Topic: The change in music around 10-12 years ago... (Read 4424 times)

Original_Ken · « **Reply #10 on:** December 12, 2013, 06:30:25 PM »

Quote from: Skyline on December 12, 2013, 01:59:21 PM

I think this kind of statement is made in every generation.

The good music is still there. You just need to know where to look.

It's not "good music" that seems to be lacking, it is innovation.

On a 1970s FM Radio station, a disc jockey might play a Bob Dylan folk song followed by Bad Company hard rock followed by Jethro Tull prog rock. So, when they then played Mahavishnu Orchestra jazz-rock fusion, people said "wow what is that?".

In 2013, you could not have jazz-rock fusion start as a new genre (assuming hyptothetically it had not happened before), because Sirius XM has separate "jazz" and "rock" channels. If you are starting out as a musician, you want to have a personal identity based on your preferences, so you choose one of those Sirius XM sub-genres. If you are country, you have to choose between Classic Country, Outlaw Country, Country Rock or Bluegrass. Which means that the difference between your music and those who established those genres is going to be exceedingly small.

One of the biggest factors enforcing this situation is Pandora (and other recommendation software). If your playlist is Bob Dylan, Joni Mitchell and Johnny Cash, Pandora is never going to play Mahavishnu Orchestra. So, by "getting exactly what you want" - nothing new is ever going to happen - because "exactly what you want" can only be based on what you have done in the past.
In theory, there is nothing preventing a new group like Mahavishnu Orchestra from forming, but if it did - how would we know ? 7 Billion people can have 7 Billion web sites, each with their own personal music made on weekends. Or 7 Billion people can have their own "New Music Recommendation Blog". The only thing that makes any one rise above the rest is salesmanship...

Anaxilus · « **Reply #11 on:** December 12, 2013, 06:42:46 PM »

I think there is definitely a derth of quality output per capita as a general trend on the timeline of this discussion. I recall many hits as a kids being on albums that were either fantastic or completely listenable. Now you get one hit wonder albums pretty much all the time. The number of quality albums I think is very indicative.

There also seems to be mass targeting of children who are less experienced or critical of music quality, and easily influenced by the graphic aspect of of the music biz (videos). Same for movies. It's a huge cash cow now that wasn't exploited in past generations to the same extent.

There are exceptions and I still maintain the internet is making things better. For now...

Skyline · « **Reply #12 on:** December 12, 2013, 06:59:22 PM »

Quote from: Original_Ken on December 12, 2013, 06:30:25 PM

Quote from: Skyline on December 12, 2013, 01:59:21 PM
I think this kind of statement is made in every generation.

The good music is still there. You just need to know where to look.
It's not "good music" that seems to be lacking, it is innovation.

On a 1970s FM Radio station, a disc jockey might play a Bob Dylan folk song followed by Bad Company hard rock followed by Jethro Tull prog rock. So, when they then played Mahavishnu Orchestra jazz-rock fusion, people said "wow what is that?".

In 2013, you could not have jazz-rock fusion start as a new genre (assuming hyptothetically it had not happened before), because Sirius XM has separate "jazz" and "rock" channels. If you are starting out as a musician, you want to have a personal identity based on your preferences, so you choose one of those Sirius XM sub-genres. If you are country, you have to choose between Classic Country, Outlaw Country, Country Rock or Bluegrass. Which means that the difference between your music and those who established those genres is going to be exceedingly small.

One of the biggest factors enforcing this situation is Pandora (and other recommendation software). If your playlist is Bob Dylan, Joni Mitchell and Johnny Cash, Pandora is never going to play Mahavishnu Orchestra. So, by "getting exactly what you want" - nothing new is ever going to happen - because "exactly what you want" can only be based on what you have done in the past.
In theory, there is nothing preventing a new group like Mahavishnu Orchestra from forming, but if it did - how would we know ? 7 Billion people can have 7 Billion web sites, each with their own personal music made on weekends. Or 7 Billion people can have their own "New Music Recommendation Blog". The only thing that makes any one rise above the rest is salesmanship...

I don't factor radio in as part of the discussion. I can't control what other people broadcast and how they classify the stuff that they play. None of that really interests me. I stopped listening to the radio as soon as large portable music collections became easy to carry around.

There are still plenty of artists breaking new ground and bending genres. Go listen to Dirty Projectors and tell me what genre they fit into. I dare you. Sure, you could listen to a group like this and start throwing out their influences, but that's always been true. Dylan's influences are obvious...he was a downright thief as he openly admits. That never caused anyone to accuse him of a lack of innovation (actually several people have accused him of just this, but they're all full of hot air). All music is derivative to some extent unless, but there are still plenty of groups out there that take their influences in completely new and unexplored directions.

We may be running out of sub-genres classify the music we're hearing, but that doesn't mean there aren't new sounds out there. There are. We just do our best to force them into categories that already exist, even when this isn't appropriate.

As I said in my original post, if you're looking to the radio to find them, then you're looking in the wrong places.

Questhate · « **Reply #13 on:** December 12, 2013, 07:26:22 PM »

I dunno -- I kinda assumed popular music was the actual discussion here. Obviously you can find great music anywhere.

But as Anax pointed out, the corporate control over avenues of music consumption are weakening as people find other ways to discovery new music. That's why you find blog bands all over alternative radio nowadays.

Original_Ken · « **Reply #14 on:** December 12, 2013, 08:27:49 PM »

Dirty Projectors is Indie. Could also be played on any of the SiriusXM "alternative" genre channels. No big surprise that they worked with David Byrne.

Whenever anyone says "these guys are bending genres", it is always Indie/Alternative.

Why is a 20-something musician playing a guitar in 2013 ? In the 1950s and 60s, "rock and roll" was a disposable dance music, the instrumentation was chosen to be loud and to break with the established popular music of soothing jazzy singers.

I cringe when I see official ribbon cutting events accompanied by a local band of 65-year olds playing "Johnny B. Goode".

One of the most disappointing turn of events IMHO was "The White Stripes". When Cobain died, there was a general consensus that rock had died with him - and that was a good thing, but unfortunately none of us anticipated the appeal of an endless chain of musicians who want to do exactly the same thing as the musical artists they grew up with.

Skyline · « **Reply #15 on:** December 12, 2013, 08:53:44 PM »

Quote from: Original_Ken on December 12, 2013, 08:27:49 PM

Dirty Projectors is Indie. Could also be played on any of the SiriusXM "alternative" genre channels. No big surprise that they worked with David Byrne.

Whenever anyone says "these guys are bending genres", it is always Indie/Alternative.

Why is a 20-something musician playing a guitar in 2013 ? In the 1950s and 60s, "rock and roll" was a disposable dance music, the instrumentation was chosen to be loud and to break with the established popular music of soothing jazzy singers.

I cringe when I see official ribbon cutting events accompanied by a local band of 65-year olds playing "Johnny B. Goode".

One of the most disappointing turn of events IMHO was "The White Stripes". When Cobain died, there was a general consensus that rock had died with him - and that was a good thing, but unfortunately none of us anticipated the appeal of an endless chain of musicians who want to do exactly the same thing as the musical artists they grew up with.

Okay, Dirty Projectors are "Indie". Have you heard anything like it before? Would it qualify as innovative by your standards? If not, then I guess we just see things differently.

Besides, "Indie" isn't a real genre. This is why people have started putting sub-labels on it. Oh, this is Indie Rock. No, this is Indie Folk. Or in the case of Dirty Projectors, this is Indie...

I'm one of the biggest Nirvana fans you'll find. But no, rock did not die with Cobain. And no, Nirvana was not entirely groundbreaking or original. They simply took a form of music that already existed (Seattle grunge scene)and pushed it to the mainstream. Yes, it changed popular music as we know it, but it wasn't necessarily inventive or new. They just made people aware of what was already out there and they were able to do so because Cobain was so incredibly gifted. Of course, there's a whole other crowd out there that will dismiss Cobain outright and point to Eddie Vedder instead.

Not really sure what the beef is with The White Stripes. They are mimicking Nirvana because they're loud and unpolished? Jack White is far more influenced by the blues masters of the past than by anything Nirvana did.

Now if you want to be a baby like Jack White and complain about The Black Keys ripping off the White Stripes, THEN you would have a valid point. Some of their early stuff is practically indistinguishable.

As a side not, Ken, I hope you know that I'm enjoying this conversation and am not trying to put down your perspective. I know a lot of people that would agree with you. Just wanted to make sure that was clear since I'm pretty new here as a poster.

Now, I await your response.

Original_Ken · « **Reply #16 on:** December 12, 2013, 09:30:00 PM »

The beef with The White Stripes is that they revived a dead and archaic art form.

As I mentioned above "Why is a 20-something musician playing a guitar in 2013 (or 1999 for that matter) ? In the 1950s and 60s, "rock and roll" was a disposable dance music, the instrumentation was chosen to be loud and to break with the established popular music of soothing jazzy singers."

To me "classic rock" is contradictory. Tutti Fruiti and Johnny B. Goode are not brilliant compositions, they were vehicles for expressing something about the 1950s (as clarified in the film Pleasantville). Doing guitar music now is just a "historical re-enactment" - like those guys who dress up as Union and Confederacy soldiers and re-enact Gettysburg.

I think this is a down side of "recording". In the past, only the best art survived for decades, because it took many hours of work to learn and perform one Beethoven symphony. So, no one listens to all the crap music of 1800. Same with Shakespeare versus the crap authors of 500 years ago.

Nowadays, everything of the past 50 years is available and hdtracks even has high res versions of music that no one should ever listen to again, like Foreigner.

Apparently, we are now in a weird sci-fi movie where all future generations are doomed to re-enact the last half of the 20th Century over and over....

Stapsy · « **Reply #17 on:** December 12, 2013, 10:00:49 PM »

That is silly. How can you dismiss all music because they use instruments that are not "new"? Is Chopin's contribution to music any less than Bach's because he wrote it 100+ years later? I either completely disagree with what you are saying or I don't quite grasp your argument.

As much as I hate to use the word evolve in this context, music is about evolution not revolution. There is nothing that comes out and blasts away everything that was done before. Maybe in the mainstream that happens, but nobody has ever come along and smashed the mould. It is a gradual process of innovation that leads to the genre's we now have. Trying to place everything into a category limits your perception of what music is. I despise the grunge movement, it does not appeal to me musically in any way, however I respect it as a movement. I would be more upset at them for killing glam rock and paving the way for nu metal than I am at the White Stripes for playing innovative music inspired by the blues. I don't see the White Stripes as a catalyst for shitty music

Anaxilus · « **Reply #18 on:** December 12, 2013, 10:01:21 PM »

I'm not sure we have to be locked or frozen into a particular era once it's over. Swing came back which was fine by me. Should the FCC have imprisoned and executed Amy Winehouse before she could 'pollute' the airways? I assume 'guitar music' is fine as long as it's Latin? Is it okay that Tori Amos uses a Harpsicord? I personally don't mind the White Stripes (or Foreigner) and find them more melodic than most of the popular music that grinds my gears over the past decade.

Some feel Cobain essentially tried to kill Rock. I'm more of a STP/Smashing Pumpkins guy myself anyway.

As for the 1800s, that was the industrialization of the western world and major wars across the globe were devouring human populations like candy. Art tends to suffer in such periods.

But on a serious not Ken, I need you to help me understand something. I just want to know what love is!!

Marvey · « **Reply #19 on:** December 12, 2013, 10:17:19 PM »

Quote from: Anaxilus on December 12, 2013, 10:01:21 PM

Should the FCC have imprisoned and executed Amy Winehouse before she could 'pollute' the airways?

Well almost yes. The FCC should have imprisoned the the producers who went to such extents to copy that motown sound of yesteryear, including the low-fidelity effect. Unrestricted from the confines of her studio recordings, she was even more awesome, even while drugged-up, slurring her words, and forgetting the lyrics.

Author Topic: The change in music around 10-12 years ago... (Read 4424 times)

Original_Ken

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Anaxilus

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Skyline

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Questhate

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Original_Ken

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Skyline

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Original_Ken

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Stapsy

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Anaxilus

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

Marvey

Re: The change in music around 10-12 years ago...

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Author Topic: The change in music around 10-12 years ago... (Read 4424 times)