggers have no identity, you are just there, either borrowing heavily on retro styles or look like a bloke from *insert some high street store* .
as for diversity.... just pick any chart from 79-82, youll find examples of... punk, disco, rock (heavy, soft, metal), new romantic, ska, reggae, rockabilly, indie, pop, ballads, new wave, etc etc etc.... a wide range of differing styles most of which didnt conform to one formulae the way they do today.
Comments
..and into the early 80's
tbh i think the mid 60's had better quality, but perhaps not the diversity.
Exactly the kind of message I was trying to put through in my post. Well said SpaceToilets.
I'm not "young" but I've always taken the view that I don't really care what most other people like, I'm only concerned with what I like. So it's quite natural for me to look around for stuff I like rather than waiting for it to be fed to me and then moaning that other people have shit taste in music
I can't speak for any of the other fogeys, they can do that themselves. I would agree with the idea that people value the music they grow up with. That's being nostalgic and that applies to other aspects of your life besides the music you remember. You'll feel that too sometime.
I'm interested in the history of pop music right up to today. I listen extensively and widely to modern music and I'm always looking to hear what is influential, what will last and what is good. For instance I don't like Grunge all that much but I recognise it's significance and how it moved rock along in the 90s.
But the 00s have been a bit disappointing. Big changes in the culture around pop music and plenty of developments in technologies of production and distribution, yet no big paradigm shifts which we got in the 60s, 70s and 80s. That's all.
If you are only concerned with what you like, that's a judgement on what you like. That's fine. I am interested in evaluative factors that help me assess what is good in art/music as well. That's a perfectly reasonable and not that old-fashioned a position. The chart is only the first place I looks and evaluate. Pop charts are an integral part of the history of pop.
Hi Adam.
Love your choice of music got anymore.
Yes I do that but I've not managed to find any of those for a while, Built to Spill was the last one, although they're not that obscure.
I also listen to albums by bands I've only previous heard the greatest hits of, currently I'm listening to Mott the Hoople and 10cc.
10cc I think the greatest hits may be enough, Mott the Hoople, I'm not sure yet.
Try All the Young Dudes (1972), then Mott (1973)
and then The Hoople (1974)
That's when they were at the top of their game.
I'd be interested to know if you think there's a lack of diversity in current music generally or if it's only lacking in current chart music?
Retune those ears!
I so get tired tired of hearing that same old line...'the music was so much better in my day'
Appreciate the past but don't live in it!
Never has there been a time when so much music is available to listen to. Enjoy finding something new.
Diversity is lacking in current chart music but I think everyone agrees on that. Outside the charts, there is a lot of quality and some diversity but little real experiment. In many of the the big genres there's been very little happening for some years, like reggae and country/dixieland rock for example. There were some great experiments with rap and rock a few years ago but they have faded a bit.
In rock music musicianship is generally great but many bands have a tendency to growl and augment without much purpose now. However, the symphonic rock groups are generally great to listen to and there's a certain grandeur to that music which is new. But if you watched Glastonbury there does seem to be a girls rock band thing emerging with Haim, Savages and Deap Vally and those bands sound quite diverse to me.
There's a lot of retro influenced music around but Daft Punk have shown how to be creative with that ( and be successful in the charts, too)
Nothing is truly original any more either (in that it doesn't sound like anything you've heard before) but I don't think that matters as long as the quality is there and the artists are clever with their influences and are putting their own spin on things. Thankfully there are lots of artists around like that so there's plenty to enjoy about current music.
never has there been a time when you had to search out 'good' music... and thats the point. i cant fathom why mainstream charts are bereft of 'good' music.
i dont want to live in the past, but when the present has little to offer then theres not much of an alternative.
this is worrying in many ways. through the 60's - 80's we listened to our music, music that these generations created themselves, from beat through to rave and all the genres/styles in between.
young people listening to retro in preferance to modern smacks of lack of anything interesting, 'good' or new in modern music.
That's not strictly true, yes there was more quality in the charts in the 60s (although that wouldn't be hard as there's just about zero quality in the charts now) but there was also a lot of good stuff that didn't trouble the charts and probably would have required "searching" for. If you take for example the "Nuggets" compilation albums they're full of good bands such as The Sonics, 13th Floor Elevators etc etc who never really made any chart impressions but were still bloody good. There was also still a lot of crap about then. If you go through some of those "Number ones of the Sixties" type compilations there's some truely awful stuff.
To be honest I don't really see why it's an issue. The charts are crap so I don't listen to them, end of. I adore music though and there's lots and lots of new stuff I do listen to. It doesn't bother me one jot whether a band I like does well in the charts. It seemingly doesn't bother them either as new bands keep on appearing and keep on releasing new stuff/touring etc. It's not hard to "discover" new bands through websites, seeing them in support slots etc. I'm perfectly happy and would be perfectly happy if the charts just didn't exist.
That's not what's happening though. Older forum members are complaining that modern music isn't challenging enough & that what's being fed to us is mostly bland, corporate shite. The same older FMs actually are actively looking elsewhere for new stuff that doesn't fit the ever narrowing confines of the mainstream.
.
Your interest is very different from my own - I'm far less concerned with (although not oblivious to) what has been influential over the years and my agenda is to continue discovering music in the styles that I enjoy. Some genres I have explored quite deeply whereas with others, I've only scratched the surface. As a teenager at school in the early 80s I was discovering different styles and not pursuing them too deeply because of limited cash. 'Red' by Black Uhuru was my first reggae album but I can't recall when I got around to having a second one as most of my cash would be going on punk and then post punk music thanks to regular listening to John Peel. I think I was about twenty before I bought an instrumental jazz album, possibly Herbie Handcock's 'Speak Live a Child'.
I'd tend to agree that the 00's have been somewhat lacking but I don't follow electronic music and that may be where much of the innovation is taking place. Certainly there are new genres cropping up - what they represent and what they are named, I'm less sure of. Unfortunately it had reached the stage where I tend to know whether I'm going to be feeling something, or not. I like soul music; impassioned vocals, gospel-trained singers and enjoyed the House and NJ Garage music of the 80's but I dislike a great deal of EDM and although I love Hip Hop and Reggae I don't always care for beats and rhythms that deviate too far from what I consider those genres to be about. I can't listen to anything where autotune has been employed as a vocal effect. So, much of the current music I enjoy (such as Neo-Soul) may not seem to be the most ground-breaking or contemporary compared to other things out there. Things never stay the same and new producers can have a huge influence on the direction the genre they are working in will take. I enjoyed quite a lot of contemporary R'n'B in the 90s but by the end of the decade acts like Destiny's Child. Missy Elliott and Timbaland pretty much destroyed things for me. Now artists considered R'n'B seem to have a totally different sound and perform on uptempo commercial dance beats. 90's R&B seems to have dissolved into some sort of unpleasant Pop-Dance fiasco.
Nearly everything coming out now that I enjoy would be considered retro to some degree and much of my music buying now focuses on reissues of the 'slightly more obscure' to the 'extremely unheard' area of music, mostly of the 60's to 80's. There is so much great older music for most of us still to discover that it would make no odds to me if new recordings just ceased to be. Of course I would miss the work of various people who are still cutting it but it is turning into a situation of diminishing returns. So many new artists coming along seem to be influenced by the junk current big guys who have ruined the scene.
I don't see the 21st Century as a time of great entertainment releases, more as a time when we have easy and cheap technology which lets us learn more about the works of the past that we preferred.
Is the chart even as significant as it was at the end of the last century? I've no idea. Also, no idea of what enters the chart of where a chart run down is broadcast. (I know I'm older and don't give a damn for much of what is mainstream but if something like TOTP was still on - maybe there is something - I'd probably watch it).
It's possibly because it is very true, although people do tend to think it WITHOUT actually looking properly for good current music.
In many ways I would love to be able to live in the past.
This is where it is a case of 'different strokes for different blokes'; I don't like the Rap/Rock thing at all but then I often dislike genres being fused together - what music journalists often consider 'innovation'. The result for me is that when the new gimmick catches on, it has a negative affect on the sound of what you liked before. Once something is popular the pressure is on to 'go there'. In the seventies many R&B acts went Disco for a while, probably down to commercial considerations. I enjoy some Disco very much but there is also much that I detest and artists such as James Brown or Curtis Mayfield certainly didn't produce their best work in that genre.
Yes! Absolutely. However we though some of the mainstream sounds were great and some were pants. Now the kids are the same but us oldsters think nearly everything that goes on heavy mainstream rotation is rubbish. Of course, more great music never bothered the charts than did but at least SOME did reach our attention that way.
not strictly true ...
in the early 60's groups/artists created music because they were inspired by what was coming out of america. creating music was their motive, money took over by necessity
Ah yes but with the 80s and 90s although there was a lot of crap in the mainstream there was a lot of good and legendary stuff as well. I wouldn't say that about 00s, but thats my personal opinion.
what a load of crap!
if you dont think there was more diversity and quality in the mainstream singles charts 60's - 80's then you show a staggering lack of knowlege of that era. now no one is saying it was all quality, yes, the charts have always been full of twee pop nonsense, but 'back then' there was also some fantastic , new, inovative, fresh music.
so many genres these days?... WHERE? oh yes hidden away.. :yawn: what new original genres are there? the period you dismiss had loads, from rock n roll through to rave. where today is the quality of the smiths? beatles? jam? ian dury? kinks? and a hundered other acts in todays mainstream? ..... yeah nowdays you have to search for it.... well get this buster, there was 'better' stuff back then too which you had to search for..
as i see it, if you have to search for 'good' music, then music is in a pretty poor state, and IF its there, why doesnt it make mainstream? theres been next to nothing new in the last 25 years, just re-hash OUR sounds compared to the 25 years prior. what happened in the past was the 'da kidz' embraced new sounds, they/we got behind the latest style, we even had a variety of choice at any one given time. it meant that specific times could be defined by the music and associated fashion of the day. where is that now? you young buggers have no identity, you are just there, either borrowing heavily on retro styles or look like a bloke from *insert some high street store* .
as for diversity.... just pick any chart from 79-82, youll find examples of... punk, disco, rock (heavy, soft, metal), new romantic, ska, reggae, rockabilly, indie, pop, ballads, new wave, etc etc etc.... a wide range of differing styles most of which didnt conform to one formulae the way they do today.