| The idea that the gene pool from which musicians and songwriters are drawn took a dive during any one period in particular is a silly argument to make, IMO. The baby-boomer musicians of the 60's were not gifted in any way with superior DNA that made them supermen with superhuman musical gifts, where the Gen X musicians got defective genes that only made them capable of producing borderline dumb, slobbering gibberish. I know many boomers love to pat themselves on the back for who knows what, but really, to look back and see "your" era as "superior" in some way is just selective memory and pure nostalgia. I 100% concur with those who say that *every* era had its share of bland, safe and silly pop music. To complain about electronic instrumentation (when it's done well, and I agree not all 80's technology holds up as I posted earlier in this thread), sounds like me when I complain about the young whipper-snappers with their rap and their hip-hop; I mean, what ever happened to real *singing*? *grumble grumble* But that's my problem, music marches on. I suppose that when the piano was introduced, there were people who complained that *real* music could only be played on harpsichord. Or complained when the electric guitar was introduced that only *acoustics* could produce "real" music. The problem is that during some periods, it's the bland safe and silly stuff that takes over and dominates the airwaves-- if you want the good stuff you have to dig a little. That definitely happened in the 80's, just like it's happening now. It's not fair to look at the '80s and say, "oh, Safety Dance is THE emblematic song of that woeful era". It's like looking at the 60's and saying "Yummy Yummy Yummy, I've got love in my tummy" is a great encapsulization of that era. Bashing all 80's music outright is just lazy and (frankly) a little ignorant and shows a lack of knowledge of the music of that era. It's understandable that as one grows up, one has less time to devote to acquiring new music or exploring the new stuff, so one's knowledge of what's current gets restricted to what's popular or on the radio. But that is never really a reflection of what is really happening or what will really be remembered, is it? Look at the Velvet Underground, for example. NO ONE bought their records, they played tiny venues. Yet given their place now in the rock pantheon, you'd think they were once the Beatles. Selective memory at work, taking the good among the dreck and posthumously elevating it so that future music fans get an exaggerated view of its prominence at the time. Fact is, if you wanted the Velvet Underground in the 60's, you had to go digging. Just like you had to go digging in the 80's for the good stuff. OTOH, it's happening to me, too. I like to complain about the music of the 00's relative to what I know best (60's/70's/80's/90's), but that's just the grumpy old man in me starting to come out. It's easy to forget that in any era, you are drowning in a sea of dreck, and when it's all over, you are left with the pearls you found that make up your music collection. As time goes by, it's easy to forget the dreck, and convince yourself that your music collection from that era (a small sampling really) WAS the era. It wasn't. |
| As a child of the 80's (class of '88), this was my hay day, too, so I feel justified talking a little smack about *some* of the music of the period. Main problem with some of it is not necessarily the talent of the performers or the quality of the songs. The chief culprit in terms of making a lot of that music sound ridiculous today is the very poor production values and crude early electronic instrumentation. It was still so new that it sounded totally "fresh" and "novel" to music makers, and inexplicably they thought it sounded "better" than real instruments, but in reality was also way too primitive and crude to hold up over time, unless it's to be enjoyed ironically and strictly for kitsch value. Funny thing is, that even at the time when it was new, a lot of it still sounded cheesey, rinky-dink and clumsy, clanking, plinkety-plink and tinny to me. A lot of otherwise good material got crushed under a lot of bad production/instrumentation. This is especially obvious when you hear long-term established artists whose careers continued on into the '80's. When you get to that period in their output, the absurdity and ugliness of the 80's production style is much easier to see when you compare it to their earlier material with real instrumentation. |
| Originally Posted by Beatl£Maniac Why is it that music got so bad in the 1980s? Bob Dylan, Bowie, The Stones e.t.c all started to make stupid music. Synthesisers, stupid electronic drums and mullets crept into everything. It can't be just me that thinks this. I mean it wasnt all bad, e.g. U2, The Smiths but most of it was. When typical 80s music comes on the radio i have to switch othe dial, anyone else share my 80s phobeia? |
| Originally Posted by Masonjar No.... I could go on but I have to go. I love the 80's.. those that didn't like the 80's probably never will. -jar |
