Originally Posted by Gigi4:
“I think there is good and bad music in every decade. I like a lot of those 80's bands but there was bad music in the 80's as well just as there is good music now.
I like a lot of acts who play live instruments but I've never bought the idea that live instruments equals good music whereas computers equals bad music. You can make a good song (or a bad song) with either. Live instruments and computers are really just tools. They're not inherently good or bad, it's the song that matters.
You can have a band like Nikelback that uses live instruments that is horrible.
I also think it's not an either or, you can combine live instruments with drum machines and computers to often create something interesting. I wish artists could do more of that instead of going all the way in one direction or the other. One of my favourite bands is Garbage which combines the two.”
live instruments doesn't equal good music and electronic music, in particular that made on computers as opposed to simply keyboards/synths, does not equate to bad music
but the use of computers in music allowed people to make music with less experience and knowledge of music, without having to learn to play an instrument, or even learn chords or notes
there is a good and a bad side to that. a few years earlier you had punk, which gave a well deserved kick up the arse to the music business, but for ever decent or popular band like the clash or the sex pistols you had a hundred that just couldn't play properly
similarly with the advent of sequencing and computerised music, you had both good and bad aspects. house music again gave the music industry a kick in the arse, showing that electronic music could be great and interesting and inspriring, and it created a huge dance scene that wasn't just about music but a different way of life to people, and a big change in clubs, moving from your meatmarkets playing shit like SAW and disco and god knows what else was in the charts, to music specifically made for dancing to in clubs
of course along with the good dance music came the bad, the ugly and the truely awful, and there are many offshoots of dance music that are unlistenable to many, such as cheesy eurotrance/techno, gabba/hardcore and minimilist
with live music with real instruments, people had to take time and effort to learn to play the instruments, learn the chords and notes, then learn chord progressions and learn to put the chords and notes together to create music. one person starting off, without the help of a studio, couldn't really create a full album themselves, with a full band sound. so you needed other individuals to play the bass, drums, etc to fill the sound out, and you certainly needed them to play live. so instead of one person sitting in a room/studio/bedroom fiddling away at a computer on their own, you had a number of creative minds together in the same room, experimenting, jamming and being creative to create music, often with the aim of creating good music, rather than commercial music. an aim to be the best band in the world
there are of course people who are very skilled at creating music who go down the commercial route with an aim to sell the most records instead of creating the best music, and that practice became more prominent in the 80s than in any previous decade, as a team of people could create music in the studio, fronted by another person or group, promoted by music videos without the need to have a real backing band or play live. in some cases the artists would make live appearances with either a hired bunch of session musicians, or perhaps more often a bunch of backing dancers
and that's when music started going down the toilet, with people creating music just to be commercial, and removing the live element, focusing on videos and dancing instead of the music
that then influenced other artists such as madonna and michael jackson, who didn't bother a fully live performance tour, and turned to miming and dancing to flesh out a show instead
so you could look back on the likes of SAW and blame them for not getting to hear michael jackson sing on tour. if people like SAW didn't make it acceptable, others wouldn't do it. you certainly wouldn't get away with miming onstage to thousands of people for over an hour in the 70s
it's one thing for artists who simply can't pull off a live performance as they were made in the studio acts, but quite another thing when acts that could perform live don't do it because a precident has been set by others
the 70s was a great period for music, both live and in the studio. keyboards became prominent and there were a lot of great electronic based acts such as stevie wonder and kraftwerk, but the 80s was an awful period for most, especially when many previously great artists created over produced studio works, and fleshed out live concerts with several additional session musicians along with the basic band. so take pink floyd who played as a 4 peice throughout the 70s, with the addition of a saxophonist just for the sax songs and 2 or 3 backing singers for some specific tracks on some tours, moving to having 2 or 3 additional players for almost every instrument, with an extra dozen people on stage playing the same songs. so the awfulness of 80s music wasn't solely in regards to the 80s bands, but the bands of previous periods who's music dropped in quality. compare 70s bowie to 80s bowie for a perfect example