Maybe I'm just getting old but pop music these days seems to feature very little music at all. It's all vocal-led and music seems to be almost an afterthought - stick on a backbeat and a half-assed keyboard riff and you're done.
Nice and cheap, loads of dosh for the producer / record label.
Perhaps the likes of Adele puts heart into her songs but they're still devoid of any decent musical accompaniment as far as my ears can detect.
Totally agree with you. It's seems it's not about the passion or the production of the music that matters anymore, it's all about the person, even if they really don't have any talent, just as long as they please the fans visually that's enough. The majority of 'music' in the charts now IS just a filler. All you hear is a mulch of sound. If instruments are being played, you can find it difficult to seperate them.
As usual it's all doom and gloom from some people despite there being plenty of quality artists around....and frankly, in this day and age who really cares about the mainstream? We're hardly restricted in what we can listen to nowadays. Sitting back and putting up with the constant, samey crap in the mainstream is not an option for some of us any more.
whilst what you say is true, the thread topic is about mainstream which by definition is where most people turn to first to hear music.
i think bemoaning the state of mainstream is justified. its mainstream that will in the future as in the past, be how the state of music in 2013 will be judged.
The problem is the whole structure of the music "business".
Before the 1980s the music "industry" was basically run by musicians for the benefit of musicians, so the record labels understood it took time to establish a new act and the act was given that time so that over the life of an initial four or five album deal the act could hone their craft and build a fan base with the record label knowing that if things worked out they would reap the long-term benefit.
In the 1980s the accountants moved in and music became a business where short-term profits were everything, so the long term development of acts finished and everything was about short term success and short term profits with an act dropped within milliseconds of their "star" starting to wane in the accountants eyes because they weren't meeting the profit targets.
The downturn of that is the today's generation are paying for that policy with a conveyor belt of short term, sound-a-like, acts with little or no thought given to tomorrow, let alone next week or next month, by the accountants running the record labels.
As usual it's all doom and gloom from some people despite there being plenty of quality artists around....and frankly, in this day and age who really cares about the mainstream? We're hardly restricted in what we can listen to nowadays. Sitting back and putting up with the constant, samey crap in the mainstream is not an option for some of us any more.
I take your point - the singles charts are an irrelevance to me and have been for a long time because I know I can find music I like elsewhere.
The problem is that the mainstream is what most people get to listen to on a casual basis and unless you specifically look for an alternative that's what most people get. I agree that in this age of mass connectivity there are millions of songs out there, all accessible with just a couple of clicks of a mouse (oh how I would have loved that ability when I was a teenager!) but by and large the public will still listen to what is played on the major radio and TV stations and my frustration with it all is that I feel the public is being short-changed - sold a poor quality product, if you like, which is just as bad as being sold knock-off fashion clothing or beefburgers made with horse meat. It's a con despite the fact that I'm sure plenty of people will claim to really like it.
And, you might argue, if people do like it then why are we complaining? What's the problem? Well, it's a case of diminishing returns. The more people will settle for substandard product the more it will be cheapened, repackaged and re-sold to them and that has a negative effect on the whole industry. The industry becomes more conservative, more risk averse and more homogenised.
whilst what you say is true, the thread topic is about mainstream which by definition is where most people turn to first to hear music.
i think bemoaning the state of mainstream is justified. its mainstream that will in the future as in the past, be how the state of music in 2013 will be judged.
It's not how I judge music, I'm more concerned with what I think and what I like and what I can get out of music. But yes, it's justified because it's particularly crap at the moment. What I'm saying is that it I don't think concentrating on the bad stuff gets you anywhere, it's more productive to focus on what is good instead.
And, you might argue, if people do like it then why are we complaining? What's the problem? Well, it's a case of diminishing returns. The more people will settle for substandard product the more it will be cheapened, repackaged and re-sold to them and that has a negative effect on the whole industry. The industry becomes more conservative, more risk averse and more homogenised.
And how does that encourage creativity?
I'm not disagreeing with you about mainstream music at all. But I do disagree with the bit in bold because, to put it simply, I see mainstream music (or if you like, the most popular artists) as only one part of the music industry as a whole There are so many other artists who are doing their own thing, being creative and not simply following trends and releasing any old crap in order to appeal to as many people as possible. That will never change and that's why I'm not that concerned about the state of mainstream/popular music. I don't have that much empathy for the casual music fan either if I'm honest.
As a half decent piano player, I often stick chart stuff on and jam along with it to see what scales, or progressions they've used - I'm often staggered at how some of them consist of about three notes, and a shite melody, when there is so much more they could have done with it. It's actually painful, and makes me angry - and what's worse is that people like this stuff too? They must do, if it sells.
I fear for the future of commerical music if this is now an acceptable standard to consumers
p.s I can't wait until this 'dance' era is over - it's not even 'dance' music in the traditional sense is it? Shit synth sounds, a couple of notes, and volume, volume, volume. - Dance music should make you want to actually dance....
[QUOTE=mimicole;63850650]I totally agree.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that people have been saying that for years and it is still not over. If anything it has progressed to an extent that it has it's own dedicated music channel in the form of MTV Dance.
I take your point - the singles charts are an irrelevance to me and have been for a long time because I know I can find music I like elsewhere.
The problem is that the mainstream is what most people get to listen to on a casual basis and unless you specifically look for an alternative that's what most people get. I agree that in this age of mass connectivity there are millions of songs out there, all accessible with just a couple of clicks of a mouse (oh how I would have loved that ability when I was a teenager!) but by and large the public will still listen to what is played on the major radio and TV stations and my frustration with it all is that I feel the public is being short-changed - sold a poor quality product, if you like, which is just as bad as being sold knock-off fashion clothing or beefburgers made with horse meat. It's a con despite the fact that I'm sure plenty of people will claim to really like it.
And, you might argue, if people do like it then why are we complaining? What's the problem? Well, it's a case of diminishing returns. The more people will settle for substandard product the more it will be cheapened, repackaged and re-sold to them and that has a negative effect on the whole industry. The industry becomes more conservative, more risk averse and more homogenised.
And how does that encourage creativity?
This has reminded me of a couple of things:
- in the age of Youtube and things like Spotify, it is really no more difficult to find music from someone alternative than it is to find mainstream music.
- it always astounds me that anyone still listens to commercial radio. Who are these people?
I'm not disagreeing with you about mainstream music at all. But I do disagree with the bit in bold because, to put it simply, I see mainstream music (or if you like, the most popular artists) as only one part of the music industry as a whole There are so many other artists who are doing their own thing, being creative and not simply following trends and releasing any old crap in order to appeal to as many people as possible. That will never change and that's why I'm not that concerned about the state of mainstream/popular music. I don't have that much empathy for the casual music fan either if I'm honest.
I wouldn't be so optimistic. Thirty years ago indie labels were popping up everywhere and they sustained an alternative music scene right through the 80s and 90s as mainstream music became more conservative. Nearly all the big ones went under by the turn of the millennium - Creation, Rough Trade, Factory and others like 4AD scaled back their operations.
The music business became more about the business and less about the music and while non-mainstream music has continued to thrive, particularly with the rise of the internet and the ability for the lucky few to gain notoriety by word of mouth rather than record company hype, the situation for any real alternative is just as bad as for a lot of the mainstream. What passes for popular indie music these days is little more than watered down, radio-friendly pop punk like the Vaccines or dull as ditchwater folky guff like Fleet Foxes.
It's nice when artists can really take risks, though, and go all out and say to hell with being safe. My favourite album of last year was "The Seer" by Swans, which was about as uncompromising and uncommercial as modern music gets. That's a rarity these days, though.
It's a slightly dangerous premise to denounce all mainstream music of the day as "rubbish", as I've no doubt every generation has said precisely the same about what their offspring were listening to at the time. Any viewing of the period TOTPs that are frequently on reminds one of the utter tripe that used to make the chart, and get played on the radio.
The chart, however, was undoubtedly more pluralistic in those days. With far fewer radio stations, one couldn't help but hear a wider variety of music. My other half's first job was for Severn Sound, and he recently dug out some old programme logs he had from about 1980. Hardly a cutting edge station, it still played a far greater variety than today's commercial garbage stations. Today's chart is depressingly monotone, with autotuned vocals on nearly everything, and the joint-the-dots "urban" mixed with X Factor numpties.
I have no problems with synths if used imaginatively, but imagination is sadly lacking. It might be my main bone of contention, but the likes of Capital, with their ridiculously restrictive range of music, are major culprits of the dumbed down music environment. Their definition of "pop" is a narrow as the Rotherhithe Tunnel. Anyone who listens to it everyday is undergoing a slow motion frontal lobotomy.
I wouldn't be so optimistic. Thirty years ago indie labels were popping up everywhere and they sustained an alternative music scene right through the 80s and 90s as mainstream music became more conservative. Nearly all the big ones went under by the turn of the millennium - Creation, Rough Trade, Factory and others like 4AD scaled back their operations.
The music business became more about the business and less about the music and while non-mainstream music has continued to thrive, particularly with the rise of the internet and the ability for the lucky few to gain notoriety by word of mouth rather than record company hype, the situation for any real alternative is just as bad as for a lot of the mainstream. What passes for popular indie music these days is little more than watered down, radio-friendly pop punk like the Vaccines or dull as ditchwater folky guff like Fleet Foxes.
It's nice when artists can really take risks, though, and go all out and say to hell with being safe. My favourite album of last year was "The Seer" by Swans, which was about as uncompromising and uncommercial as modern music gets. That's a rarity these days, though.
If that's the case why should I be pessimistic? The business model has changed, it's more difficult for artists to make money or breakthrough to the mainstream but the artists will always be there. Artists who don't compromise their sound and are making the music they want to make rather than trying to appeal to the most people possible are not really that rare. Whether they're to your taste or in the genres you like is another thing altogether. The other factor is trends. There has defnitely been a shift away from guitars/rock in "indie"/alternative music in recent years. It's not just happened in mainstream/chart music. I'm sure that will change in time and there will be more traditional bands (with real instruments!) around again and some will become popular. However, people will still complain that it's only the watered down stuff that appeals to those pesky "causal" music listeners .
It's a slightly dangerous premise to denounce all mainstream music of the day as "rubbish", as I've no doubt every generation has said precisely the same about what their offspring were listening to at the time. Any viewing of the period TOTPs that are frequently on reminds one of the utter tripe that used to make the chart, and get played on the radio.
The chart, however, was undoubtedly more pluralistic in those days. With far fewer radio stations, one couldn't help but hear a wider variety of music. My other half's first job was for Severn Sound, and he recently dug out some old programme logs he had from about 1980. Hardly a cutting edge station, it still played a far greater variety than today's commercial garbage stations. Today's chart is depressingly monotone, with autotuned vocals on nearly everything, and the joint-the-dots "urban" mixed with X Factor numpties.
I have no problems with synths if used imaginatively, but imagination is sadly lacking. It might be my main bone of contention, but the likes of Capital, with their ridiculously restrictive range of music, are major culprits of the dumbed down music environment. Their definition of "pop" is a narrow as the Rotherhithe Tunnel. Anyone who listens to it everyday is undergoing a slow motion frontal lobotomy.
Re BIB - We do seem to have a somewhat different situation these days though, in that now, we have older generations shaking our heads at what the young are listening to, not because 'it's too loud/no proper tunes' as in the past. No. Now the older generations are shaking our heads because today's music is so sodding tame.
We're the generations who grew up on the pioneers of metal, glam & punk. Where are the youth movements of today? Why is everything so........ordinary??????
Where are the youth movements of today? Why is everything so........ordinary??????
Too busy on the Internet, social networking, playing games and listening to music they haven't paid for. Hard to have a movement when people aren't really that passionate about something or don't feel the need to rebel against it due to not getting what they want.
As a young person, I feel no need to rebel against anything. I'm very happy with my life. Also, the music tastes of young people are more fragmented than they were a few decades ago I'd imagine, so that makes it more difficult for any "movement" to happen.
The problem is that people have been saying that for years and it is still not over. If anything it has progressed to an extent that it has it's own dedicated music channel in the form of MTV Dance.
Not really. The dance-pop craze peaked in 2011. We saw the decline start in 2012, and it seems to be continuing. In the US they've gone from dance-pop dominating 2008-2011, and now they've almost approached 12 months without a single dance song getting to #1. And a similar trend is happening in the UK. In summer 2011 we had 25+ dance songs in the top 40, now it's a much lower number (and a couple of months ago we had a top 10 where the only dance song was Gangnam Style). It's definitely going away now. I just hope it happens faster. I reckon in a few years we'll be back to like in the mid-00s where the dance hits were fewer, but better in quality.
It's not how I judge music, I'm more concerned with what I think and what I like and what I can get out of music. But yes, it's justified because it's particularly crap at the moment. What I'm saying is that it I don't think concentrating on the bad stuff gets you anywhere, it's more productive to focus on what is good instead.
.
but you arent reprisentitive of the whole music buying pubic, which is more interested in txf contestants then 'searching out good music'.
i still think the current music scene will be judged upon what the charts say... after all, how can whats watched on youtube or spotify be quantified ? thats what the official charts do, give a grounding, give data, to a particular period in time. therefore 2013 will be judged on what the singles chart stats are showing.
As a young person, I feel no need to rebel against anything. I'm very happy with my life. Also, the music tastes of young people are more fragmented than they were a few decades ago I'd imagine, so that makes it more difficult for any "movement" to happen.
.
absolutely...thats basically supporting a point ive made several times here over the last few years.
without that need to rebel, to create your own thing, modern times will be seen as dull, unimaginative, generic, from a creativity pov.
it appears too that those who do want to rebel (as such) simply tap in to retrolands archive, pinching ours!
but you arent reprisentitive of the whole music buying pubic, which is more interested in txf contestants then 'searching out good music'.
i still think the current music scene will be judged upon what the charts say... after all, how can whats watched on youtube or spotify be quantified ? thats what the official charts do, give a grounding, give data, to a particular period in time. therefore 2013 will be judged on what the singles chart stats are showing.
absolutely...thats basically supporting a point ive made several times here over the last few years.
without that need to rebel, to create your own thing, modern times will be seen as dull, unimaginative, generic, from a creativity pov.
it appears too that those who do want to rebel (as such) simply tap in to retrolands archive, pinching ours!
Then we have to see what masterwork the son of David Gilmour get to accomplish. :rolleyes:
i still think the current music scene will be judged upon what the charts say... after all, how can whats watched on youtube or spotify be quantified ? thats what the official charts do, give a grounding, give data, to a particular period in time. therefore 2013 will be judged on what the singles chart stats are showing.
I'm sure it will by most people. I just don't know why you care so much what other people think. I certainly won't be looking back at the charts of the last few years and thinking that's all that music in that period had to offer. If people want to have such a narrow minded view of music then that's up to them.
As a half decent piano player, I often stick chart stuff on and jam along with it to see what scales, or progressions they've used - I'm often staggered at how some of them consist of about three notes, and a shite melody, when there is so much more they could have done with it. It's actually painful, and makes me angry - and what's worse is that people like this stuff too? They must do, if it sells.
I fear for the future of commerical music if this is now an acceptable standard to consumers
p.s I can't wait until this 'dance' era is over - it's not even 'dance' music in the traditional sense is it? Shit synth sounds, a couple of notes, and volume, volume, volume. - Dance music should make you want to actually dance....
Exactly what I was about to put. There is no heart or soul, no real emotion in any of it. Of course there has always been throwaway chart music, but at least in the past it took some skill to make, now it's all just auto tuned shite
If that's the case why should I be pessimistic? The business model has changed, it's more difficult for artists to make money or breakthrough to the mainstream but the artists will always be there. Artists who don't compromise their sound and are making the music they want to make rather than trying to appeal to the most people possible are not really that rare. Whether they're to your taste or in the genres you like is another thing altogether. The other factor is trends. There has defnitely been a shift away from guitars/rock in "indie"/alternative music in recent years. It's not just happened in mainstream/chart music. I'm sure that will change in time and there will be more traditional bands (with real instruments!) around again and some will become popular. However, people will still complain that it's only the watered down stuff that appeals to those pesky "causal" music listeners .
Personally I think its great that the music industry is evolving, who cares if some men in suits are not making as much money as they once did? The internet is excellent in terms of hearing new music and musicians can easily get there stuff out there. There is some truly great music happening beneath the surface. To some extent this argument has always been there, there has always been those complaining about how crap mainstream music is. Its wrong to think this is a new phenomenon. The only difference I can really is is that we are seeing a rise in autotune and very little actual music, but there has always been a large market for throwaway pop.
Youtube views and Spotify scrobbles (or whatever they are called!) are quantified.
The traditional Top 40 is rapidly becoming an anachronism. Perhaps in a positive step, the traditional music industry is also becoming a bit of an anachronism.
I'm sure it will by most people. I just don't know why you care so much what other people think. I certainly won't be looking back at the charts of the last few years and thinking that's all that music in that period had to offer. If people want to have such a narrow minded view of music then that's up to them.
two issues here though...
on a personal level of course i dont care what others think...never have... which is why people questioned my tastes back in the 70's because i had variety in my collection and not just one genre (which was commonplace )
but 'officially' the common collective will point to the available data to draw a conclusion as to the state of music in 2013. id suggest that something like (a guesstimate) 10% of music buyers actually have a deep knowlege of music at any one time...the rest are far more casual and buy anything. the charts are testiment to this. ... so yes, the gbp are more ibnterested in who wins the x factor then seeking out and buying great music.
This question goes out to all music lovers, and fans, of any age!
Do you feel there is enough heart and soul in commerical music today?
I personally feel the 60's, 70's, 80's, and even 90's contained a lot of heart felt stuff, where you could really appreciate the emotions, chords, and harmonies in a great piece of music. This kind of stuff was popular, and it sold.
Fast forward to 2013 - the charts is full of manufactured rubbish, in my opinion. Good music has been replaced with monotone rubbish, it seems - and there's about a million great chord progressions, and notes that are just not used anymore...Why?
Loudness, or volume, seems to be the most important factor now.
As a music producer, who is currently working on a new 'sound' (will be promoting stuff later in the year) I'm very keen to know if music lovers, of all ages, and taste, are happy with the quality of music today? Would you be open to more 'melodic' music like we've seen in the past? Or is 'melodic' stuff not cool anymore?
Jay
Great thread Jay and bang on the money.
A lot of today's stuff is just a pile of words put together and mainly full of cliche`s.
Comments
Totally agree with you. It's seems it's not about the passion or the production of the music that matters anymore, it's all about the person, even if they really don't have any talent, just as long as they please the fans visually that's enough. The majority of 'music' in the charts now IS just a filler. All you hear is a mulch of sound. If instruments are being played, you can find it difficult to seperate them.
whilst what you say is true, the thread topic is about mainstream which by definition is where most people turn to first to hear music.
i think bemoaning the state of mainstream is justified. its mainstream that will in the future as in the past, be how the state of music in 2013 will be judged.
Before the 1980s the music "industry" was basically run by musicians for the benefit of musicians, so the record labels understood it took time to establish a new act and the act was given that time so that over the life of an initial four or five album deal the act could hone their craft and build a fan base with the record label knowing that if things worked out they would reap the long-term benefit.
In the 1980s the accountants moved in and music became a business where short-term profits were everything, so the long term development of acts finished and everything was about short term success and short term profits with an act dropped within milliseconds of their "star" starting to wane in the accountants eyes because they weren't meeting the profit targets.
The downturn of that is the today's generation are paying for that policy with a conveyor belt of short term, sound-a-like, acts with little or no thought given to tomorrow, let alone next week or next month, by the accountants running the record labels.
I take your point - the singles charts are an irrelevance to me and have been for a long time because I know I can find music I like elsewhere.
The problem is that the mainstream is what most people get to listen to on a casual basis and unless you specifically look for an alternative that's what most people get. I agree that in this age of mass connectivity there are millions of songs out there, all accessible with just a couple of clicks of a mouse (oh how I would have loved that ability when I was a teenager!) but by and large the public will still listen to what is played on the major radio and TV stations and my frustration with it all is that I feel the public is being short-changed - sold a poor quality product, if you like, which is just as bad as being sold knock-off fashion clothing or beefburgers made with horse meat. It's a con despite the fact that I'm sure plenty of people will claim to really like it.
And, you might argue, if people do like it then why are we complaining? What's the problem? Well, it's a case of diminishing returns. The more people will settle for substandard product the more it will be cheapened, repackaged and re-sold to them and that has a negative effect on the whole industry. The industry becomes more conservative, more risk averse and more homogenised.
And how does that encourage creativity?
I'm not disagreeing with you about mainstream music at all. But I do disagree with the bit in bold because, to put it simply, I see mainstream music (or if you like, the most popular artists) as only one part of the music industry as a whole There are so many other artists who are doing their own thing, being creative and not simply following trends and releasing any old crap in order to appeal to as many people as possible. That will never change and that's why I'm not that concerned about the state of mainstream/popular music. I don't have that much empathy for the casual music fan either if I'm honest.
[QUOTE=mimicole;63850650]I totally agree.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that people have been saying that for years and it is still not over. If anything it has progressed to an extent that it has it's own dedicated music channel in the form of MTV Dance.
This has reminded me of a couple of things:
- in the age of Youtube and things like Spotify, it is really no more difficult to find music from someone alternative than it is to find mainstream music.
- it always astounds me that anyone still listens to commercial radio. Who are these people?
I wouldn't be so optimistic. Thirty years ago indie labels were popping up everywhere and they sustained an alternative music scene right through the 80s and 90s as mainstream music became more conservative. Nearly all the big ones went under by the turn of the millennium - Creation, Rough Trade, Factory and others like 4AD scaled back their operations.
The music business became more about the business and less about the music and while non-mainstream music has continued to thrive, particularly with the rise of the internet and the ability for the lucky few to gain notoriety by word of mouth rather than record company hype, the situation for any real alternative is just as bad as for a lot of the mainstream. What passes for popular indie music these days is little more than watered down, radio-friendly pop punk like the Vaccines or dull as ditchwater folky guff like Fleet Foxes.
It's nice when artists can really take risks, though, and go all out and say to hell with being safe. My favourite album of last year was "The Seer" by Swans, which was about as uncompromising and uncommercial as modern music gets. That's a rarity these days, though.
The chart, however, was undoubtedly more pluralistic in those days. With far fewer radio stations, one couldn't help but hear a wider variety of music. My other half's first job was for Severn Sound, and he recently dug out some old programme logs he had from about 1980. Hardly a cutting edge station, it still played a far greater variety than today's commercial garbage stations. Today's chart is depressingly monotone, with autotuned vocals on nearly everything, and the joint-the-dots "urban" mixed with X Factor numpties.
I have no problems with synths if used imaginatively, but imagination is sadly lacking. It might be my main bone of contention, but the likes of Capital, with their ridiculously restrictive range of music, are major culprits of the dumbed down music environment. Their definition of "pop" is a narrow as the Rotherhithe Tunnel. Anyone who listens to it everyday is undergoing a slow motion frontal lobotomy.
Re BIB - We do seem to have a somewhat different situation these days though, in that now, we have older generations shaking our heads at what the young are listening to, not because 'it's too loud/no proper tunes' as in the past. No. Now the older generations are shaking our heads because today's music is so sodding tame.
We're the generations who grew up on the pioneers of metal, glam & punk. Where are the youth movements of today? Why is everything so........ordinary??????
Not really. The dance-pop craze peaked in 2011. We saw the decline start in 2012, and it seems to be continuing. In the US they've gone from dance-pop dominating 2008-2011, and now they've almost approached 12 months without a single dance song getting to #1. And a similar trend is happening in the UK. In summer 2011 we had 25+ dance songs in the top 40, now it's a much lower number (and a couple of months ago we had a top 10 where the only dance song was Gangnam Style). It's definitely going away now. I just hope it happens faster. I reckon in a few years we'll be back to like in the mid-00s where the dance hits were fewer, but better in quality.
AHA!
There, my good friend, you may have put your finger right on it
It's your job to rebel!
but you arent reprisentitive of the whole music buying pubic, which is more interested in txf contestants then 'searching out good music'.
i still think the current music scene will be judged upon what the charts say... after all, how can whats watched on youtube or spotify be quantified ? thats what the official charts do, give a grounding, give data, to a particular period in time. therefore 2013 will be judged on what the singles chart stats are showing.
absolutely...thats basically supporting a point ive made several times here over the last few years.
without that need to rebel, to create your own thing, modern times will be seen as dull, unimaginative, generic, from a creativity pov.
it appears too that those who do want to rebel (as such) simply tap in to retrolands archive, pinching ours!
Then we have to see what masterwork the son of David Gilmour get to accomplish. :rolleyes:
Exactly what I was about to put. There is no heart or soul, no real emotion in any of it. Of course there has always been throwaway chart music, but at least in the past it took some skill to make, now it's all just auto tuned shite
Personally I think its great that the music industry is evolving, who cares if some men in suits are not making as much money as they once did? The internet is excellent in terms of hearing new music and musicians can easily get there stuff out there. There is some truly great music happening beneath the surface. To some extent this argument has always been there, there has always been those complaining about how crap mainstream music is. Its wrong to think this is a new phenomenon. The only difference I can really is is that we are seeing a rise in autotune and very little actual music, but there has always been a large market for throwaway pop.
The traditional Top 40 is rapidly becoming an anachronism. Perhaps in a positive step, the traditional music industry is also becoming a bit of an anachronism.
two issues here though...
on a personal level of course i dont care what others think...never have... which is why people questioned my tastes back in the 70's because i had variety in my collection and not just one genre (which was commonplace )
but 'officially' the common collective will point to the available data to draw a conclusion as to the state of music in 2013. id suggest that something like (a guesstimate) 10% of music buyers actually have a deep knowlege of music at any one time...the rest are far more casual and buy anything. the charts are testiment to this. ... so yes, the gbp are more ibnterested in who wins the x factor then seeking out and buying great music.
Great thread Jay and bang on the money.
A lot of today's stuff is just a pile of words put together and mainly full of cliche`s.
It's all largely full of attitude.