What HAPPENED to this sort of music?
We can't expect anybody to reach the same levels of genius..... but there must be someone out there who can get even slightly close?...............
Nice choice of Happiness Is A Warm Gun, one of JL's most surreal but forceful lyrics ever.
This is the reason music is so tainted these days. For the majority of this decade, Simon Cowell has ensured that this once fun event of the Christmas No.1 no longer occurs, just so he can line his trouser pockets with millions of pounds handed over at shop-tills the width and breadth of the country in a zombie-like fashion by a public brainwashed after 12 weeks of indoctrination every Saturday night.
This is why I have decided to kick-start a campaign to show him that the UK’s music loving population is fed-up with his wretched disingenuous monopoly.
Introducing… Bob Dylan's - "Must Be Santa"... Last year, Jeff Buckley gave us all hope that common sense and love of music will one day prevail. The appreciation and awareness of Buckley’s outstanding version of Hallelujah introduced a whole new audience to his talents, and also gave way to contempt for Cowell and the sadly more popular Burke version. This year there is no more powerful an icon than Bob Dylan who, at the age of 70, has created one of the catchiest and most spirited Christmas records since the glam hey-day of the Seventies. Not only that, he has also made a video that when, accompanied with the music, will cheer up even the most miserable of Scrooges.
So all I ask is that people will visit iTunes or Amazon and download this remarkable record and get it to number one. Remember all proceeds of this record go to the following charities:
Feeding America will receive Dylan's royalties from sales in the USA.
Crisis will receive Dylan's royalties from sales in the UK.
United Nations' World Food Programme will benefit from all other sales.
If you still not convinced I will leave you with one simple question:
Wouldn’t you rather help the poor, hungry and unfortunate people of the world than pay for Cowell’s next multi-million pound lavish self-indulgent birthday bash or 60-a-day cigarette habit?
Is this the ''I hate 00s Music'' convention?
Seriously guys this is your opinion. It's amazing how many people think their opinion is fact.
It's also amazing how many claim the charts are ''crap'' and then go on to blame Cowell, when his artists only take up three months of chart out of a 12 month year. It really doesn't make sense. You can't blame cowell for the apparently ''rubbish'' music thats in the charts when it's only around for 3 months.
People just need to understand some people like 00s. Wherther their young, or old or middle aged. It doesn't make their taste in music any better or worse than yours. Although a lot of people on this board seem to sit on a high horse a look down upon those who do not look at things with the repetitive negative perspective of ''Music these days is rubbish cos I said so and music in my day was better innit''.
Anyway you guys can resume your lists of moans about today's music. Either way it won't stop people buying the likes of Rihanna, GaGa, JLS and Alexandra Burke, wherther you think their music is rubbish or not.
Personally I am only a fan of 3 of them.
Although a lot of people on this board seem to sit on a high horse a look down upon those who do not look at things with the repetitive negative perspective of ''Music these days is rubbish cos I said so and music in my day was better innit''.
Well one of the current bands I praised here were dismissed completely by a supporter of today's music, so it cuts both ways. And I'm certainly not 'moaning' as you call it.
From my point of view the decline is not a case of seeing the past through rose-tinted specs. I can't abide nostalgia either. I enjoyed a lot of 90s music, when I spent time getting into minor acts. I liked Hugo Largo, the Cranes, the Durutti Column, the Lilac Time and many others. I do look beyond the charts. Since the mid-90s other changes have made the scene become more stale. Not least downloads, which increase quantity but seem to level out quality. The demise of nearly every TV music show apart from Cowell's hasn't helped either. Previously, an appearance on TOTP would inspire thousands of kids to get into music and even start learning how to play instruments. Bands were formed just from seeing David Bowie, T. Rex and the Sex Pistols.
I mean no offence to those who think today's music is vibrant and original. But the evidence, to me and others, seems to contradict that view.
Well one of the current bands I praised here were dismissed completely by a supporter of today's music, so it cuts both ways. And I'm certainly not 'moaning' as you call it.
From my point of view the decline is not a case of seeing the past through rose-tinted specs. I can't abide nostalgia either. I enjoyed a lot of 90s music, when I spent time getting into minor acts. I liked Hugo Largo, the Cranes, the Durutti Column, the Lilac Time and many others. I do look beyond the charts. Since the mid-90s other changes have made the scene become more stale. Not least downloads, which increase quantity but seem to level out quality. The demise of nearly every TV music show apart from Cowell's hasn't helped either. Previously, an appearance on TOTP would inspire thousands of kids to get into music and even start learning how to play instruments. Bands were formed just from seeing David Bowie, T. Rex and the Sex Pistols.
I mean no offence to those who think today's music is vibrant and original. But the evidence, to me and others, seems to contradict that view.
Of course it cuts both ways. I am a representitive for my views and my views only not the views of others.
I don't think today's music is orginal. Nothing in 00s is completely orginal. To like today's music you don't have to view it as ''orginal''. I like a good amount of 00s tracks, but not the entire top 40.
I am not some narrow minded modern music junkie, who only likes 00s music. I love music fom the past as well 00s music particuarly music from the 60s and 80s.
To make good music you don't have to be orginal. Someone wirting a song a dirt and rapping about the subject would be orginal, but it doesn't mean it would be good.
TOTP died for a number of reasons, from the way it was formated, to a change in timeslot as well tv music channels as competition and of course XF. So for those who don't have sky, or cable XF and radio is their only exposure to music for 3 months.
I don't know wherther TOTP inspired kids to extent which you claim so I won't comment on that.
However a lot of people see our top 40 a representive for modern music. It is a representitive of popular music, and pop music is about how many people like a selection of songs not quality it has always been this way. Good music didn't fill charts all the way until 2003. There has always been a mixture.
You call it ''evidence''. I call it perception. People's view of music is indivdually different, and perception will always be the thing which dictates view and opinion. There is no right and wrong in this case. It is just two different views, two different perceptions.
You say you mean no offence but within your posts I get a certain vibe that you think your musical tastes are better than those who oppose your view, and that you can tell music quality.
You say you mean no offence but within your posts I get a certain vibe that you think your musical tastes are better than those who oppose your view, and that you can tell music quality.
Nothing could be further from the truth. My belief is that everyone's entitled to enjoy whatever they like. As you say, taste is subjective.
Beyond that, one can be objective. Some acts do outshine others and that doesn't demean anyone. As I said earlier, good luck to fans of the Wurzels But, anyone with an ounce of knowledge about music would be aware of the fact that The Beatles contributed more to it overall than the Wurzels. That's not a putdown. But it is a fact.
I mean no offence to those who think today's music is vibrant and original. But the evidence, to me and others, seems to contradict that view.
The trouble with your evidence is that it's based mostly on what you hear in the mainstream. The sort of music you're after that is well crafted, has good musicianship, decent lyrics, variety and creativity does not usually become very popular these days but it does still exist. You won't find me defending much of the crap in the charts but thankfully there is a huge amount of other types of music being made.
You may say you've looked outside of the mainstream but it sounds like you haven't really done that since the 90s. Maybe there is a correlation between how much effort you put into finding/listening to music and how much you enjoy it? That's certainly true for me. Have a look at the top rated albums on metacritic for the last decade or look at some of the "best albums of the decade" lists that are popping up at the moment such as that Times one that someone started a thread about and see how many of them you've actually listened to.
If the answer is "not many", how can you really judge modern music? You need to have listened to lots and lots of albums from all sorts of genres if you're going to make a judgement on the quality of the whole of "modern music", or else, narrow your criticism to chart music.
Hip Hop is still good, you just have to look deeper to find it. The majors in the states now sign so much crap and the public buy so much crap. Underground is where it's at!!
Everyone seems to be saying you need to look deeper to find the good stuff so a better question might be one that addresses this state of affairs: Why is crap music obscuring all the good music? Subjective, yes, but thought provoking.
And before anyone says it was ever thus, I listen to shows like "Pick of the Pops", where they often play forgotten chart music, and the chart sh*t from yesteryear that everyone has forgotten about is often surprisingly good IMHO. Even the slimy commercial tat of the 50s/60s/70s/80s has a certain charm about it that I find lacking in todays commercial tat, probably because of the way todays music is usually produced ie. heavily compressed with no dynamics
You may say you've looked outside of the mainstream but it sounds like you haven't really done that since the 90s.
But I have, extensively. Not only from the long-running thread here, which offered endless bands and artists who were recommended, I have made my own investigations too. Many were acts I read about and heard were 'brilliant'.
I found the vast majority of them bland. I'm sorry, but across the board, from mainstrean to Indie this is music's weakest ever era. If these underground acts are so good, surely some would break through? This happened before with Joy Division, the Smiths, The House Of Love and others. It's not today.
But I have, extensively. Not only from the long-running thread here, which offered endless bands and artists who were recommended, I have made my own investigations too. Many were acts I read about and heard were 'brilliant'.
I found the vast majority of them bland. I'm sorry, but across the board, from mainstrean to Indie this is music's weakest ever era. If these underground acts are so good, surely some would break through? This happened before with Joy Division, the Smiths, The House Of Love and others. It's not today.
Nah. It's easy to say that but I bet you've heard less than 20% of the 200 top rated albums of the last decade. Also, I can assure you that most of them aren't as bland as some of your favourites like Coldplay and Travis .
Everyone seems to be saying you need to look deeper to find the good stuff so a better question might be one that addresses this state of affairs: Why is crap music obscuring all the good music? Subjective, yes, but thought provoking.
Yes, that is a more relevant and interesting discussion which I've seen debated on this forum a few times. The problem for me is lack of variety in mainstream music due to less opportunities for different types of artists/music to be heard by a wide audience. There are lots of reasons for this but the main one, imo, is the way modern technology has changed how people consume and listen to music.
Thing is, you can sit back and moan about it or you can use modern technology to your advantage to discover all the lovely music that is still being made .
Thing is, you can sit back and moan about it or you can use modern technology to your advantage to discover all the lovely music that is still being made .
Nah. It's easy to say that but I bet you've heard less than 20% of the 200 top rated albums of the last decade.
You don't know what I have and haven't listened to. And once again, I'm not 'moaning'.
I maintain that the age of great songwriting and truly inventive acts is over. Nothing anyone's recommended post-2000 has faintly approached the genius often apparent from 1963 to 1987. While there are still some talented acts around, none come close to the achievements of that phase.
This happens to every artform eventually, there's an era of greatness, often at the outset of a movement. Gradually, as time goes on, less and less genuine talent comes through.
I occasionally look at the single charts and there is usually nothing there that I would actually buy. In fact, I barely recognise the names of most of the one-hit-wonder artists.
The decent music (from my perspective) can still be found on many albums in the album charts, thankfully.
When I look at the album charts I always look from the bottom up.Most of the best albums don't even reach the charts.A good way of checking out new music is looking through Rate Your Music (RYM) - which is based on peoples ratings on albums after they have listened to them.
You don't know what I have and haven't listened to. And once again, I'm not 'moaning'.
I maintain that the age of great songwriting and truly inventive acts is over. Nothing anyone's recommended post-2000 has faintly approached the genius often apparent from 1963 to 1987. While there are still some talented acts around, none come close to the achievements of that phase.
This happens to every artform eventually, there's an era of greatness, often at the outset of a movement. Gradually, as time goes on, less and less genuine talent comes through.
do you think that the period 1971-76 was an era of great creative genius?.... well if you like prog rock i suppose.. but i dont write off the 00's, there have been some superb all time great tracks this decade, even if they lack some originality but thats inevitable.
imho queens of the stoneage 'go with the flow' and 'no one knows' are two of the best rock tracks ever..
robyn 'with every heartbeat' certainly stands up well as classic, well crafted/produced pop
white stripes 'seven nation army' is as raw and bluesey as anything from the golden age of british rythm and blues (mid 60's).
just afew examples i as a pop music fan of over 40 years would cite as 'all time greats'.
i fully agree with your last paragraph though, new styles when its fresh are usually the zenith of the style before the bandwagon jumpers get on board and dilute it, turning into a parody.
Someone asked me the other day what music I listened to - I was embarrassed for myself that it was all old stuff, and embarrassed for the state of current music that it was all old stuff. Cheryl Cole, N'Dubz - Jesus This is coming from an ex hardcore Garage fan too!
You don't know what I have and haven't listened to. And once again, I'm not 'moaning'.
I maintain that the age of great songwriting and truly inventive acts is over. Nothing anyone's recommended post-2000 has faintly approached the genius often apparent from 1963 to 1987. While there are still some talented acts around, none come close to the achievements of that phase.
This happens to every artform eventually, there's an era of greatness, often at the outset of a movement. Gradually, as time goes on, less and less genuine talent comes through.
lol, you're completely wrong but if you only like music from that era there's nothing wrong with that I suppose.
When you keep posting the same negative view over and over again it does tend to come across as moaning I'm afraid. Maybe you could lighten the mood by telling us about the wondrous delights of Coldplay and Travis .
My post will get lost in the endless negative bile of this thread but I will say it again. I love modern music, if people are willing to open their ears a little and look past the charts, they will find all kinds of brilliance.
That's not to say the charts are all bad they are not, but they are not the be all and end all. I don't know maybe I'm more musically open minded than some people, but I really do like all sorts of music and these days there is a hell of lot of different stuff out there.
This happens to every artform eventually, there's an era of greatness, often at the outset of a movement. Gradually, as time goes on, less and less genuine talent comes through.
No, it's just that there is less new material to cover or less to make groundbreaking due to many many previous years of that already happening, therefore it is going to be even harder trying to come up with something new, fresh and original. I really do think you are asking for too much and it comes across that you don't seem to fully appreciate how hard it is to constantly be original with music, or in fact any kind of art or topic, which has been in practice for centuries on end, therefore you will end recycling past fashions, trends, designs, chords, genres, beats, etc...
You say that the 60s were great blahblahblah. Yes we know. But if you were living in the 60s, you'd probably notice something similar to what it is now - the sound that was popular then was done everywhere. Everything was produced in the same way, same style. Just like synths and 80s style pop or indie pop is in now, so you end up hearing lots of songs that sound the same, as it is popular. The same happened in the 60s, or in any decade or musical era, yet you do not complain about that. The first few Beatles songs imo all sounded the same and that is a general consensus. The same can also be said to someone like Britney Spears (yes, large step). Her debut hit, Oops..., Lucky and Crazy were on her first 2 albums, and yet they distinctly use the same kind of dumbed down bubblegum beats with the same rhythm, just that the producers altered the melody. Same with Lady GaGa. Just Dance and Poker Face, and Bad Romance even, all have that same kind of production. But of course, since it is more "acceptable" to diss both Britney and GaGa because they are modern and to worship the Beatles (whom I don't really get into as I feel that they haven't dated too well, they're a bit too sappy for me, I don't know), the Beatles and their decade get away with it. And for the record, I don't like Britney or GaGa either. I'm just proving you don't need to like either to make a well rounded non-biased point.
Just admit it. You just don't like certain genres or certain types of music. You can't use criticisms for this decade which you can easily use for earlier decades which you choose to ignore. This is why I find it hard/annoying having to pick out a "favourite decade" out of selections of music I have listened to, as:
a) I may be looking back with rose-tinted specs, and it doesn't help that I wasn't even near alive to remember so I'm probably just trying to fit in with what others are saying
b) I may not have listened to the large enough cross-section of music to really make a fully equiped judgement
c) I'll always find something wrong about a certain era which might put me off it, yet the next day find something much good in favour of a previous decade.
Whenever I think of this decade, many thing comes into my head. It's been more predictable I think. There hasn't been that big "movement" like grunge or Britpop, or resurgence like teen pop in the late 90s for instance. But nevertheless, there have been a lot of significant changes which people fail to take note of. If it weren't for P!nk, who I think stamped out Britney-styled teen pop and made it mature with the growing audience, giving younger people songs with more meaning and more death, then we wouldn't have Avril Lavigne, Kelly Clarkson and the like, breaking through. Without Eminem, hip hop wouldn't have penetrated pop culture as much, to the point where (unfortunately) popular hip hop has become diluted and too commercial. Without Norah Jones and her jazz/blues inspired album, we wouldn't have ever had the big hype for stars like Amy Winehouse, Duffy, and these retro wannabes.
Yes, you can envy older generations and wish "oh I wish I was alive to listen to that", but trying to stick your head the past all the time isn't good, because you'll become depressed and it contradicts your point about progression. How can you ask for music to progress if you can't? Also, whilst looking back and listening to old music, take advantage of the good stuff that comes out NOW and not take the attitude that all that comes out now is bad. I mean, the internet wasn't advanced or there wasn't even the internet, so you couldn't find music as well, there were no iPods or other personal players, so musical tastes (you could argue) were more enclosed so there was less choice. So with all this technology, you can now branch out.
You can think that most stuff if is, etc... but don't always assume that for instance none of the stuff now won't be remember in 10 years time. I can guarantee you that there are lots of songs that will be remembered and played in years to come. You just don't realise it. But that's human nature for you. We moan or don't seem to really know how much something means to us and how much something is good for us once it goes away or once we don't have it.
When you keep posting the same negative view over and over again it does tend to come across as moaning I'm afraid. Maybe you could lighten the mood by telling us about the wondrous delights of Coldplay and Travis .
I only mentioned Coldplay & Travis because I was asked to list a few acts I regarded as great from today's era. I was swiftly told my post was 'rubbish'. While the two bands have made some great music, I don't think they're groundbreaking. No current act is, that's the difference between one era and another though.
You can label it 'moaning' all you like, it's not. I have no reason to moan. Mine is simply a view that many hold, just as many others agree with you
Comments
This is why I have decided to kick-start a campaign to show him that the UK’s music loving population is fed-up with his wretched disingenuous monopoly.
Introducing… Bob Dylan's - "Must Be Santa"... Last year, Jeff Buckley gave us all hope that common sense and love of music will one day prevail. The appreciation and awareness of Buckley’s outstanding version of Hallelujah introduced a whole new audience to his talents, and also gave way to contempt for Cowell and the sadly more popular Burke version. This year there is no more powerful an icon than Bob Dylan who, at the age of 70, has created one of the catchiest and most spirited Christmas records since the glam hey-day of the Seventies. Not only that, he has also made a video that when, accompanied with the music, will cheer up even the most miserable of Scrooges.
So all I ask is that people will visit iTunes or Amazon and download this remarkable record and get it to number one. Remember all proceeds of this record go to the following charities:
Feeding America will receive Dylan's royalties from sales in the USA.
Crisis will receive Dylan's royalties from sales in the UK.
United Nations' World Food Programme will benefit from all other sales.
If you still not convinced I will leave you with one simple question:
Wouldn’t you rather help the poor, hungry and unfortunate people of the world than pay for Cowell’s next multi-million pound lavish self-indulgent birthday bash or 60-a-day cigarette habit?
BLOG: Must Be Dylan
TWITTER: Must Be Dylan
FACEBOOK: Must Be Dylan
Seriously guys this is your opinion. It's amazing how many people think their opinion is fact.
It's also amazing how many claim the charts are ''crap'' and then go on to blame Cowell, when his artists only take up three months of chart out of a 12 month year. It really doesn't make sense. You can't blame cowell for the apparently ''rubbish'' music thats in the charts when it's only around for 3 months.
People just need to understand some people like 00s. Wherther their young, or old or middle aged. It doesn't make their taste in music any better or worse than yours. Although a lot of people on this board seem to sit on a high horse a look down upon those who do not look at things with the repetitive negative perspective of ''Music these days is rubbish cos I said so and music in my day was better innit''.
Anyway you guys can resume your lists of moans about today's music. Either way it won't stop people buying the likes of Rihanna, GaGa, JLS and Alexandra Burke, wherther you think their music is rubbish or not.
Personally I am only a fan of 3 of them.
From my point of view the decline is not a case of seeing the past through rose-tinted specs. I can't abide nostalgia either. I enjoyed a lot of 90s music, when I spent time getting into minor acts. I liked Hugo Largo, the Cranes, the Durutti Column, the Lilac Time and many others. I do look beyond the charts. Since the mid-90s other changes have made the scene become more stale. Not least downloads, which increase quantity but seem to level out quality. The demise of nearly every TV music show apart from Cowell's hasn't helped either. Previously, an appearance on TOTP would inspire thousands of kids to get into music and even start learning how to play instruments. Bands were formed just from seeing David Bowie, T. Rex and the Sex Pistols.
I mean no offence to those who think today's music is vibrant and original. But the evidence, to me and others, seems to contradict that view.
I don't think today's music is orginal. Nothing in 00s is completely orginal. To like today's music you don't have to view it as ''orginal''. I like a good amount of 00s tracks, but not the entire top 40.
I am not some narrow minded modern music junkie, who only likes 00s music. I love music fom the past as well 00s music particuarly music from the 60s and 80s.
To make good music you don't have to be orginal. Someone wirting a song a dirt and rapping about the subject would be orginal, but it doesn't mean it would be good.
TOTP died for a number of reasons, from the way it was formated, to a change in timeslot as well tv music channels as competition and of course XF. So for those who don't have sky, or cable XF and radio is their only exposure to music for 3 months.
I don't know wherther TOTP inspired kids to extent which you claim so I won't comment on that.
However a lot of people see our top 40 a representive for modern music. It is a representitive of popular music, and pop music is about how many people like a selection of songs not quality it has always been this way. Good music didn't fill charts all the way until 2003. There has always been a mixture.
You call it ''evidence''. I call it perception. People's view of music is indivdually different, and perception will always be the thing which dictates view and opinion. There is no right and wrong in this case. It is just two different views, two different perceptions.
You say you mean no offence but within your posts I get a certain vibe that you think your musical tastes are better than those who oppose your view, and that you can tell music quality.
Beyond that, one can be objective. Some acts do outshine others and that doesn't demean anyone. As I said earlier, good luck to fans of the Wurzels
You may say you've looked outside of the mainstream but it sounds like you haven't really done that since the 90s. Maybe there is a correlation between how much effort you put into finding/listening to music and how much you enjoy it? That's certainly true for me. Have a look at the top rated albums on metacritic for the last decade or look at some of the "best albums of the decade" lists that are popping up at the moment such as that Times one that someone started a thread about and see how many of them you've actually listened to.
If the answer is "not many", how can you really judge modern music? You need to have listened to lots and lots of albums from all sorts of genres if you're going to make a judgement on the quality of the whole of "modern music", or else, narrow your criticism to chart music.
And before anyone says it was ever thus, I listen to shows like "Pick of the Pops", where they often play forgotten chart music, and the chart sh*t from yesteryear that everyone has forgotten about is often surprisingly good IMHO. Even the slimy commercial tat of the 50s/60s/70s/80s has a certain charm about it that I find lacking in todays commercial tat, probably because of the way todays music is usually produced ie. heavily compressed with no dynamics
I found the vast majority of them bland. I'm sorry, but across the board, from mainstrean to Indie this is music's weakest ever era. If these underground acts are so good, surely some would break through? This happened before with Joy Division, the Smiths, The House Of Love and others. It's not today.
Yes, that is a more relevant and interesting discussion which I've seen debated on this forum a few times. The problem for me is lack of variety in mainstream music due to less opportunities for different types of artists/music to be heard by a wide audience. There are lots of reasons for this but the main one, imo, is the way modern technology has changed how people consume and listen to music.
Thing is, you can sit back and moan about it or you can use modern technology to your advantage to discover all the lovely music that is still being made
Hmmmm.... I choose.... BOTH!!
I maintain that the age of great songwriting and truly inventive acts is over. Nothing anyone's recommended post-2000 has faintly approached the genius often apparent from 1963 to 1987. While there are still some talented acts around, none come close to the achievements of that phase.
This happens to every artform eventually, there's an era of greatness, often at the outset of a movement. Gradually, as time goes on, less and less genuine talent comes through.
When I look at the album charts I always look from the bottom up.Most of the best albums don't even reach the charts.A good way of checking out new music is looking through Rate Your Music (RYM) - which is based on peoples ratings on albums after they have listened to them.
do you think that the period 1971-76 was an era of great creative genius?.... well if you like prog rock i suppose.. but i dont write off the 00's, there have been some superb all time great tracks this decade, even if they lack some originality but thats inevitable.
imho queens of the stoneage 'go with the flow' and 'no one knows' are two of the best rock tracks ever..
robyn 'with every heartbeat' certainly stands up well as classic, well crafted/produced pop
white stripes 'seven nation army' is as raw and bluesey as anything from the golden age of british rythm and blues (mid 60's).
just afew examples i as a pop music fan of over 40 years would cite as 'all time greats'.
i fully agree with your last paragraph though, new styles when its fresh are usually the zenith of the style before the bandwagon jumpers get on board and dilute it, turning into a parody.
Can I snigger and sneer now?
Someone asked me the other day what music I listened to - I was embarrassed for myself that it was all old stuff, and embarrassed for the state of current music that it was all old stuff. Cheryl Cole, N'Dubz - Jesus
When you keep posting the same negative view over and over again it does tend to come across as moaning I'm afraid. Maybe you could lighten the mood by telling us about the wondrous delights of Coldplay and Travis
That's not to say the charts are all bad they are not, but they are not the be all and end all. I don't know maybe I'm more musically open minded than some people, but I really do like all sorts of music and these days there is a hell of lot of different stuff out there.
No, it's just that there is less new material to cover or less to make groundbreaking due to many many previous years of that already happening, therefore it is going to be even harder trying to come up with something new, fresh and original. I really do think you are asking for too much and it comes across that you don't seem to fully appreciate how hard it is to constantly be original with music, or in fact any kind of art or topic, which has been in practice for centuries on end, therefore you will end recycling past fashions, trends, designs, chords, genres, beats, etc...
You say that the 60s were great blahblahblah. Yes we know. But if you were living in the 60s, you'd probably notice something similar to what it is now - the sound that was popular then was done everywhere. Everything was produced in the same way, same style. Just like synths and 80s style pop or indie pop is in now, so you end up hearing lots of songs that sound the same, as it is popular. The same happened in the 60s, or in any decade or musical era, yet you do not complain about that. The first few Beatles songs imo all sounded the same and that is a general consensus. The same can also be said to someone like Britney Spears (yes, large step). Her debut hit, Oops..., Lucky and Crazy were on her first 2 albums, and yet they distinctly use the same kind of dumbed down bubblegum beats with the same rhythm, just that the producers altered the melody. Same with Lady GaGa. Just Dance and Poker Face, and Bad Romance even, all have that same kind of production. But of course, since it is more "acceptable" to diss both Britney and GaGa because they are modern and to worship the Beatles (whom I don't really get into as I feel that they haven't dated too well, they're a bit too sappy for me, I don't know), the Beatles and their decade get away with it. And for the record, I don't like Britney or GaGa either. I'm just proving you don't need to like either to make a well rounded non-biased point.
Just admit it. You just don't like certain genres or certain types of music. You can't use criticisms for this decade which you can easily use for earlier decades which you choose to ignore. This is why I find it hard/annoying having to pick out a "favourite decade" out of selections of music I have listened to, as:
a) I may be looking back with rose-tinted specs, and it doesn't help that I wasn't even near alive to remember so I'm probably just trying to fit in with what others are saying
b) I may not have listened to the large enough cross-section of music to really make a fully equiped judgement
c) I'll always find something wrong about a certain era which might put me off it, yet the next day find something much good in favour of a previous decade.
Whenever I think of this decade, many thing comes into my head. It's been more predictable I think. There hasn't been that big "movement" like grunge or Britpop, or resurgence like teen pop in the late 90s for instance. But nevertheless, there have been a lot of significant changes which people fail to take note of. If it weren't for P!nk, who I think stamped out Britney-styled teen pop and made it mature with the growing audience, giving younger people songs with more meaning and more death, then we wouldn't have Avril Lavigne, Kelly Clarkson and the like, breaking through. Without Eminem, hip hop wouldn't have penetrated pop culture as much, to the point where (unfortunately) popular hip hop has become diluted and too commercial. Without Norah Jones and her jazz/blues inspired album, we wouldn't have ever had the big hype for stars like Amy Winehouse, Duffy, and these retro wannabes.
Yes, you can envy older generations and wish "oh I wish I was alive to listen to that", but trying to stick your head the past all the time isn't good, because you'll become depressed and it contradicts your point about progression. How can you ask for music to progress if you can't? Also, whilst looking back and listening to old music, take advantage of the good stuff that comes out NOW and not take the attitude that all that comes out now is bad. I mean, the internet wasn't advanced or there wasn't even the internet, so you couldn't find music as well, there were no iPods or other personal players, so musical tastes (you could argue) were more enclosed so there was less choice. So with all this technology, you can now branch out.
You can think that most stuff if is, etc... but don't always assume that for instance none of the stuff now won't be remember in 10 years time. I can guarantee you that there are lots of songs that will be remembered and played in years to come. You just don't realise it. But that's human nature for you. We moan or don't seem to really know how much something means to us and how much something is good for us once it goes away or once we don't have it.
Life is short. So make the most of now.
You can label it 'moaning' all you like, it's not. I have no reason to moan. Mine is simply a view that many hold, just as many others agree with you
Did you read the rest of what I said though?
I know you were not moaning btw. It's Friday, I'm lazy and I really wanted to finish my post.