Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Does the fall of music ever depress you? It does me.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does the fall of music ever depress you? It does me. - Page 2

post #16 of 198
5/1/10 at 12:01pm
I think part of the problem is more and more people have migrated to their niche interests, circumventing major record labels thanks to the internet. To compete, the big labels have begun pandering to the basest of interests. They're not interested in the talented guitar player with a distinctive voice, they're interested in the next artist with Britney Spears sex appeal. That and the fact that mainstream music has become more formulized and industrialized than ever before.

The typical mainstream icon is generated like this: pick a photogenic unknown artist, who cares if they terrible or can't sing, they'll just auto-tune them to pitch perfection. Get them to sign a contract signing their life and creative direction away to you. Now to designing the song for them, preferably go for something with the mind-numbing repetition of "I Got a Feeling". After all, with competition like this, you want the song to be stuck in everyone's heads 30 seconds in. If it's hip-hop have them have them crap on about their bling and hoes, then proceed to fill the music video with semi-naked models and ripped guys thrusting at them suggestively. Now there's only the easy part, get everyone to buy it! Have radio and TV music play them 24/7 for a couple of weeks, pay the stations off and have them plug it as the next greatest thing. Voila! Hit on your hands.
Reply
post #17 of 198
5/1/10 at 12:14pm
I think the comment above is spot on. Speaking of radio stations, a lot of FM deejays spew as much garbage as the music they play, so it's symptomatic of the distribution system as a whiole when it comes to public broadcasting.
Reply
post #18 of 198
5/1/10 at 12:19pm
Kind of...If I could,I'll live in the 70's....or 90's...
Reply
post #19 of 198
5/1/10 at 1:09pm
I don't see music falling. I see various genres rising and falling. Most rock and americana produced today is essentially the same as it was 30 years ago, with a few stylistic differences, and consequently, I see rock as a genre in decline. I think metal is currently peaking. I honestly don't know what to think about commercial pop and RnB - it seems such a stretch to even call it music sometimes.
Reply
post #20 of 198
5/1/10 at 1:28pm
There are a few things at work here. First of all, everybody has this super rosy view of the past because they only remember the very best of bygone eras.

A few examples:

1) Chuck Berry's biggest hit was my ding-a-ling. He put out some seriously great songs, with great guitar work, and he practically invented modern rock guitar until Hendrix took it to the next level and then there wasn't another big leap forward until eddie van halen. Yet his biggest hit was my ding a ling.
2) Nobody remembers that The Monkeys were as big as any act out there at the time and comparably bigger than Britney Spears.

Another thing at play here is that you are essentially listening to modern music for aspects of older music. Modern music can be judged that way, but you're missing out on what makes it good/great. A lot of these arguments will essentially boil down to "it doesn't sound like x" Sure, there is just some complete crap, but there is always complete crap being produced, there is also always some truly breathtaking music being produced, even pop wise. But if you want it to sound like the music you were into in your college years (it's amazing how everybody thinks that the best music ever produced was the music that they were listening to in college, no?) it's going to fall flat.


The final point is what many others have mentioned, music is more dispersed than ever today, which is a great thing, but which means that you have to look harder for certain things.
Reply
post #21 of 198
5/1/10 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjrabon View Post
Nobody remembers that The Monkeys were as big as any act out there at the time and comparably bigger than Britney Spears.
brilliantly put, fjrabon.

btw, it's spelled Monkees.
Reply
post #22 of 198
5/1/10 at 2:24pm
I kinda like it, because the new generation has never bought a single CD in its life...and believes that music = free = 128kbit mp3.

the only ppl who would be willing to pay for music get ripped off on that loudness war **, so that little music(read "noise") industry will slowly die due to its own evil plans

and the good "real" music becomes cheaper and cheaper, because hardly anyone's interested anymore...who cares about singers that are not autotuned these days?
Reply
post #23 of 198
5/1/10 at 2:37pm
People who still buy CDs and are picky.

I noticed 'Brothers In Arms' by Dire Straits, old pressing sounding softer in volume yet very pleasant for the ears. After that I played '19' by Adele but it sounded so much louder that I lowered the volume right away yet the sound was still good enough to give the chills listening to 'Hometown Glory.' The sound was good if you ask me. (Set up: Sony D33 + Yamaha MA 10 (treble 7/10) + Pioneer Monitor 10 = impressive sound.)
Reply
post #24 of 198
5/1/10 at 6:10pm
Thread Starter 
I think my OP complaint is not as understood as I'd like so I want to clarify.

I'm fully aware mainstream music has always been of a lower quality than others, but there's a difference between what's being put out today in bulk and what was being put out in bulk as little at 6 or 7 years ago. As far as Artie Shaw and Ludwig van Beethoven being used as examples, I can't really get with either as a reference to what I'm talking about. In the case of Artie Shaw, he was essentially bringing the swing music which was made popular by Ellington, Henderson and Basie to a wider audience before racial boundaries were broken. His music was certainly of some sort of artistry even if a little bit weaker than the others who came first. Beethoven was frowned upon by some because of his innovations and his break with conservatism.

The 90s had its crappy stars like Vanilla Ice, Mili Vanilli, MC Hammer....etc. But these stars never attained reverence for more than a year. Whereas someone like Rihanna or Beyonce or Lady Gaga have already surpassed that and are the essence of all pop music right now. Pop music has never been the best, but it's always been good, until now. There was always talent involved in writing a good pop song and being able to perform it. All that is gone. You don't need to be able to even sing. Even in the 80s when all the terrible hair metal bands spent more on their image than their album, at least they had the ability to play and sing and sometimes write.

This culture, particularly the youth is being so dumbed down. There's no musical identity in the music which they listen to. It's completely void of emotionality, substance, message, musicality and most of all...talent. This has never been the case no matter how bad mainstream music was.

It just makes me very sad. And regarding music being better now than ever before. I don't agree with that, even if we are talking non-mainstream. All music in my opinion suffers from the fact that the mainstream is where the investments. The 2000's have been a rather pitiful time in music regardless of genre, however that doesn't mean there haven't been some good moments for some artists.
I've been talking headphones with you for years. Now I can help you with your purchase:) Sales Specialist & Headphone Guru @ Headphones.com
Reply
post #25 of 198
5/1/10 at 6:33pm
I agree with the OP,honestly most artists/CDs now are crap.I am 18 and I find artists like beyonce,usher,avril lavigne,Taylor swift,linkin park,black eyed peas.... All are horrible with no emotions and crappy lyrics and offensive words.90% of my collection is vocal trance and house but I also hate the new house production,and I began lately to listen to the old stuff before 2000 all the way back to the early 1990.it's really very different in almost everything,you feel that the singer put alot of work and tried to produce sophisticated complex house production and not anything and glue it together!
But some modern production especially in trance is better with armin van buuren Atb,chicane...so ya not all of the modern music is bad,I can't generalize.
Ps:you should really listen to 'My hump' for black eyed peas(or pead?),I am sure you would want to kill yourself after hearing it..
Reply
post #26 of 198
5/1/10 at 6:51pm
the charts on the whole ore terrible but there is an ungodly quantity of great music out there, the problem is that there is just sooooooooooooo much music out there how do you find the stuff you like amongst the crap
Reply
post #27 of 198
5/1/10 at 7:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbacic View Post
Music now is better than it has ever been.
It's just not mainstream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWuss View Post
bingo. the good stuff's still there.
nowadays you just have to dig, man!
X3 I have no trouble finding music that continues to surprise and delight me. I wished i lived in the US sometimes so I could find heaps more, but then even now
Reply
post #28 of 198
5/1/10 at 7:26pm
The charts and mainstream are just like the bestseller lists - crap, crap and more crap. Crap piled on top of other crap and derivative, reprocessed crap.

That aside, there's a ton a great music out there. You just need to know where to look. I assume it's streamed, but I get "Morning Becomes Eclectic" at KCRW in LA over the air. I've picked up lots of great new music from that. Keep your eyes open.

Also, even if there was a complete stop to quality music in 2010, I wouldn't care. There's so much great music from times past that I won't have time to listen to and appreciate everything there is.
Reply
post #29 of 198
5/1/10 at 7:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post
I think my OP complaint is not as understood as I'd like so I want to clarify.

I'm fully aware mainstream music has always been of a lower quality than others, but there's a difference between what's being put out today in bulk and what was being put out in bulk as little at 6 or 7 years ago. As far as Artie Shaw and Ludwig van Beethoven being used as examples, I can't really get with either as a reference to what I'm talking about. In the case of Artie Shaw, he was essentially bringing the swing music which was made popular by Ellington, Henderson and Basie to a wider audience before racial boundaries were broken. His music was certainly of some sort of artistry even if a little bit weaker than the others who came first. Beethoven was frowned upon by some because of his innovations and his break with conservatism.
We're not on the same page. About Artie Shaw, if you think about it, the fact that he criticized the mainstream while drawing inspiration from artists who were clearly not the mainstream of the time actually illustrates my point. Was his music "weaker"? Well, I could just as easily ask if it was the "weakest" music out there, which your "some sort of artistry" characterization clearly suggests was not the case.

As for the contemporary folks cited, I dunno…while I can't stand fake-ass Usher, there are certainly good Rihanna, Beyoncé and Lady GaGa singles to be heard. In fact, I'd be willing to say that Rihanna and Beyoncé have exhibited growth since I first heard them years ago, even if neither is the kind of music I actively listen to. I'll give you an example: I always felt Beyoncé's "Crazy In Love" was pretty fantastic for a mainstream single, but truth is, I never lived with it enough to realize it was actually a decent song until a friend played me a cover by this folkish group called The Magic Numbers. It was a good lesson…bust it…

YouTube - The Magic Numbers - Crazy In Love - LIVE LOUNGE

I've played that for dozens of people, and quite a few have responded the same way I did: "Who knew it was a good song?" Of course, others have said they'd rather stick with the Beyoncé original, and I honestly think they could do a lot worse.
Reply
post #30 of 198
5/1/10 at 7:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post
I think my OP complaint is not as understood as I'd like so I want to clarify.

I'm fully aware mainstream music has always been of a lower quality than others, but there's a difference between what's being put out today in bulk and what was being put out in bulk as little at 6 or 7 years ago. As far as Artie Shaw and Ludwig van Beethoven being used as examples, I can't really get with either as a reference to what I'm talking about. In the case of Artie Shaw, he was essentially bringing the swing music which was made popular by Ellington, Henderson and Basie to a wider audience before racial boundaries were broken. His music was certainly of some sort of artistry even if a little bit weaker than the others who came first. Beethoven was frowned upon by some because of his innovations and his break with conservatism.

The 90s had its crappy stars like Vanilla Ice, Mili Vanilli, MC Hammer....etc. But these stars never attained reverence for more than a year. Whereas someone like Rihanna or Beyonce or Lady Gaga have already surpassed that and are the essence of all pop music right now. Pop music has never been the best, but it's always been good, until now. There was always talent involved in writing a good pop song and being able to perform it. All that is gone. You don't need to be able to even sing. Even in the 80s when all the terrible hair metal bands spent more on their image than their album, at least they had the ability to play and sing and sometimes write.

This culture, particularly the youth is being so dumbed down. There's no musical identity in the music which they listen to. It's completely void of emotionality, substance, message, musicality and most of all...talent. This has never been the case no matter how bad mainstream music was.

It just makes me very sad. And regarding music being better now than ever before. I don't agree with that, even if we are talking non-mainstream. All music in my opinion suffers from the fact that the mainstream is where the investments. The 2000's have been a rather pitiful time in music regardless of genre, however that doesn't mean there haven't been some good moments for some artists.
I honestly can't agree with very much of this. I feel like Gaga's talent is pretty manifest and I don't even like that kind of music. Same with Rihanna. Beyonce is hit or miss with me. And that's to say NOTHING about all the non-pop artists. I also feel like millions have said the same about every decade before you, and there will be someone 15 years from now talking about how the 00's were great and music sucks now. My grandparents said that my parents culture was dumbed down, my parents said my culture was dumbed down, I'll probably at some point say things are dumbed down.

I don't mean this to be offensive, but I think you're simply getting old and losing the ability to identify with anything that's new.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Does the fall of music ever depress you? It does me.