advertisement


The TRUTH Why Modern Music Is Awful

DonQuixote99 said:
The top of the chart has gotten worse, I'll argue.
Click to expand...

it doesn't take much of an argument. this is about POPULAR music. i've written about it a few times over the years and i think we are living out a cultural catastrophe. sure, the "sophisticated" music fan (like tony) has more than ever to choose from and almost certainly a lot more that is top notch than ever before. unfortunately, the choice and variety operates via fragmented, niche markets and not a shared culture. for those who are simply exposed to the mainstream (most people), for whatever reason, there is now very little chance of discovering anything that would lead to an evolution of taste.

we have comparable problems in other arts, especially in film, which is arguably worse because of scale and cost: unlike music, there isn't much of any quality beyond "pop" cinema. by quality, i mean acceptable production quality in our age.
 
vuk said:
it doesn't take much of an argument. this is about POPULAR music. i've written about it a few times over the years and i think we are living out a cultural catastrophe. sure, the "sophisticated" music fan (like tony) has more than ever to choose from and almost certainly a lot more that is top notch than ever before. unfortunately, the choice and variety operates via fragmented, niche markets and not a shared culture. for those who are simply exposed to the mainstream (most people), for whatever reason, there is now very little chance of discovering anything that would lead to an evolution of taste.

we have comparable problems in other arts, especially in film, which is arguably worse because of scale and cost: unlike music, there isn't much of any quality beyond "pop" cinema. by quality, i mean acceptable production quality in our age.
Click to expand...

As far as cinema is concerned this is true if you only look at US cinema. There is plenty of high quality cinema being made elsewhere in the world.

For me a large part of the issue is that we're living through the greatest period of cultural imperialism since the 40s and 50s. My teenage kids live in a virtual USA. They watch USA films, watch USA tv shows, listen to USA music, track USA news ( even through UK outlets) and obsess about the evils of Trump.

Im trying to persuade them to engage more with their European, let alone English, cultural heritage but this is a challenge when they spend 99% of their time immersed in North American culture.

Getting back to music, this was interesting:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/oct/12/why-has-the-uk-stopped-producing-pop-superstars

In an odd way, particularly in the UK, contemporary european culture has become a minority interest. It's not entering the mainstream ( apart from Max Martin) and not being heard. There's still plenty of good stuff there but its almost invisible.

Kevin
 
Is it even true of US cinema? There always seems to be a lot of films with limited distribution on the IMDB release list.
 
vuk said:
it doesn't take much of an argument. this is about POPULAR music. i've written about it a few times over the years and i think we are living out a cultural catastrophe. sure, the "sophisticated" music fan (like tony) has more than ever to choose from and almost certainly a lot more that is top notch than ever before. unfortunately, the choice and variety operates via fragmented, niche markets and not a shared culture. for those who are simply exposed to the mainstream (most people), for whatever reason, there is now very little chance of discovering anything that would lead to an evolution of taste.
Click to expand...

The thing that amuses me here is what has happened to music is what you always seem to argue for politically, e.g. the all-powerful music moguls, corporate record labels and radio stations of the past have had their ability to shape taste removed from all market sectors beyond the most basic children’s pop music. Everything else is now open and has developed its own ecosystem where it is effectively self-governing. As with any true democratisation it relies a little more from the end-user as one is no longer being spoon-fed ‘approved taste’ by Tin Pan Alley, Phil Spector, Motown, Atlantic, EMI, the BBC or whatever corporate or cultural elite. Be under no doubt, the “shared culture” you mention was very largely created and edited by corporate A&R men etc! These used to create, make and break music careers, now it is up to the band, artist or community themselves.

People who are interested still find what they want. I’d cite say ‘grime’, ‘drill’ etc as a prime example; a highly charged and highly political undercurrent of rap that is huge in the UK at present and exists amost entirely beyond any mainstream influence or control. For the first time the technology and distribution market exists for the very poorest and most disenfranchised in society to musically come out fighting without having to rely on any corporate types to nod approval or write a cheque anywhere.
 
Joe said:
Ah ! .... a man who's teenage loins were first stirred by "Take Three Girls " ?
Click to expand...
Might have been if the series existed in on TV here, which it didn't. Actually, I heard 'Once I Had a Sweetheart' once, on 'underground radio,' and I had to have it. Song has a truly lovely instrumental break, don't you know....
 
Sich said:
I was about to make the same point; the mainstream 'pop' market is an attempt by the majors to make some profit.
The industry is in uncharted waters and cannot be compared to 50 years ago.
Click to expand...
So we were better off when the big corporate tastemakers felt free to bring some sophistication to pop? Or felt they had to? Perhaps that word 'tastemakers' accords them too much myth. They rode waves as much as made them, surely. And of course wiped-out trying, a lot.
 
Last edited:
The worst music nowadays are those acoustic versions of rock songs like that 'Love will tear us apart' cover, and other such dross, its like the kids are rebelling against rebellion. Oh and the never ending stream of grime artists who have been giving us almost exactly the same thing for over a decade now, grime was a vital genre, but its gone on about a decade too long. Tbh musical genres move MUCH MUCH more slowly nowadays (you see so slowly I had to type it twice and capitalise it!). Look at the 60s - beat - pysch - hard rock within 5 years, and the same with soul music, by 1970 it was funk, then it was disco by '76. The 90s were the same as far as electronic music went, absolutely brilliant time for music, apart from the embarrassing Brit pop lot, I almost hate Brit pop as much as Ed Sheeran. There is probably excellent new music being produced nowadays, but I'm middle aged, so I'm buggered if I'm gonna bother looking for it. I haven't listened to a new song in almost 20 years, apart from the odd Rhianna or Beyoncé track that I jump around to in my stained pyjamas.
 
vuk said:
it doesn't take much of an argument. this is about POPULAR music. i've written about it a few times over the years and i think we are living out a cultural catastrophe.
Click to expand...

Yebbut you didn't even like the Beatles, ffs!
 
Tony L said:
The thing that amuses me here is what has happened to music is what you always seem to argue for politically, e.g. the all-powerful music moguls, corporate record labels and radio stations of the past have had their ability to shape taste removed from all market sectors beyond the most basic children’s pop music. Everything else is now open and has developed its own ecosystem where it is effectively self-governing. As with any true democratisation it relies a little more from the end-user as one is no longer being spoon-fed ‘approved taste’ by Tin Pan Alley, Phil Spector, Motown, Atlantic, EMI, the BBC or whatever corporate or cultural elite. Be under no doubt, the “shared culture” you mention was very largely created and edited by corporate A&R men etc! These used to create, make and break music careers, now it is up to the band, artist or community themselves.

People who are interested still find what they want. I’d cite say ‘grime’, ‘drill’ etc as a prime example; a highly charged and highly political undercurrent of rap that is huge in the UK at present and exists amost entirely beyond any mainstream influence or control. For the first time the technology and distribution market exists for the very poorest and most disenfranchised in society to musically come out fighting without having to rely on any corporate types to nod approval or write a cheque anywhere.
Click to expand...

tony.

you keep missing the central point (and reading things into what i am saying that are not teher): i agree that for individuals who are engaged and know how to find things, there is a lot more on offer. what i lament is collective cultural decline. it is not a political or economic argument at all -- that said, one could argue that the there us an effect of dumbing people down, which will have political consequences.
 
kjb said:
As far as cinema is concerned this is true if you only look at US cinema. There is plenty of high quality cinema being made elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...

i have been having trouble finding things over the past decade. it seems to me, there has been a decline, especially in europe. please feel free to correct me -- i am open to tips/suggestions.

For me a large part of the issue is that we're living through the greatest period of cultural imperialism since the 40s and 50s. My teenage kids live in a virtual USA. They watch USA films, watch USA tv shows, listen to USA music, track USA news ( even through UK outlets) and obsess about the evils of Trump.
Click to expand...

indeed. back to to the central topic here, one of the most annoying things is how american hip-hop is infiltrating african, caribbean and south american pop. not that i don't like hip-hop, but it's like pouring the same sauce over every meal.
 
vuk said:
i don't really like the beatles but it a mater of aesthetics, not quality of music.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how one would assess the quality of music without using aesthetics (or anaesthetics in the case of 'free' jazz), but I'm too thesis'd out (74,000 words, excluding footnotes!) to explore the matter here and now.
 
Joe Hutch said:
I'm not sure how one would assess the quality of music without using aesthetics (or anaesthetics in the case of 'free' jazz), but I'm too thesis'd out (74,000 words, excluding footnotes!) to explore the matter here and now.
Click to expand...

OK, saying aesthetics on its own was note correct. i don't like the barbershop quartet style of performing music. it is a matter of personal aesthetic preference, not "universal" aesthetics.
 
I just assume that if I like something recent, it isn't pop music. I haven't had any pretensions to being down with the kids since Queens of The Stone Age first went thermonuclear. When I do go and see a contemporary-ish band I like, White Denim, Wolf People or Graveyard, for example, most people there are my age, colour and gender. EDM and 1 Extra are impenetrable to me, and I'm glad they are. It means there's still some creative churn in those far younger.

NB: I still think my 23 year old niece that loves Muse is wrong, though and that The Mars Volta are way better. I just haven't found the right time to pick that particular argument.
 
There's been now't decent since Brit pop.... as far as genre goes anyway. About the only daytime radio music I've liked in many years is Lorde and Christian and the queens... oh and "Bullet proof" by LA Roux which sounds like early Depech Mode..
 
Whenever people start talking about the "quality" of music, you know they are talking about what they like or do not like.

So, anyone who has used that as a measure, I ask that you state the objective, agreed, criteria of musical "quality".
 
Cav said:
So, anyone who has used that as a measure, I ask that you state the objective, agreed, criteria of musical "quality".
Click to expand...

if you watch the video, he explains the various criteria used in a few studies. one example is a decline in timbral complexity.
 
vuk said:
you keep missing the central point (and reading things into what i am saying that are not teher): i agree that for individuals who are engaged and know how to find things, there is a lot more on offer. what i lament is collective cultural decline. it is not a political or economic argument at all -- that said, one could argue that the there us an effect of dumbing people down, which will have political consequences.
Click to expand...

My point is your ‘collective culture’ as far as pop music goes was only ever a manipulated illusion. Surely you get that? Even movements like punk grew from record labels and A&R men desperately trying to find their slice of the pie just as they had in the 50s and 60s. It always stemmed from one or two real innovative bands/artists playing underground clubs, e.g. Beatles, Hendrix, Pink Floyd, Sex Pistols or whatever, they were signed, had all the rough edges rubbed off by a top producer and were sold as product. Swiftly a scene arrived around their style as competing labels, A&R men etc desperately tried to get on that bandwagon by signing similar sounding acts and very actively pushing this manufactured scene as the ‘new youth culture’ or whatever. It was all about ‘getting signed’ as bands couldn’t afford to produce and promote product themselves with the tools available at that time. The prior mechanism was often for music to be created from scratch by moguls such as Phil Spector, Motown or whoever with the ‘artists’ as little more than performers singing songs that had written for them and wearing the clothes they had provided, the precursor for the ‘X-Factor’ thing of today, i.e. as manufactured and corporate as it gets! Some great music was made this way (Motown, Stax etc especially), but it was certainly manufactured as a corporate commodity.

I’d argue that since the house/techno culture of the late-80s onwards things have shifted very significantly, and in many ways for the better IMO. Obviously in that scene DJs still held huge power, but the actual product now existed far beyond the corporate mainstream (far more so than it did with punk) and as such so did what you would likely describe as a cultural narrative. Since this point control has shifted to the artists almost entirely, and as such there is no longer any centrally driven ‘scene’, which I assume is what you miss. I’d certainly argue that today’s music is far more intelligent and disparate with countless groups of people doing exactly what they want in their own self-controlled ecosystem rather than following any lead from outside or above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top