|
||||||||
Pop On Trial - the best decade |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brummieland
Posts: 4,913
|
Pop On Trial - the best decade
Did anyone else watch this?
The final result was that the 70's were voted the best decade for music, after a programme on each of the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's. What decade do you think was best/worst? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Location: Location
Posts: 4,313
|
I would say the 80's was the most varied. The 60's and 70's just seemed to have different versions of pop/rock but the 80's had the emergence of hip-hop and house music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lost in a forest.
Posts: 9,648
|
I can't really say much about the 50's but don't agree with the 70's.
Apart from David Bowie, Punk and a handfull of classic rocks bands it was a terrible decade for music. Too much dirge like Mudd, Maralade, Showaddy Waddy and God knows what else For me it would have been between the 60's because it was the decade when music quite literally started to change people's lives or the 80's because of the diversity and pure pop it produced. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 4,998
|
Looking back, the 90's were rubbish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Co. Down/ Armagh, Ireland
Posts: 878
|
nah 90's were easily the most diverse decade for music- we had every type of music being brought to the forefront of music- nirvana- grudge, oasis-brit rock, spice girls- pop, whitney/ mariah- power balleds, britney- teen pop, Take that- boyband, eminem- hip ho/rap, ATB/sash- club, aqua- barbie girl...
the list can go on and on- there was diversity to the extreme, whereas i feel recently the sucessful acts all seem to fit a much narrower mould, maybe due to the rise of these reality tv shows such as x factor. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lost in a forest.
Posts: 9,648
|
Quote:
Looking back, the 90's were rubbish.
The BBC4 programs lorded up the Spice Girls but telling us how much they changed the lifes of young girls but now we have a generation of ladettes who have no idea what it means to be a lady. So much for Girl Power |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lost in a forest.
Posts: 9,648
|
Quote:
nah 90's were easily the most diverse decade for music- we had every type of music being brought to the forefront of music- nirvana- grudge, oasis-brit rock, spice girls- pop, whitney/ mariah- power balleds, britney- teen pop, Take that- boyband, eminem- hip ho/rap, ATB/sash- club, aqua- barbie girl...
the list can go on and on- there was diversity to the extreme, whereas i feel recently the sucessful acts all seem to fit a much narrower mould, maybe due to the rise of these reality tv shows such as x factor. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Co. Down/ Armagh, Ireland
Posts: 878
|
Quote:
The diversity was there but most of it was rubbish.
In fairness, there wasnt a great deal of soul moving music during the 90's. It was quite commercial, which i think has been brought on into the 2000's, but has possibly been brought to a further extreme, which has left some modern music feeling empty and purely out there as innoffensive balled that people will buy regardless- its a safe type of music to release |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lost in a forest.
Posts: 9,648
|
Yup, as a very clever band once said Pop Will Eat Itself and it did
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,806
|
Quote:
nah 90's were easily the most diverse decade for music- we had every type of music being brought to the forefront of music- nirvana- grudge, oasis-brit rock, spice girls- pop, whitney/ mariah- power balleds, britney- teen pop, Take that- boyband, eminem- hip ho/rap, ATB/sash- club, aqua- barbie girl...
the list can go on and on- there was diversity to the extreme, whereas i feel recently the sucessful acts all seem to fit a much narrower mould, maybe due to the rise of these reality tv shows such as x factor. I thought the early to mid-nineties produced very creative and diverse music. Other than the examples you gave, if you look into the electronic/dance genres there was an absolute explosion of richness and creativity. Bit of a problem splitting things into decades though, because some things run across the beginnings or ends of certain decades. So I have a great affection for the early nineties. The problem here is that it's about the most influential decade, so you have to look to see how the 90s influenced this decade. And I have to say that the 'noughties' are pretty barren. All those innovations in the nineties appeared to have been practically ignored and too many acts now just want to be as 'pop' and as mainstream as possible, and ignore underground influences to just embrace the unoriginal manufactured pop svengali approved ideas of music. So although I absolutely loved the early nineties, I have to agree that the seventies would also be my choice as the most influential decade. Normally I'd struggle to decide, but once you throw Kraftwerk into the mix of the seventies then I have to choose the seventies as the most influential decade without any hesitation. So my favourite decade would probably go to the 1990s. The most influential decade to the 1970s. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 895
|
For actual "POP" music look no further than the 80's, until the rise of Stock Aitken and Waterman the vast majority of pop acts were actual bands that played and wrote their own music.
So much so that even the Americans bought into it and we had the 2nd british invasion since the other great decade of pop music the 60's. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,806
|
Quote:
I can't really say much about the 50's but don't agree with the 70's.
Apart from David Bowie, Punk and a handfull of classic rocks bands it was a terrible decade for music. Too much dirge like Mudd, Maralade, Showaddy Waddy and God knows what else For me it would have been between the 60's because it was the decade when music quite literally started to change people's lives or the 80's because of the diversity and pure pop it produced. I think most music is pretty much disposable junk, or just plain crap, but in every decade there are great examples of what makes music great. I'd say that there was just a huge amount of crap in the 80s. I hated most of the music. But Hip Hop and House were genres that fuelled massive changes in music. So if anybody suggested that the 1980s were the most influential, I would still have to consider that they have a valid point. I hated 80s music, but can't deny the influence. Hip Hop was great back then,...but look at what Hip Hop is now. I don't like it now, when I once did, but even if I don't like modern Hip Hop it is still a huge market force right now and has been a huge sea change in music popularity since then due to Hip Hop's original influence which was spread in the 1980s. Even if you think that there weren't that many influences in the 1980s, just that one massive influence of Hip Hop alone counts for a hell of a lot on it's own. The influences may not be necessarily positive ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 4,998
|
The nougties is my favourite era. It's current, and therefore the most relevant to me at the moment.
And if we're talking about POP music, it now tends to have a bit more edge than in the 80's/90's (although I do still like some of it). Another plus is the diversity of music to be found through the internet, whereas before you only ever really had access to the 'chart' stuff. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,806
|
Quote:
For actual "POP" music look no further than the 80's, until the rise of Stock Aitken and Waterman the vast majority of pop acts were actual bands that played and wrote their own music.
So much so that even the Americans bought into it and we had the 2nd british invasion since the other great decade of pop music the 60's. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,806
|
Quote:
The nougties is my favourite era. It's current, and therefore the most relevant to me at the moment.
And if we're talking about POP music, it now tends to have a bit more edge than in the 80's/90's (although I do still like a lot of the 80's stuff). Another plus is the diversity of music to be found through the internet, whereas before you only ever really had access to the 'chart' stuff. I disagree that pop music has more edge to it now. Right now it feels more blanded out than it ever was before. I think you have a good point about the internet though. Maybe the internet is the new breeding ground for the underground, and we may see the influences break through later on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 4,998
|
Quote:
Yes, but how can you say how influential it has been to music yet? It's just too early to judge isn't it?
I disagree that pop music has more edge to it now. Right now it feels more blanded out than it ever was before. There's more edge to current music in the sense that you rarely see cheesy pop-groups like Spice-Girls / Steps / S-Club, etc anymore. Music has moved on. Maybe it sounds 'blanded out' in the sense that a lot of the R1 chart stuff sounds a bit more samey, perhaps. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,806
|
Quote:
I don't think it's most influential at all, I just said I liked it.
There's more edge to current music in the sense that you rarely see cheesy pop-groups like Spice-Girls / Steps / S-Club, etc anymore. Music has moved on. Maybe it sounds 'blanded out' in the sense that a lot of the R1 chart stuff sounds a bit more samey, perhaps. I think there's a problem with the OP. The 'Pop on Trial' programme wasn't about determining which is the 'best' decade for music, it was all about determining which decade was the most 'influential'. It was nothing to do with 'the best'. I have to disagree with you about the edge to current pop music though. Music may have moved on, but that doesn't mean that it's edgy or not cheesey. Music had moved on at any given point in time you want to choose from the 50s up until now, it didn't make it somehow superior to or better than what preceded it. Just because something is current and now doesn't make it good in itself. Yes, that 'samey' is what I mean. When things are samey there is no edge and that's what often makes a lot of music cheesey. It's the same with any music that get's overdone, it was the same with glam rock, new romantic, ballady boy/girl band stuff, and much popular music from any decade. Once it becomes commercially flogged to death and overused until it earns every last penny it can earn, it has no edge and is just overdone cheese. Blandness and cheesiness often go hand in hand with a lot of commerically successful music. If I look back now, I honestly think that pop music from the 1960s and 1970s has a lot more edge to it than current pop music does now. And they aren't even my eras. For some reason people like David Bowie, T Rex, and Roxy Music were 'pop' music, but somehow managed to have more edge to their music than a lot of the less commercially successful stuff. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Middlesex
Posts: 2,345
|
Most of the music I listen to is from the Noughties, but a lot of it is actually quite remiscent of stuff from previous eras. In my opinion, music is always developing because artists today have so many more influences to be inspired by, and can mix up and develop that original sound to make something new and exciting.
Having said that, there is undoubtedly a lot of crap out at the moment, that sometimes isn't even musical - by this I mean 'artists' that take advantage of today's technology by taking a vocal hook and repeat it a hundred times over a repeitive, electronically produced beat, or those who'll write a line or two about the local pub and it's inhabitants, strum a couple of guitar chords and sing in a fake Northern accent then get hailed by NME as the saviours pop music. Unfortunately, this tends to be the only stuff that's broadcasted on mainstream radio, which is partly why there's so much criticism of today's music. Search deeper though, and there is some real amazing, innovative stuff out there. Back on topic, I honestly couldn't say which decade is my favourite, simply because I haven't heard enough to decide. For example, for a long time I held the opinion that the 90's was a rubbish era for music because at the time I only heard the talentless, manufactured pop music that was directed at my age group (under 7s). But now I'm looking into music a bit more, I've found that there were actually some pretty brilliant groups out there (Suede being my favourite of the ones I've heard so far), and there are undoubtedly hundreds more for me to discover from all the other decades. ![]() (Apologies for the essay by the way, I can go on for ages about stuff like this )
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: My House
Posts: 16,347
|
Quote:
Looking back, the 90's were rubbish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 895
|
Quote:
I don't think that's really true. If you're talking about actual 'POP' music then the pop svengalis had been around since the 1950s at least, as the programme showed. Mickie Most was around in the 60s and 70s, and then there was that song writing producer team who wrote most of those glam rock pop hits.
I see your point but I was talking about the 80's rather than other decades, looking specifically at the likes of Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet, A-ha etc and until S/A/W the 80's really didnt have much of a hit factory other than the Jam/Lewis acts in the US. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 64,238
|
The 90s were very poor.
At least in the 80s there was some individuality and artists weren't afraid to be a bit more outlandish. Better than the synchronised boyband dancers of today. :sleep: |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,325
|
1945-1955? blues and beginning of r&b? emergence of small groups rather than big bands and orchestras?
1955-1965 - the rock and roll era, emergence of beat groups and start of some experimenation? 1965-1975? real start of rock music, explosion of people recording: George Martin/the Beatles, Eddie Kramer/Jimi Hendrix, Cream, John Mayall's bluesbreakers, Phil Spector, Otis Redding, Rolling Stones, Temptations, Curtis Mayfield, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Genesis, Queen, Funkadelic, MC5, Iggy Pop, The Doors, Janis Joplin, Kraftwerk, Bob Marley - so many styles all coming together. 75-85 - heyday of punk, new wave and indie - lots of glam ballads, NWOBHM, spandex, perms, drum machines and synths get going 85-95 - a bit leaner - lots of pop, getting brasher - fewer genuinely new genres - mainly splits from existing ones 95 - 2005 - Britpop, new indie-style, urban - again divisions of subdivisions Goth Dark-Metal Emo etc looks like one of the earlier decades had a bigger chunk of originality. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,597
|
For me 1973 - 1985 was the greatest music era.
Really liked Glam Rock (T.Rex, Slade, Wizzard, Mud etc.), Punk (The Ramones, Sex Pistols, The Clash, The Jam etc.), Electronica (Tangerine Dream, Kraftwerk, Jarre). Art Rock (Talking Heads, XTC, Bill Nelson/Be Bop Deluxe) Electropop (Blancmange, Soft Cell, OMD, YMO etc.) Some nice tunes also from the 60's however the 90's were poor music years and the 00's even worse (blame Cowell). |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,325
|
Quote:
1945-1955? blues and beginning of r&b? emergence of small groups rather than big bands and orchestras?
1955-1965 - the rock and roll era, emergence of beat groups and start of some experimenation? 1965-1975? real start of rock music, explosion of people recording: George Martin/the Beatles, Eddie Kramer/Jimi Hendrix, Cream, John Mayall's bluesbreakers, Phil Spector, Otis Redding, Rolling Stones, Temptations, Curtis Mayfield, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Genesis, Queen, Funkadelic, MC5, Iggy Pop, The Doors, Janis Joplin, Kraftwerk, Bob Marley - so many styles all coming together. 75-85 - heyday of punk, new wave and indie - lots of glam ballads, NWOBHM, spandex, perms, drum machines and synths get going 85-95 - a bit leaner - lots of pop, getting brasher - fewer genuinely new genres - mainly splits from existing ones 95 - 2005 - Britpop, new indie-style, urban - again divisions of subdivisions Goth Dark-Metal Emo etc looks like one of the earlier decades had a bigger chunk of originality. Focusing on neat ten-year chunks makes for easy TV but it doesn't reflect the reality of how music developed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,231
|
Quote:
For myself apart from Alternative Rock and few off centre dance acts I agree.
The BBC4 programs lorded up the Spice Girls but telling us how much they changed the lifes of young girls but now we have a generation of ladettes who have no idea what it means to be a lady. So much for Girl Power Its hardly a new phenomena either. Most of the female population at any time in history would not fit any definition of lady. London three hundred years ago was wall to wall with drunken women and women selling sexual favours and you wouldn't find many genteel folk working on the factory production lines of the 1840s to 1980s. The only recent change has been the easier affordability and availability of drink, better wages , later marriage, more entertainment options and the growth of contraceptive options in the sixties. The Spice Girls didn't have anything to do with any of that and were never seen burning their bras or even getting drunk let alone falling off stage drunk or getting whisked off to rehab. its actually one of those myths that accrue to some bands that the Spice Girls particularly seem to accumalate. Fact is the Spice Girls were only wannabees in the sense that they wanted to be successful - 4 of them had actually been through all the professional training anyone in their field should have gone through - the fifth had gone straight into the entertainment industry and learnt some basics the hard way. Someone picked them because they saw they had the right tones and talents - no different than Lloyd Weber picking his Marias or Cowell picking his X factor singers or most managements in history finding people to fit their groups - though actually done better than most people have managed. The Spice Girl message is essentially work hard to get what you want and don't be put off by a male dominated world that will try and ignore you. Thats pretty rational given the dominance of cloned boybands at the time and its fully in keeping with the core political and economic ideas and trends in the country from the mid seventies onward. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:33.




)