Please see the reflection on this video here - ruclips.net/video/p0flDyhE3RE/видео.html Most people did not get that this video was about how various biases affect our perception of quality and indeed our own memories.
I know this video wasn't about this (I did get it), it's just occurred to me that the 2015 #1 was Uptown Funk, which is pop through and through, but I actually think is good music, I would have liked to hear the judgement on that.
Sorry, but 'I want to hold you're hand' is a masterpiece. One of the most clever written songs ever, with a unique chord progression, well pasted and a great emotional peak. An absolute classic. Beethoven wrote a lot, but what was his greatest invention? Dadada Dam, Dadada Dam. Simple is not bad. Or is Fried Chicken bad food, cause it's simple?
A lot of musicians still play physical instruments and write their own music; it's not an isolated case. Some examples include Red Vox, Scale the Mountain, Shmu, and a whole lot of others out there.
I'd like to start off saying I appreciate where you're coming and agree that we all have a bias towards things we are familiar with. I often hear a lot of criticism regarding modern music for not having real musicians being featured in tracks and that the music production featured in most of modern music requires no talent. I can tell you as a musician originally coming from the metal scene where I was sponsored by guitar companies and later moving to electronically driven music, they both required immense skill and dedication . Rock, metal and pop music from the 80s and 90s (and before) have such an amazing quality to them and as listeners we have come to appreciate the artists talent to play parts, construct great progressions and memorable melodies. What I've noticed when fans of music from those decades hear a lot of modern music are complaints for how simple the progressions are or how the music requires no real talent to make. I've often seen guitarists online play modern pop songs basically clowning on the songs to show the simplicity. But the skill set required to make modern sounding music is less about crazy progression and scales and more about sound design, which is an entirely different skill and one that isn't widely recognized by the public. A lot of people hear a synth or bass line in Deadmau5 song (for example) and think how simple the progression is and that the computer is doing all the work. When in reality Joel (Deadmau5) probably spent hours or sometimes days creating the sound of one of the synths from a simple wave form. There is no doubt a huge shift happening right now from modern music and the great music from the 60s,70s, 80s, 90s, 00s but there is a lot of skill to appreciate from electronic production. Any one who doubts that I encourage to get a DAW and some VST'S and try recreating some electronic songs. I'll stress again that it's less about recreating the notes and more about recreating the sound of the synths or the tightness of the drum mix. I will also add that I am not the biggest fan of modern radio pop music, just wanted to give a different perspective to people. If you're looking for some innovative modern guitar music check out Animals As Leader or CHON also if you're looking for modern pop music that isn't garbage check out Great Good Fine OK, Penguin Prison and Miami Horror to name a few.
Nirvana, Chilli Peppers, Green Day, SubLime, OffSpring, Tool, Quicksand, Toadies, Soundgarden, Sytem Of The Down, Tom Petty, Sugar Ray, Limp Bizkit, Lenny Kravitz, Everclear, Beastie Boys, Guns and Roses, Presidents, Third Eye Blind, Live, No Doubt , Soul Asylum, Puddle Of Mudd, I could go on and on- the 90's Rocked! 😁✌ I just found this old video of yours.
You skipped over "To Sir, With Love." That is a provocative song about growing up. "The Way We Were" is about memories of all the good things of a relationship. Just forget that Babs sang it.
I'm 12. This generation sucks. The huge legends like Frank Sinatra, David Bowie, Elvis Presley, or Freddie Mercury have been replaced by scumbag artists like Justin Bieber, Nicki Minaj, or Lil Wayne. Sometimes the only good music comes from videogames.
All y'all need to calm down and listen to the certain good music that comes out each year. It's easy for me to find good music each year so if it's easy for me it should be for you.
Hey David, thanks for this analysis - very informative. On the subject of The Beatles specifically, you might want to check out this documentary. It’s presented by Howard Goodall, a classically trained musician and TV/film composer. He explores the strengths of The Beatles as composers and songwriters from a technical perspective here. He’s also done a series on the history and development of music which is well worth a watch. ruclips.net/video/ZQS91wVdvYc/видео.html
The difference really is that in the 70ties the good music was in the mainstream and heard by the masses (among some garbage, of course), whereas the mainstream music became entirely plastic pop-garbage these days, and one has to search hard for good music.
+Oliver Mattausch Here's the thing. Going from the let's say 50s and into the late 90s you had the many different radio stations and you had the lack of the internet. That meant that the stations wanted the best of the best it meant it was not just about sells about being really good. Enter the internet and well what you find on the radio these days is about does it SELL not is it GOOD. The internet was good and bad for music. It's good because we can get away from the crap and find what we like. Bad because the big labels don't want to take chances any more on new acts. Then again it may be way independent labels are growing more.
Oliver Mattausch : Here's where the conversation steers itself into the ditch. The mainstream music that's on the TV, the radio and on the awards shows IS the music of the era. For people who dig out stuff you like on RUclips: the fact that you have to dig for it proves our point. Mr Mattauch is absolutely correct! For a tiebreaker, it's millennials who discover 80's music on SUPERNATURAL, GTA, etc...who validate our assessment. Why do the 80's stand out? Because that was era where MUSIC VIDEOS came into being. Notice the uploaded here keeps referring to "albums"? In fact he's reaching back to the era of SINGLES, ala 45rpm vinyl discs. That's where the phrase "B-side" comes from. The people who fixated on albums back in the day were sort of an underground fan base, (think GRATEFUL DEAD, here). They imagined that Morrison, Garcia, Neil Young and whoever took the stage at WOODSTOCK were somehow plugged into the "great universal consciousness". They were/are the people who thought Jim Morrison was speaking with gods voice. In other words, the eccentric fringe audience.
The Masses have never been pressured to understand what makes something like Music, great. They simply follow the next blind follower for the Trend of the Day or Flavor of the Week, and go with that. No one seems to be honest with themselves when it comes to personal taste. It's almost like they have to seek approval whether they like something or not. It's a goddamn shame.
Because that's human nature, unfortunately. If you want to survive and reproduce, you have to play along with the rest of the pack, at the expense of personal authenticity.
I like listening to Jazz and blues, thanks to underground hiphop. But my siblings is laughing at me for listening to such songs when the artist they listen is more laughable. They laughed at me for listening to Miles Davis or Duke Ellington while they are listening to another generic pop singer like Miley Cyrus.
As someone who grew up listening to Hip-Hop like Eminem, 2Pac and Biggie, I like all sorts of music aside from those three. I like Aerosmith, Metallica, Frank Sinatra, Johnny Cash, Bob Dylan as well as classical music. Even in the genres I like there is good music and bad music in them. It's all a matter of taste.
Today's music specially the mainstream rap just sets trends. The fucking dab, what ever rain drop and drop top mean, people just saying gang gang gang, people doing the whip. This is *CANCER*. Almost everybody at school just thinks that whenever you say rock you mean emo. They call metallica death metal, fucking *DEATH* metal. WTF
To me, music, movies, and other media artists have lost creativity (for the most part). It seems hard for the mainstream industry to be original with new ideas, like in the 60's, 70's, & 80's, so, many do reboots, re-imaginings, and remakes. To us it seems to have all been done, but truly, many lack creativity. Moreover, to me it seems that talented musicians took a backseat to programmed electronics, and vocalists with a wide range took a back seat to monotone simplicity.
If you have a half dozen people given writing credit for your song (besides yourself), and you're a solo artist, you may not actually have much talent. We have R&B, Hip Hop and Pop songs that have like 20 people listed for contributing to the song. At this point you get the impression that a bunch of suits sat in a room and looked for a formula to make the most money off of, as long as it was paired with an "artist" with the right look. The song is no longer the focus, it's more like a glorified advertisement for a consumer product based on a meticulously designed persona/image. Pop music has always had a degree of commercial marketing to it, but if the performer had actual talent, then it didn't detract much from the product. Michael Jackson could team up with Pepsi or some other company, which made him look like a bit of a sellout, but his music and ability to perform were at a high enough level that we could overlook it.
And let's not forget that Hip Hop frequently uses 'borrowed' melodies from other songs... and then rants profanity-laced, forced-rhyming, grammatical nonsense in a staccato monotone.
@@Midnight65883 In the early 2000's there were bands that were still around like Blink 182, New Found Glory, Good Charlotte, Sum 41, etc. and even though they weren't really rock and were more punk/pop punk they still wrote songs with many creativity and have talent in to their music skills unlike these new pop/rap artists like Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande, Lil Pump, etc. That music is ASS.
I get your point, there was always junk on mainstream .But you are forgetting that the amount of junk has been growing exponentially since 2000. I personally don´t remember the last time I´ve heard a good mainstream song. And if you surf through the 70´s to the 90´s you will find a tonne of them
I go back and forth - I remember how horrible the 90s were, but then I hear some of the crap that goes mainstream now, which sounds like it was written by and for people with room temperature IQs, and I think things have gotten at least a bit worse. I also think the prime pop music market has shifted to younger audiences that have less capacity to understand complexity, since they are more willing to buy music and do the things that generate revenue for what is left of the music industry. I've seen some data that points that way.
I don´t think the 90´s were that horrible. The first half was dominated by the grunge scene which was a very creative and crazy period. Then through the whole decade you find some very solid bands making other genres. Off course there was a lot of garbage around like boys and girls band and shit like that but you would still find very good music playing daily on the radio. Stuff with creativity. Nowadays, it´s just sellout crap.
Even the bad music from the 90’s has artistic merit. It wasn’t necessarily aesthetically pleasing, but the artistry was clear and the people behind the scenes were obviously professionals.
I'm 37. Most of the obscure bands I listened to during the 90's, many still making albums now, seem to have turned to the pop formulas of their genres. It's kind of saddening. I have never been against growing and changing style. In fact I like it when they do it. I don't want them to sound the same on every album, but at the same time I don't want them to sound like every other song on the radio. Only a handful peak my interest over the years and I rarely find anything new I like. No distinctive catchy melodies. I started traveling backwards listening to the songs I missed out on like green eyed lady and dark star. I feel like music is going backwards in creativity.
Joshua Garden I was born in 1991 and I think grunge is trash, along with New Metal. So I agree with him that the 90's were mostly horrible. I can only find good music today in the so called indie Hip Hop scene, since they try to make more melodic songs with actual lyrics. Not just a 3 second loop stretched on 3 minutes with someone condoning greed, crime and casual sex over it. And that is because I only listened to Metal before, so the mainstream can really make you think bad of styles by misrepresenting them.
100%. Pop music has gotten so bad over the past 2 decades, it's a DISGRACE for real musicians, who die hard for the music, for their craft and musicianship. I myself am VERY ashamed of being a musician, a songwriter, producer because all these money grubbing douchebags ruin it all for us.
Necrophilic Excretion actually pop just got good again. Kesha, Lady Gaga, Lana Del Rey, Lorde, and arguably Katy Perry are actually making good records now (as opposed to their earlier works). So you have to ask yourself, is pop bad or is it that its just not for you? Pop songs are meant to be happy and fun, its not like rock which is more meaningful and serious. In pop, the emotion behind the main tune is the main factor. The lyrics are also more about poignancy than poetry. If its a good tune, and the lyrics are decent, then its good pop. Now I can name quite a few pop records this year that have decent to good lyrics and high quality instrumentation, but if you look at it like its a rock song then you're just expecting a fish to climb a tree or calling a skittle bad because it doesnt taste like a steak. For one, I think you should try the new Feist album out. Its folk pop (you know, that sound taylor swift butchers every other year), but I think you'll like it. Has a bit of a kinks vibe to it imo.
No, they aren't lol. Kesha, Feist, and Lorde have made ridiculously good albums this year. Stop swallowing the shit these other guys are trying to feed you and go make your own opinion. There's nothing wrong with a fun song. Dont act like some beacon of creativity when you can only comprehend one narrow genre of music.
Liam Burke i made my own opinion. They fucking suck. Stop Being the sheep that accepts any kind of crap the mainstream puts out. Oh wait it's not an opinion it's a fact.
Your familiarity theory is not how I experienced music. I was a teenager in the 90ties but hate 90ties music. It was horrible - either depressing grunge, annyoing brit-pop or stupid techno music. I always liked 60ties, 70ties, and 70ties music (Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Pink Floyd, Santana, Hendrix etc.). Then again, some good music was released from the early 2000ths when electronic music became well developed (Infected Mushroom, Carbon-based Lifeforms, Solar Fields etc.).
+Oliver Mattausch I actually like Infected Mushroom - one of the few EDM-type bands I find interesting. And I was the same way in the 90s. BUT! I still think the perception of music getting worse is a common one, and I believe it is because people have a bias toward what they were first exposed to. Obviously not everyone is going to be that way.
The meaning of grunge was nihilism. Hair metal was cheesy, but at least it was fun. Thankfully the "Brit Pop" movement in the mid 90's made music enjoyable again.
Same here, it really all died in the early '90s when rap, dance-hip hop and grunge alternative became mainstream which really said it all for the future of music and that is it'll only get worst as the years pass. And I was right.
Andrew Dexter You are so right. Good music died in the 1990's but you could see the winds of change start to blow in the very late 80's when the ghetto and the seattle sound garbage started to get pushed to the forefront and all the talented artists were pushed aside and later pushed way in the background entirely.
Well yeah there was always rubbish around in every decade but back in the sixties and seventies when I was growing up even the junk had something memorable about it. A catchy hook or a distinctive vocal that remained in your head, Today though none of the pop songs stay with you. The decline of melody is one of the saddest things about music of the last twenty years.
They didn't have protools, synths or autotune back then, so they more or less had to rely on decent singers and real instruments, even for crappy pop music. What was considered bad pop music in the 60s and 70s, could probably be considered good music nowadays, and probably appealing in a retro way. I'll take "Seasons in the Sun" over Ed Sheeran, or any of these current "folk" artists (overpolished acoustic guitars and cringy throaty vocal style with too much delay effect) any day of the week. While new technology can make a mediocre song sound better, it can also make it sound worse)
I disagree with the conservative bias point you made... I have an appreciation for 80's music... and 60's music... and those were both 1 and 3 decades before I was born... I also hated "old" music when I was younger, so I never catalogued it as being good. I mean the reality is that mainstream pop music back in the 80's were objectively better. Even by objectively measurable standards... such as musicians used to be, on average, much older than the average musician today who is typically in their late teens or early 20's... pop culture and music is being produced by children/young adults, promoted by children/young adults, being performed by children/young adults, targeted mainly at children/young adults... music and pop culture in general has been dumbed down and infantilized
This is the industry's fault for not creating hardware in music. Something you can actually touch and feel is said to be of value, rather than something you artificially upload into a computer somewhere. Also, musicians nowadays are forced into an informal economy, an economy where there is no actual wealth creation, an economy where the artist has to sing for there meal. This is fine if you're young, but if you want time to grow old, to have a family, to generate wealth, you want royalties. This is where the screw up is, and also, this is why there is no new music nowadays. Before the 2000's according to the IRS, there were over 300,000 musicians making over 100,000 a year, when napster hit, this whole class went away and has been stagnant now for over a decade. It's flusted the music economy into a zipf curve, or in science called, a long tail, where there are few winners, and a vast sea of losers, where the winners benefit tremendously, and the losers earn nothing. Want you actually want, to sustain an industry, is a bell distribution, or a bell curve, where there is actually a strong number in the middle, this was true before the explosion of the internet among other things.
The only good music I remember from the early 2000s (on the pop charts anyway) was Queens of the Stone Age, White Stripes, and the Strokes. Maybe Jet. They were exceptions to the overall rule, though. The late 90s/early 2000s were TERRIBLE for popular music. 1994-1996 was the last great time for pop.
Give me anything from before the computer age and I can listen to it. I detest music of today and I finally figured out what is wrong with it. It is artificial and no one has to be a master at their instruments. It's all computerized. Good example is megadeth listen to their original albums then listen to the clean up that Dave did to all his albums. It's the same music but the perfection computerized clean up takes away from the flair of the original recordings.
Lol I posted that before finishing your video, I'm glad you touched on that..... ....but I think that's what's really wrong with music more so than the novelty you speak of. I can listen to anything from black metal to the Beatles or even nirvana....mind you as a metal head in the late 80 to 90s I didn't like them till after his death because like you said I didn't get hooked to the novelty ride away since I was comparing the style to say guns and roses, Mötley Crüe, ACDC, Zeppelin, sabbath or Metallica...sepultura...slayer...Danzig, ect, ect. I started listening to the grungy stuff some time after I discovered white zombie and NIN. In my 20s started listening to stuff I had not and started liking stuff like Bon jovi. Stuff that as a teen would be uncool to listen to cause teen reasons. Once I started playing guitar seriously I even got in to classical music. So as a lover of a diverse amount of music. I can honestly say that computers tool have made music crap. Even if you listen to say rap of today vs rap at is roots it's just so different. I can go even further chase you know girls....if you listen to a Britney Spears album of the 90s vs one of today. You can tell the difference. Music with out mistakes, proficiancy, talent, and rawness is just stale.
+John christopher Yeah I don't really care for most of the Megadeth re-masters. That highly compressed "modern" sound robs a lot of the subtlety from the music, especially on Rust in Peace, which is actually a quite dynamic metal album.
@@QazwerDave I suppose we do. Musicians are not as talented as they once were, perhaps it is because of the movement away from instrumental music into the realm of electronic music. I am not saying that there are no talented musicians at all, just that they are much less common. I have music production software and ANYONE can shit out music there with just a keyboard and mouse. I use instruments with the software, but instrument proficiency is not required as I can edit any mistakes with the click of a button (I am legitimately good at the piano and guitar). Not very many can pick up an instrument and play it properly today. In my opinion the pop music today is much less profound lyrically and musically, no doubt in my mind. It is mass produced by insecure teenagers because they can do it on their home computer. People can't sing anymore either. Popular artists are not musicians, they are insecure, immature teenagers at best. The Beatles were profoundly more talented than today's pop artists and they were still garbage musicians. Yes garbage has existed for years, but there are twice as many people living now than there were in the 70's and technology has crippled the interest in real instruments for young people in many regards (NOT ALL). Tool I would say is a great example of great musicianship in the modern age, there are more, but that is the best example that comes to mind. They are a no bullshit band. Those are few and far between now and then but definitely more so now than then.
@@zaksmith3304 I think that while the percentage of shit, especially in the pop music scene, has undoubtebly gone streadily upwards along side techonogical inovation and proliferation, I do think that the number of talented musicians, as well as their actual level, have never been higher than right now, also this spurred on, at least partly, by technology. Learning an instrument has never been easier, and resources like youtube in overflowing with sources for learning and mastery. There are people today doing things never seen before, simply because everyone can see what all of their colleagues are doing and how they're doing it. Rivals are pushing each other from the other side of the globe.
The only thing worse than a jazz or a classical snob is a metal snob. There is nothing wrong with simple music. Making music is like making food, it only takes a few of the right ingredients to make something sublime (think a salted steak). To continue the analogy, the problem with Top40 pop is like making a dish with all food substitutes. It is like cooking Tofurkey with cheap knock off margarine and Sweet 'n' Low. It has no soul. And some people will lazily consume whatever shit is shoveled in front of them. What makes music great is that same X factor that makes great food great. You know it when you experience it, but there is no way to explain it. Complexity in music can be great (Bach is a great example). Much like Indian food, you can add many ingredients and end up with art. But mindlessly complex music has the same effect of just throwing the whole pantry into a blender. To that effect, much of metal, while technically impressive, is just mindless guitar wanking. Not all of it of course, there is some great metal. But 9 times out of 10 when I hear a metalhead shitting on "simple music", they're all about guitar wanking. Pop, in and of itself, isn't bad. Most pop is bad because pop is catchy, and the accountants that run record companies want catchy to move their otherwise dull product. So it is less about most pop music being bad, and more about most soulless corporate music being pop.
Some really near sighted and limited opinions applied on way too broad a base. Pop music and repetitive music "sucks" to intelligent people who require more complex music? While music today sucks, it has nothing to do with simplicity, or repetition, but rather a lack of any sort of relatable connection to life in the subject matter except for self indulgence and self destruction,whether it is money, drugs, or sex. Superficiality is much different than simplicity.There are people who only think of these simple things 24/7, and people who don't. There you go.
100 % agreed. Complexity doesnt make something good. Relateabilty, feeling, soul, meaninging, emotion do imo. Todays music has none of those things which is why it sucks.
It's funny, back then Michael Jackson was considered a dancing machine, now I look at all these popular brain dead dances and ask myself what happened!!??
And it gets worse: The kids today don't even know anymore, what music COULD sound like. When they eventually start making music, they start out with a very limited musical vocabulary, which of course leads to even poorer music to emerge from the young generation. Just take young singers: They all sound the same, because there's only one singing style left, that's the R'n'B style, that everybody imitates these days. Since this music is so omnipresent, they neither get to hear anything different, nor will they be able to find their own unique way for constant bombardment with the same crap over and over again!
Love Me Do may not have many sections but what it does have is a soulful performance, incredible harmonies, an epic harmonica section, and an incredible groove. Love Me Do is definitely on par with their later work. It would be incorrect to say that The Beatles progressed. Their r&b phase was just as groundbreaking and their psychedelic rock phase. I Wanna Hold Your hand is not pop, it's rhythm and blues. "The Way We Were, that sucked" If you seriously think Barbara is not a good singer and that the string arrangement was not good, you're insane. My Sharona is a great groove, lot's of cool rhythmic things happening between the guitars and the drums. George Michael is an amazing singer and Wham! was one of the best artists of 80s pop. I hate Ke$ha too but Alicia Keys is actually decent and The Black Eyed Peas are a great dance group. Usher is an incredible singer. The White Album is more like a 4 star album. "Spice Girls was the top album of 1997" Deservedly so, it's an amazing record with incredible vocal harmonies, they took what they learned from Wilson Phillips and En Vogue and brought it to a massive audience by combining it with the sounds of what was modern hip-hop at the time, brilliant work. "There are artists out there who can actually sing without autotune" Like SPICE GIRLS, there was no autotune on the first two records. 'That level of practice is missing from a lot of artists more recently" No argument there. Totally agree. I think the best composer of the Baroque was Jacquet de la Guerre and the worst was Jean-Baptiste Lully. The Galant style is just flat out boring, let's just keep it real. I love atonal music too. I don't like black metal but I love death metal. Ace of Base, while not as groundbreaking as Nirvana, knew how to make great dance songs. They were very well put together and a huge influence on later styles such as reggaeton. A lot of the music that you say is not very complex may not be so in a harmonic ,melodic, or lyrical way but are definitely so in a rhythmic way. A good example is disco, a lot of people like to give disco a lot of flack but the truth is that a lot of it had amazing drumming, bass work, and percussion. The syncopation and driving counter rhythms are what get you to the dance floor ( a lot of these rhythms have afro-cuban and columbian roots). In terms of the argument of new music getting worse. I look at the billboard charts of the 70s and 80s and I'd say about 70-80% of the songs are good. I look at the billboard charts from the 2000s and 2010s and I find only about 20-30% of it to be good. I was born in 1993.
I think Streisand is egotistical beeyatch, but "The Way We Were" was a lovely romantic tune. And let's look at groups like Tears for Fears, with songs like "Shout" and "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" which are still popular with a large audience to this day. There was so much variety in the older pop music. Now it all sounds the same. And that's been scientifically demonstrated several times over the past couple years!
What many don't realize regarding pop music, which on the surface appears simplistic, is that there is a great level of complexity to simplicity. In a way, it's the art of making something sound good out of very little. For example, music that is considered highly complexed uses many musical notes, and in that lies its appeal. But the appeal of simplistic pop music is that it is catchy, creating hooks out of very few notes. Ironically that isn't as simple as it sounds. That, in my opinion, is why pop music is perennially popular over most highly complexed styles of music, such as jazz or classical. It is melodic structure over rhythmic structure. The melodic structure of pop music is rhythmic, whilst more complexed styles rely on using all the notes available for its effectiveness. But, more isn't necessarily better. So we have to ask ourselves the question, if the music we criticise so much is that bad, why is it so popular? I think the more musically knowledgeable we are, the more we tend to look down on music that appears to operate on a musical skill level below what we perceive as highly skilled, and yet that is not what seems to attract most people musically speaking. It's a musical arrogance and snobbery of sorts, and this blinds us to the attractive and effective simplicity (which again isn't that simple) of pop music.
I think modern music doesn't suck,but the good modern music has been overshadowed by mediocre pop singer's and overrated bands,some good modern bands are Bloc Party,The War On Drugs,MGMT,Tame Impala,Passion Pit,Klaxons,Two Door Cinema Club,Editors,Atlas Genius,The Killers,The Strokes,Mac Demarco,Kendrick Lamar,Tyler The Creator,and Childish Gambino
The short answer is, *'NO.'* The great musicians haven't gone anywhere but it's far harder to get support. This is true for all performing arts (I'm a puppeteer and a lot of my friends are musicians) It's harder than ever to get audiences to turn out to your show and harder than ever to get paid to perform. Getting to be a great musician is a long process. Back in the 80's & 90's I remember how easy it was to pack a local music venue with a band you never heard of. Ten months later that band would be huge. (This happened for me with Green Day, No Doubt, Zebrahead, Smashmouth, etc--not that any of those bands were phenomenal but they got big through live performance) If you can't get traction within the first year, it becomes much harder to keep up the passion. One of my favorite bands (Remy Zero) couldn't find traction even after multiple hits and ultimately dissolved after three albums. I know at least six bands filled with great musicians who struggled for a couple years and then gave up on the third year. Art and music are free everywhere you go and that lowers the value of great art and music. No one can afford to split part time work and also be a musician. At some point you have to give up and get a 'real job' and that means great musicians are not making it to the big time. Just the corporate, studio crap put together by marketers. So, using The Beatles as an example; what if _Love Me, Do_ or _I Wanna Hold Your Hand_ never hit? They were good enough in the 60's to grab attention because there wasn't that much else. No competing entertainment. No Netflix or Internet. There was plenty of other great music at the time but not enough (And not free-enough) to drown out _I Wanna Hold Your Hand_ So, imagine a world with no big hit for The Beatles early on. No Rubber Soul afterwards and no Sgt. Pepper's. The Beatles just gave up after a few albums because they just couldn't get the traction. I think that's the way it is for _LOTS_ of great bands now. People with passion and talent who put in the work and time but aren't rewarded for it at all. It feels like throwing all that time and energy into an empty void. And then you see Drake. He gets huge and you can't even really consider it "music". That shit is demoralizing. I think those are the main problems.
+Mareșalul Alexandru Averescu. Listen to the earoh East coast black new jack swing r&b of the late 80's early 90's, new edition, Guy, Rene, Tribe Called Quest and tons of other main and not so mainstream. Listen to the instruments, beats and poetic flow. They just don't make it like that anymore, it's sad.
I guess you do have a point. Personally, I feel that music as a whole is moving in a direction that I wholeheartedly dislike, where most (if not all) of the instruments are being "played" by a computer program instead of a real person. Take Taylor Swift and Fall Out Boy for example -- their older stuff was pretty good because they had real people playing instruments on their tracks, but when you look at their most recent albums, the only real non-programmed instrument you hear is the vocals, and those are generally tweaked and layered to hell. Guitar has been replaced by electronic tones and strings, while the entire percussion track has been reduced to a standard bass note and ELECTRONIC CLAPS. Like, they can't even use real claps. As someone who actually plays music, it angers me on such an emotional level when I tell people that a newer Fall Out Boy / Taylor Swift song doesn't have any actual instruments in it, and they point me to the Wikipedia page like, "Look, here's the guitarist and bassist and drummer listed right here on the band page." Yeah, but that entire album is comprised of nothing but programmed keys and strings, electronic claps, a fake bass kick, and tons of vocal layering. No one sat down to play and record the guitar or drums for those tracks. And sure, they need touring instrumentalists, because no one would go see Fall Out Boy if it was just the dude singing while his laptop played the songs in the background. For the last century we've had popular musicians and bands that have inspired people to pick up instruments and learn them. You had The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Who, Pink Floyd, AC/DC, Rush, Def Leppard, U2, Metallica, Iron Maiden, The Police, Pearl Jam, Oasis, etc, all very popular bands of the last half-century, all of which inspired generations of people to pick up instruments and learn to play them. You don't have that now. No one's going to listen to the latest One Direction track and think "Omg I've gotta learn that on guitar / drums!", and there aren't really any popular "bands" around anymore that actually play their instruments. I think Paramore and Fall Out Boy were the last real "rock" bands that fell. So now when people get inspired to learn an instrument, they're being inspired by music that's 20+ years old. So I think in that regard, yes, the quality of music has been decreasing, because it's becoming less about the physical playing of instruments, and as someone who actually plays an instrument, I think that sucks. However, if I didn't play any instruments and just generally had no idea about music at all, I admit that I'd probably enjoy today's pop music :P A question for you: if the technology had been there in the ~1960's, do you think music would have became as electronically influenced then as it is today?
Charity Diary music is a beauty, not a playground. Elvis thought it was a playground, and he was kinda good, but it didn't match what quality music had before.
I never answered this comment - music technology (which was new at the time) had a huge influence in the music of the 1960s, so I would anticipate a similar effect if they had the same technology access.
The same sequence also happens in architecture, and tbh, in many things in life. Architecture gets more and more complex then reverts to a very simple stage, that starts getting more elaborate again and the cycle keeps happening
Your conclusions and suppositions are woefully erroneous. Music before the 90s WAS better. Music after 2000 generally sucks...HARD. Forget all that "when I was a teen" relativism. I was a teen in the 70s and I can see it. We didn't forget all the shitty songs, there just weren't as many. Now, it's almost ALL shit. That's just the way it is.
I've been hearing people complaining about an imaginary decline in the quality of music since I was a kid. Times have changed. Tech has changed. The biggest difference is today there's a lot MORE music than ever before. Naturally, there's probably more bad (or in some cases maybe just incomplete) music than ever before, but there's probably also more good music than ever before--but you might have to look for it.
I agree but there is not more good music than ever before there’s just not. however I won’t undermine the actual good music that is modern like Alice In Chains 2018 album Rainer Fog and many more. The issue is record producers want give any attention to real talented young people they only want a presentable person they can make a brand out of
Don't you know about the new style honey? All you need are looks and a whole lotta money." It's the next phase, new wave, dance craze, anyways it's still rock and roll to me...
But now... I can't be successful in the genre of music I want to play... Cause its just dying.... Like... Listen to the temperance movement..... On Google they had the best rock song of 2016.... And its soooo unknown.... This is just sad...lol
I saw the title of this video and I just wanted to scream, "YES! The answer is YES!" There are always exceptions...main stream music sucks but there are great obscure musicians. ...Now I'll actually watch the video. ;-p
Best music of genre from each decade 1700-1800s-Baroque 1800-1900s-Romantic/Jazz/Blues 1900s-Jazz/Blues 1910s-Jazz/Ragtime/Blues 1920s-Ragtime/Jazz 1930s-Swing/Jazz/Boogie Woogie 1940s-Jazz/Country/Swing 1950s- Rock/Doo Wop/Folk/Jazz/Soul 1960s-Pop/Rock/R&B/Motown/Soul 1970s-Heavy Metal/Rock/Disco/Funk 1980s-Punk Rock/Hard Rock/New Wave/Synthpop 1990s-Hip Hop/Grunge/Rap/Alternative Rock 2000s-Nu Metal/Southern-Northern Hip Hop 2010-Rap/Pop
As others have said, whether music as a whole sucks now could be debatable..what isnt is that in comparison to the past, mainstream music does suck. I listen to alot of old Top 40 radios show from the 70s-to the 90-s and yeah, alot of it WAS garbage as well, however there is a decent amount of stuff in there as well...sure you had the Osmonds and ELO and a bunch of disco crap, but stuff like David bowie or the Stones or Pink Floyd did manage to make it into the mainstream, which isnnt the case any longer. Also, it's one think to check Top 40 singles, but if you check the top selling albums from the 60-80's you really do see quite a difference with the quality of music. Personally, I grew up in the 90s, and while I do think I may have a bias because I do think it was the last decent decade of music, it still wasnt nearly as good as the 60s or the 70s
As for the Osmonds, "Crazy Horses" and "Yo-Yo" are far better than anything you hear today from Katy Perry or the rest of them. I agree that the 90s were the last decade of music, although it only lasted until about 1996 when the alternative rock movement ended for good. It's worth noting that 2001-2004 did produce some good stuff (White Stripes, Strokes, Queens of the Stone Age, Jet, Hives, etc) but other than that, there was nothing else worthwhile after 1996.
Not everything has to be metal, or some variation on that brooding theme. As far as mainstream went in the early 2000s, it was slim pickings. You couldn't get much better than that. Unless you were a fan of nu-metal or post-grunge, which I suspect you were. But I wouldn't call that "better" at all. That stuff was awful.
Overproduction and the ease of digital manipulation of music has killed the entire industry. There are still great bands but they are not in the mainstream and they do require alot of effort to discover. The music industry has went the way of the movie industry and general entertainment in general.
The thing is. There's more "bad music" today then there was in the 1970s or whatever. I'm generally open to new music. I was into the whole pop music like rap and daft punk and stuff until I discovered Queen and Zeppelin and became a rock guy. I have to say pop music is pretty bad compare to most pop songs In the past. Music today lacks chord progressions, and is so lost built on a single catchy hook line. And repetition of verses to built up a "bass drop" to the hookline it's pretty dumb and simple. Music today lacks valuable meaning, and good messages. It's just empty bs. Infact a lot of pop music especially rap is negatively influencing pop culture.
Loferix gaming lmao, me too, I was young, I was stuck in the mud, I didn't know guns n roses existed, or acdc, because the community keeps shoving pop music down our throats without realizing it, then I found rock/metal and realized, hey! This is rock eh? 20 times better than pop. Now I play guitar and try to revive it at my school, but too many autistic kids dabbing and whipping.
All forms of art started on the decline after about 1997, and after 2005 it COMPLETELY shot down the toilet. Not so much about time signatures or complexity. It has way more to do with good old fashioned INTEGRITY. Art has no more INTEGRITY, and every studio and "artist" is only out for the almighty dollar. Sure, some crap existed always, but at least it was EXPERIMENTAL crap. It tried to do something, even if it didn't work. Now it's all about selling out to stay relevant, corporately or even politically. Music, film, TV and even modern sculptural art have become a laughing stock.
I find myself not liking what is currently popular but rediscovering gems years or decades later. I did not like the Beatles in the 60s but love some of their songs now. I agree that each year yields thousands of garbage releases. I have the luxury of a 60+ years to pick and chose MY best favorites.
2000's pop was actually quite fun, and had some cool character. That decade as a whole was just freaky and odd, but definitely memorable. I've noticed how much more catchy those tunes are than the garbage made in the 2010's. There have been only a handful of records in this decade that I'll take along with me for the rest of my life. I sincerely hope the 20's are stellar, and that music becomes valuable again. Spotify needs to die
+kane gord I still play my thriller LP frequently. I think it is one of the best produced albums ever. Quincy Jones got the best of the best to help craft those songs (Toto and Eddie Van Halen, among others), and it pays off. Micheal Jackson himself is talented, but it is the whole package that really makes it sound so good, even after all these years.
I've heard that by running an analysis of hits from last decades there were some significant finding about the quality of modern music. The tonal range is being narrowed, also volume stays flatter and is just overall louder.
Good topic. I think most commercially successful music thats any good falls in the alternative, adult alternative or adult contemporary charts on Billboard. Not saying that most of that music is good,, but if its good thats where it tends to get categorized. The mainstream billboard chart is almost exclusively hip hop, (hip hop inflected) r&B and house based EDM. The only exceptions I can think of in recent years is some of the girl pop made by Katy Perry, Lady Gaga and Taylor Swift. What used to be considered "urban music" is now the mainstream music in the United States
I really don't think the comparison of old repetitive and today's repetitive is really fair. Sure, older songs would do, like, the same chorus, and everything in between was the same tune if not the same lyrics. But _today..._ if I were to complain about the repetitive nature of today's music, what I mean is the constant "oontz oontz oontz", where there is barely even a tune at all, it's just bass and drums pounding on you for several minutes. That's a rather different kind of repetitive.
B K But screamo is emo. And I mean emo as in emotive hardcore (what it meant originally), not these mall goth scene kids who think pretending to want to kill themselves is cool. Although many people call non screamo bands screamo. If you think bands like BMTH, AA, OMAM, BVB, PTV and ADTR are screamo, then I'm sorry, but you are wrong... go listen to pg.99 or the saddest landscape.
People are now afraid to criticize the Beatles? Shoot, I''ll criticize the Beatles any time...while the are consensus "greatest band ever," I'd say Pink Floyd, the Who, Moody Blues, and others are better. The Beatles aren't "great" because they are great musicians, but because they were targeted by the business and gave in for the money. Then they got into the occult... They were chosen by the biz to reinvent rock music, which went stagnant in 1959 after the deaths of Big bopper, Ritchie Valens, and Buddy Hollyin 1958. So, in 1963-4, they revitalized rock, and the Brit invasion began. Glad to have grown up in late 60s-early 70s...after Led Zep IV, even they began to suck.
I'd like to bring up some points you forgot or completely left out. First of I would just point out that you kind of got yourself trapped in your own cage by cherrypicking and decide yourself what is and what isn't good music. So how can one biased opinion discern and objectively speak about what is good and what is bad? Second of all your whole speak about "classical" music is kinda cliched by giving us a lesson of classical music and its complexity. I've heard that argument thousands of times already. Baroque music isn't somehow objectively superior to all other music. Complexity isn't the only factor to determine such a thing. So what is it? You talk about two things: Novelty and Originality. There's lots of original music out there but does that mean its good? Not really. I'd argue that time signature and melodic/harmonic variation and good mastering is the essential ingredients to good music. A memorable melody is maybe one of the most difficult things to come up with. If you put that melody into the right context you have good music. I rather listen to David Wise masterpiece from Donkey Kong Country (snes) "Aquatic Ambience" than a "complex" piece by Handel or Bach. Less is more. What modern pop music is missing is memorable melodies and chord progression. They miss that third thing called "magic" which is the third thing after originaly and novelty. Loudness wars and the dumbing down of pop music is to blame aswell.
I walked into a store that was playing pop music today and i literally wanted to rip my ears out i would rather listen to a chalkboard getting scraped than that stupid techno "Music" thats aparently so good. I love 70s rock like carry on wayward son and killer queen and so much more it just goes to show people threw their instruments out and started singing for money instead of for entertainment
I hate that argument, real hip hop artist are musicians even if they don’t “play an instrument”. Jay z, Eminem, nas, 2pac are geniuses and you can’t just copy the shit they do. I would agree music has gotten worse and has less meaning. I also miss when rock was relevant even tho I’m a hip hophead. Back in the late 90’s-07 there were a lot of rock songs on mtv and vh1 I liked, and bands I enjoyed. I couldn’t name any rock band that’s come out in the past 10 years, you don’t even see them on the radio or tv. But I remember a lot of hip hop mainstream wise from 03-07 was garbage juice crunk and snap bs
Uzefulvideos That can be a positive thing and a negative thing. It’s cool people can make their own stuff, but at the same time it dilutes the industry. We enjoyed those older bands because partly we aspired to be them, once you reach that point, then what’s the incentive for the music industry to make good stuff.
Beatles, Pink Floyd, Led Zep and Queen and now we have ...............? The fans started stealing music which now gives the musicians ZERO BUDGET to make new music. Musicians all had to go out and get real jobs in order to pay their monthly bills. And so the musicians are all mostly AMATEUR/HOBBYISTS now and does this make a difference? Of course it does. I jammed with Led Zep in the 70s and have many friends in the Beatles camp. Quality music comes from many years of hard work and experience in the studio. You are not going to get another 'Bohemian Rhapsody' from some guy recording in his bedroom. That song cost $500,000 to record. Until we get a realistic budget for Pro musicians we will have an endless stream of mostly dreadful music made by Hobbyists. And 99% of music loses money in this new streaming world. Not a good business to get into! Say goodbye to great songs with Orchestras and horn sections and sax solos on them. These cost MONEY and we need to start paying the musicians again otherwise good music won't be coming back. The fans have only themselves to blame for the dreadful music on the radio! The Beatles used HUNDREDS of other musicians on their albums. They received MILLIONS in advances to make their great albums. Streaming rates have put 60% of Pro musicians out of work. Time for a new business model where the true fans support their favorite bands with MONEY with DIRECT SALES (eliminating the Middle men who still take 88% of the revenues)
Well, music made by non-musicians is like paintings made by non-painters. If the output of a high school art class is all you've ever seen, you think that stuff is pretty good. And it bears various surface similarities to the older works - same size, same type of paints used, same subject matter etc. Therefore, we can conclude that little Brianna's art assignment is truly comparable to the works of Rembrandt and Picasso.
+Mississippi Blues I don't disagree with your assessment, but I'm going give a slightly different analogy. Imagine you have a robot or a piece of software that will paint for you. You tell the robot what parts of older paintings you would like it to contain, then the robot creates the art. You put your name on it because it was you who operated the software. No art involved. That's similar to what a lot of current hip-hop "artists" do these days to create their backing music.
+David Stewart Oh yeah, totally agree with you. It wasn't all that long ago when rap was just recycling every '80s pop song ever recorded, with all the kids giving the rappers full credit for having created it all in the first place.
1975-1985 The peak of pop music, in my opinion. Then it all went downhill. 90s-present music suck, because in general there is no freaking MELODY. The same applies to movie soundtracks: NO MELODY, just generic filler strings. No inspiration. You don´t remember anything after you exit the theater. Of course, there are exceptions...but compared to what we had during the 50s-80s, there was a lot of shitty music, but there was a TON of great stuff, and very varied.....it´s impossible not to see the difference. Compare the John Williams soundtracks for Superman vs The Avengers. Do you remember anything from the Avengers soundtrack? The Spider-Man movies? It´s all dull filler. Repetitive string loops. I´d say there is some type of melody-phobia...Melodies are "cheesy", because cynicism dominates our society. The consequence is that new music is forgettable.
I'd just like to know how the use of crude language can be construed as a form of "artistry". It took us 700 years to get to here? Maybe it's a throwback to what might be genetic, and a throw back to Yelling across the plains, or jungles of Africa.....Kinda like a re-connect and a tribal "in your face"?
Pop music that I used to think of as really lame in 90s sounds 100% better than stuff in the main stream today. I've never cared for pop, but at least it used to be actual music. I'm in my mid 30s and like metal and punk mostly. My parents didn't get my music because there was too much to it for them to comprehend. This pop today is not even music, I mean from a musicians standpoint it is so boring and generic, there is nothing there TO understand. It just sucks. No melody, progression, and it's not as memorable. This is because most mainstream music is all written by the same handful of producers. There has always been crap music out there, but it has gotten way worse! It just seems that nobody even remembers what good music is. They just call it "old" and don't give it a chance. I really wonder if there will ever be another band like Pantera with really good music that can be popular also. I don't see it happening anytime soon.
Music totally sucks, that's why they don't make high quality stereos anymore. back in the day. You would go over to a persons house and they would show off their great stereo and say what do you want to hear - You walk into a home now days - there is no stereo . Because it's not worth investing money in a high quality stereo to listen to crap. Music Sucks, I loved music for many years - I bought a new truck about 2 years ago, never turn on the Radio. It sucks, it's lousy and the old stuff is depressing to listen to because it reminds you that its the end of good music.Todays song is lazy music - just repetion , no breaks in the songs, no change in the tune that reverts back to the sound - its like struming a guitar over and over in the same chord
As a progressive liberal I have to say that I found your video offensive, your language was triggering, and now I have post traumatic stress disorder, thanks.
bud what was great back in the time before the 90s,was the bands were bands ,played music using there own guitars drums,the band atmostphere,,,,,,now it's a person on stage ,no band dancers and background music,,and if you call rap singing then you don't know music. i do get it my dad said you kids don't know music,but this is totaly different,no skilled guitarist and so on,,,now it's just not a show,,,one person and dancers,,sad i'm glad i was a teen in the 70s,,best ever even country
I understand what you are saying, but man the shit garbage I hear kids and even people my age (20's) listen to is soooooo bad. It's not even compareable to the simple tunes of Elvis and the Beates. I mean their music is reallllllly trash.
What are you smoking, the 90s was the catalyst for why we have all the godawful shit today (nu, core, modern rap, indie, britpop, POP, edm, electropop etc)! The 70s and 80s musical landscape was so much better, plenty of genres got on the pop charts, music was still evolving, the charts was inclusive (hate the word but it was true at the time) in the sense that they didn't try to target one specific audience with complete samey garbage. Sure ok the 90s had SOME good stuff but it was a transitional decade in a very bad way.
@@jpoulter8845 90s was the start but not the death. The end of the mix stations in the early 90s truely was the beginning of demographic promotion and separtion though.
there's bad music in every generation but there is a lot more music in this generation and there is disproportionately more bad music as well. however, just cause what they play on the radio sucks doesn't mean there aren't plenty of good artists/musicians out there! it depends on what you're into. there's still good jazz, just less abundant original material. electronic dance music, if you are into it, is at a peak in creativity and performance. there are good rock and metal bands interspersed throughout depending on what kind of styles you like cause those genres are more diversified or hybridized now. "classical" music styles are waning a bit but there are still good composers, obviously you can look at epic modern movie scores. hip hop and rap are going strong, sure there are a lot more terrible "artists", but there are still some classic rappers and a few newer more innovative ones. there is a lot of great modern music! don't pay attention to the bs stuff. I have to admit there is even some radio pop music that I have grown to enjoy in the last few years. good video!
Please see the reflection on this video here - ruclips.net/video/p0flDyhE3RE/видео.html
Most people did not get that this video was about how various biases affect our perception of quality and indeed our own memories.
well you just don't like Pop or and dance music lol that is clear...like you said...its all about personal bias.
I know this video wasn't about this (I did get it), it's just occurred to me that the 2015 #1 was Uptown Funk, which is pop through and through, but I actually think is good music, I would have liked to hear the judgement on that.
Sorry, but 'I want to hold you're hand' is a masterpiece. One of the most clever written songs ever, with a unique chord progression, well pasted and a great emotional peak. An absolute classic. Beethoven wrote a lot, but what was his greatest invention? Dadada Dam, Dadada Dam. Simple is not bad. Or is Fried Chicken bad food, cause it's simple?
David Stewart maybe cause that’s not what the video is about.
I was a teen in the 2000's, and music started to suck in the 1990's, but it got really bad in the 2000's.
Pink floyd, Led zeppelin, and Jimi Hendrix never get old..Fuck all the new sheep shit.
Logic Seeker we need the real music, Michael bible, Disney counts, Michael Jackson, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's
Logic Seeker PREACH
Logic Seeker you forgot metallica
Logic Seeker "Fuck all the new sheep shit."
That is a perfect way to describe 95% of mainstream music.
so true man and you've actually mentioned holy trinity of 20th century
At least Duran Duran wrote their own music and played their own instruments!!!
A lot of musicians still play physical instruments and write their own music; it's not an isolated case. Some examples include Red Vox, Scale the Mountain, Shmu, and a whole lot of others out there.
@@princegoatcheese9379 Do any of them have near the number of hit songs that Duran Duran did?
I'd like to start off saying I appreciate where you're coming and agree that we all have a bias towards things we are familiar with. I often hear a lot of criticism regarding modern music for not having real musicians being featured in tracks and that the music production featured in most of modern music requires no talent. I can tell you as a musician originally coming from the metal scene where I was sponsored by guitar companies and later moving to electronically driven music, they both required immense skill and dedication . Rock, metal and pop music from the 80s and 90s (and before) have such an amazing quality to them and as listeners we have come to appreciate the artists talent to play parts, construct great progressions and memorable melodies. What I've noticed when fans of music from those decades hear a lot of modern music are complaints for how simple the progressions are or how the music requires no real talent to make. I've often seen guitarists online play modern pop songs basically clowning on the songs to show the simplicity. But the skill set required to make modern sounding music is less about crazy progression and scales and more about sound design, which is an entirely different skill and one that isn't widely recognized by the public. A lot of people hear a synth or bass line in Deadmau5 song (for example) and think how simple the progression is and that the computer is doing all the work. When in reality Joel (Deadmau5) probably spent hours or sometimes days creating the sound of one of the synths from a simple wave form. There is no doubt a huge shift happening right now from modern music and the great music from the 60s,70s, 80s, 90s, 00s but there is a lot of skill to appreciate from electronic production. Any one who doubts that I encourage to get a DAW and some VST'S and try recreating some electronic songs. I'll stress again that it's less about recreating the notes and more about recreating the sound of the synths or the tightness of the drum mix. I will also add that I am not the biggest fan of modern radio pop music, just wanted to give a different perspective to people. If you're looking for some innovative modern guitar music check out Animals As Leader or CHON also if you're looking for modern pop music that isn't garbage check out Great Good Fine OK, Penguin Prison and Miami Horror to name a few.
Nirvana, Chilli Peppers, Green Day, SubLime, OffSpring, Tool, Quicksand, Toadies, Soundgarden, Sytem Of The Down, Tom Petty, Sugar Ray, Limp Bizkit, Lenny Kravitz, Everclear, Beastie Boys, Guns and Roses, Presidents, Third Eye Blind, Live, No Doubt , Soul Asylum, Puddle Of Mudd, I could go on and on- the 90's Rocked! 😁✌ I just found this old video of yours.
You skipped over "To Sir, With Love." That is a provocative song about growing up. "The Way We Were" is about memories of all the good things of a relationship. Just forget that Babs sang it.
I'm 12. This generation sucks. The huge legends like Frank Sinatra, David Bowie, Elvis Presley, or Freddie Mercury have been replaced by scumbag artists like Justin Bieber, Nicki Minaj, or Lil Wayne. Sometimes the only good music comes from videogames.
But i was born in 1999 and didnt grow up listening to the old music. I can still easily tell that most of todays music is crap
All y'all need to calm down and listen to the certain good music that comes out each year. It's easy for me to find good music each year so if it's easy for me it should be for you.
Hey David, thanks for this analysis - very informative. On the subject of The Beatles specifically, you might want to check out this documentary. It’s presented by Howard Goodall, a classically trained musician and TV/film composer. He explores the strengths of The Beatles as composers and songwriters from a technical perspective here. He’s also done a series on the history and development of music which is well worth a watch.
ruclips.net/video/ZQS91wVdvYc/видео.html
While I bet you know a lot more about music than I do, when you hold up Lord of the Rings as complex literature....
"Ninety percent of everything is crap" - Theodore Sturgeon
+1 for Sturgeon quote.
I had kids say to me the wish they were born in the 70s🤔
So they could witness Flock of Seagulls and Cindy Lauper at their peak?
lorddarthstar I'm 13. I wish I was born in the 80's
lorddarthstar I wish I was born in like the mid forties
I wish I was born in 1940 so I could serve in Vietnam and listen to Good Old music such as CCR, Buffalo Springfield, The Rolling Stones ETC
lorddarthstar I wish people at my school didnt act like wannabes
The difference really is that in the 70ties the good music was in the mainstream and heard by the masses (among some garbage, of course), whereas the mainstream music became entirely plastic pop-garbage these days, and one has to search hard for good music.
+Oliver Mattausch Here's the thing. Going from the let's say 50s and into the late 90s you had the many different radio stations and you had the lack of the internet. That meant that the stations wanted the best of the best it meant it was not just about sells about being really good. Enter the internet and well what you find on the radio these days is about does it SELL not is it GOOD. The internet was good and bad for music. It's good because we can get away from the crap and find what we like. Bad because the big labels don't want to take chances any more on new acts. Then again it may be way independent labels are growing more.
Oliver Mattausch if you have to search for it, then it ain't good
dumbest comment on here
Oliver Mattausch : Here's where the conversation steers itself into the ditch. The mainstream music that's on the TV, the radio and on the awards shows IS the music of the era. For people who dig out stuff you like on RUclips: the fact that you have to dig for it proves our point. Mr Mattauch is absolutely correct! For a tiebreaker, it's millennials who discover 80's music on SUPERNATURAL, GTA, etc...who validate our assessment. Why do the 80's stand out? Because that was era where MUSIC VIDEOS came into being. Notice the uploaded here keeps referring to "albums"? In fact he's reaching back to the era of SINGLES, ala 45rpm vinyl discs. That's where the phrase "B-side" comes from. The people who fixated on albums back in the day were sort of an underground fan base, (think GRATEFUL DEAD, here). They imagined that Morrison, Garcia, Neil Young and whoever took the stage at WOODSTOCK were somehow plugged into the "great universal consciousness". They were/are the people who thought Jim Morrison was speaking with gods voice. In other words, the eccentric fringe audience.
J Culley I actually never saw that. I'll have to look it up.
I'm just going to say this, Michael Jackson, Prince and David Bowie are no longer with us... yeah, doesn't say much for modern music.
It just says their not around anymore. Their influence is still there, though.
Peter Murphy with Bauhaus put David Bowie to shame.
The Masses have never been pressured to understand what makes something like Music, great. They simply follow the next blind follower for the Trend of the Day or Flavor of the Week, and go with that.
No one seems to be honest with themselves when it comes to personal taste. It's almost like they have to seek approval whether they like something or not. It's a goddamn shame.
Because that's human nature, unfortunately. If you want to survive and reproduce, you have to play along with the rest of the pack, at the expense of personal authenticity.
@@collegerebel
That's the mentality of the herd.
I like listening to Jazz and blues, thanks to underground hiphop. But my siblings is laughing at me for listening to such songs when the artist they listen is more laughable. They laughed at me for listening to Miles Davis or Duke Ellington while they are listening to another generic pop singer like Miley Cyrus.
As someone who grew up listening to Hip-Hop like Eminem, 2Pac and Biggie, I like all sorts of music aside from those three. I like Aerosmith, Metallica, Frank Sinatra, Johnny Cash, Bob Dylan as well as classical music. Even in the genres I like there is good music and bad music in them. It's all a matter of taste.
Today's music specially the mainstream rap just sets trends. The fucking dab, what ever rain drop and drop top mean, people just saying gang gang gang, people doing the whip. This is *CANCER*. Almost everybody at school just thinks that whenever you say rock you mean emo. They call metallica death metal, fucking *DEATH* metal. WTF
They had an album called Death Magnetic. That means automatic Death Metal, right?
David Stewart No
At least we can agree Jethro Tull is Death Metal since they won the first grammy for best metal performance.
David Stewart lol wth noo 😂😂
Are you suggesting that the a Grammy award does not actually make a record of who was the best musician in a given year in a given category?!?!
To me, music, movies, and other media artists have lost creativity (for the most part). It seems hard for the mainstream industry to be original with new ideas, like in the 60's, 70's, & 80's, so, many do reboots, re-imaginings, and remakes. To us it seems to have all been done, but truly, many lack creativity. Moreover, to me it seems that talented musicians took a backseat to programmed electronics, and vocalists with a wide range took a back seat to monotone simplicity.
FreeRPGer Agreed. I just can't get into the new sound sadly. I have tried.
If you have a half dozen people given writing credit for your song (besides yourself), and you're a solo artist, you may not actually have much talent. We have R&B, Hip Hop and Pop songs that have like 20 people listed for contributing to the song. At this point you get the impression that a bunch of suits sat in a room and looked for a formula to make the most money off of, as long as it was paired with an "artist" with the right look.
The song is no longer the focus, it's more like a glorified advertisement for a consumer product based on a meticulously designed persona/image. Pop music has always had a degree of commercial marketing to it, but if the performer had actual talent, then it didn't detract much from the product. Michael Jackson could team up with Pepsi or some other company, which made him look like a bit of a sellout, but his music and ability to perform were at a high enough level that we could overlook it.
And let's not forget that Hip Hop frequently uses 'borrowed' melodies from other songs... and then rants profanity-laced, forced-rhyming, grammatical nonsense in a staccato monotone.
The problem is rock is pretty much dead.
kkkfts it’s sad and it’s sooooo good
Actual talent
Great, and Christianity's still alive, til' Jesus arrives and the sun blows up.
Hip hop took the over. It’s just sad
@@Midnight65883 In the early 2000's there were bands that were still around like Blink 182, New Found Glory, Good Charlotte, Sum 41, etc. and even though they weren't really rock and were more punk/pop punk they still wrote songs with many creativity and have talent in to their music skills unlike these new pop/rap artists like Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande, Lil Pump, etc. That music is ASS.
Jarod David WTF?
I get your point, there was always junk on mainstream .But you are forgetting that the amount of junk has been growing exponentially since 2000. I personally don´t remember the last time I´ve heard a good mainstream song. And if you surf through the 70´s to the 90´s you will find a tonne of them
I go back and forth - I remember how horrible the 90s were, but then I hear some of the crap that goes mainstream now, which sounds like it was written by and for people with room temperature IQs, and I think things have gotten at least a bit worse. I also think the prime pop music market has shifted to younger audiences that have less capacity to understand complexity, since they are more willing to buy music and do the things that generate revenue for what is left of the music industry. I've seen some data that points that way.
I don´t think the 90´s were that horrible. The first half was dominated by the grunge scene which was a very creative and crazy period. Then through the whole decade you find some very solid bands making other genres. Off course there was a lot of garbage around like boys and girls band and shit like that but you would still find very good music playing daily on the radio. Stuff with creativity. Nowadays, it´s just sellout crap.
Even the bad music from the 90’s has artistic merit. It wasn’t necessarily aesthetically pleasing, but the artistry was clear and the people behind the scenes were obviously professionals.
I'm 37. Most of the obscure bands I listened to during the 90's, many still making albums now, seem to have turned to the pop formulas of their genres. It's kind of saddening. I have never been against growing and changing style. In fact I like it when they do it. I don't want them to sound the same on every album, but at the same time I don't want them to sound like every other song on the radio. Only a handful peak my interest over the years and I rarely find anything new I like. No distinctive catchy melodies. I started traveling backwards listening to the songs I missed out on like green eyed lady and dark star. I feel like music is going backwards in creativity.
Joshua Garden I was born in 1991 and I think grunge is trash, along with New Metal. So I agree with him that the 90's were mostly horrible. I can only find good music today in the so called indie Hip Hop scene, since they try to make more melodic songs with actual lyrics. Not just a 3 second loop stretched on 3 minutes with someone condoning greed, crime and casual sex over it. And that is because I only listened to Metal before, so the mainstream can really make you think bad of styles by misrepresenting them.
music is fucking dead p
it's my teenage daughters fault
Modern Music Is Awful
100%. Pop music has gotten so bad over the past 2 decades, it's a DISGRACE for real musicians, who die hard for the music, for their craft and musicianship. I myself am VERY ashamed of being a musician, a songwriter, producer because all these money grubbing douchebags ruin it all for us.
Necrophilic Excretion i think it died in the 70's
Necrophilic Excretion actually pop just got good again. Kesha, Lady Gaga, Lana Del Rey, Lorde, and arguably Katy Perry are actually making good records now (as opposed to their earlier works). So you have to ask yourself, is pop bad or is it that its just not for you? Pop songs are meant to be happy and fun, its not like rock which is more meaningful and serious. In pop, the emotion behind the main tune is the main factor. The lyrics are also more about poignancy than poetry. If its a good tune, and the lyrics are decent, then its good pop. Now I can name quite a few pop records this year that have decent to good lyrics and high quality instrumentation, but if you look at it like its a rock song then you're just expecting a fish to climb a tree or calling a skittle bad because it doesnt taste like a steak.
For one, I think you should try the new Feist album out. Its folk pop (you know, that sound taylor swift butchers every other year), but I think you'll like it. Has a bit of a kinks vibe to it imo.
Liam Burke pop is 100% plastic and boring. The artists you mentioned are Just as bad
No, they aren't lol. Kesha, Feist, and Lorde have made ridiculously good albums this year. Stop swallowing the shit these other guys are trying to feed you and go make your own opinion. There's nothing wrong with a fun song. Dont act like some beacon of creativity when you can only comprehend one narrow genre of music.
Liam Burke i made my own opinion. They fucking suck. Stop Being the sheep that accepts any kind of crap the mainstream puts out. Oh wait it's not an opinion it's a fact.
Your familiarity theory is not how I experienced music. I was a teenager in the 90ties but hate 90ties music. It was horrible - either depressing grunge, annyoing brit-pop or stupid techno music. I always liked 60ties, 70ties, and 70ties music (Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Pink Floyd, Santana, Hendrix etc.). Then again, some good music was released from the early 2000ths when electronic music became well developed (Infected Mushroom, Carbon-based Lifeforms, Solar Fields etc.).
+Oliver Mattausch I actually like Infected Mushroom - one of the few EDM-type bands I find interesting. And I was the same way in the 90s. BUT! I still think the perception of music getting worse is a common one, and I believe it is because people have a bias toward what they were first exposed to. Obviously not everyone is going to be that way.
At least Grunge had meaning unlike Pop Music
Oliver Mattausch The Postal Service as well
The meaning of grunge was nihilism. Hair metal was cheesy, but at least it was fun. Thankfully the "Brit Pop" movement in the mid 90's made music enjoyable again.
The music has declined since 1990. 60's, 70's and 80's are the best.
Andrew Dexter I think by mid 2000 it became soulless
Same here, it really all died in the early '90s when rap, dance-hip hop and grunge alternative became mainstream which really said it all for the future of music and that is it'll only get worst as the years pass. And I was right.
Andrew Dexter You are so right. Good music died in the 1990's but you could see the winds of change start to blow in the very late 80's when the ghetto and the seattle sound garbage started to get pushed to the forefront and all the talented artists were pushed aside and later pushed way in the background entirely.
I love the 1960's.
it ended after the grunge/alternative era
Well yeah there was always rubbish around in every decade but back in the sixties and seventies when I was growing up even the junk had something memorable about it. A catchy hook or a distinctive vocal that remained in your head, Today though none of the pop songs stay with you. The decline of melody is one of the saddest things about music of the last twenty years.
They didn't have protools, synths or autotune back then, so they more or less had to rely on decent singers and real instruments, even for crappy pop music. What was considered bad pop music in the 60s and 70s, could probably be considered good music nowadays, and probably appealing in a retro way. I'll take "Seasons in the Sun" over Ed Sheeran, or any of these current "folk" artists (overpolished acoustic guitars and cringy throaty vocal style with too much delay effect) any day of the week. While new technology can make a mediocre song sound better, it can also make it sound worse)
Well said
As a 2000's kid I can relate (especially since I still listen to Sum41, Simple plan and Linkin Park, etc)
I disagree with the conservative bias point you made... I have an appreciation for 80's music... and 60's music... and those were both 1 and 3 decades before I was born... I also hated "old" music when I was younger, so I never catalogued it as being good. I mean the reality is that mainstream pop music back in the 80's were objectively better. Even by objectively measurable standards... such as musicians used to be, on average, much older than the average musician today who is typically in their late teens or early 20's... pop culture and music is being produced by children/young adults, promoted by children/young adults, being performed by children/young adults, targeted mainly at children/young adults... music and pop culture in general has been dumbed down and infantilized
True
This is the industry's fault for not creating hardware in music. Something you can actually touch and feel is said to be of value, rather than something you artificially upload into a computer somewhere. Also, musicians nowadays are forced into an informal economy, an economy where there is no actual wealth creation, an economy where the artist has to sing for there meal. This is fine if you're young, but if you want time to grow old, to have a family, to generate wealth, you want royalties. This is where the screw up is, and also, this is why there is no new music nowadays. Before the 2000's according to the IRS, there were over 300,000 musicians making over 100,000 a year, when napster hit, this whole class went away and has been stagnant now for over a decade. It's flusted the music economy into a zipf curve, or in science called, a long tail, where there are few winners, and a vast sea of losers, where the winners benefit tremendously, and the losers earn nothing. Want you actually want, to sustain an industry, is a bell distribution, or a bell curve, where there is actually a strong number in the middle, this was true before the explosion of the internet among other things.
There hasn't been anything good since the early 2000s
The only good music I remember from the early 2000s (on the pop charts anyway) was Queens of the Stone Age, White Stripes, and the Strokes. Maybe Jet. They were exceptions to the overall rule, though. The late 90s/early 2000s were TERRIBLE for popular music. 1994-1996 was the last great time for pop.
Rock God Yea. I'm more of a 80s-90's guy.
Rock God If you actually think music is getting worse then you are very close minded when it comes to music.
you're blind. There has been good music, but it's just not popular anymore.
EdgeRay 1309 muse
Give me anything from before the computer age and I can listen to it. I detest music of today and I finally figured out what is wrong with it.
It is artificial and no one has to be a master at their instruments. It's all computerized.
Good example is megadeth listen to their original albums then listen to the clean up that Dave did to all his albums. It's the same music but the perfection computerized clean up takes away from the flair of the original recordings.
Lol I posted that before finishing your video, I'm glad you touched on that.....
....but I think that's what's really wrong with music more so than the novelty you speak of.
I can listen to anything from black metal to the Beatles or even nirvana....mind you as a metal head in the late 80 to 90s I didn't like them till after his death because like you said I didn't get hooked to the novelty ride away since I was comparing the style to say guns and roses, Mötley Crüe, ACDC, Zeppelin, sabbath or Metallica...sepultura...slayer...Danzig, ect, ect. I started listening to the grungy stuff some time after I discovered white zombie and NIN.
In my 20s started listening to stuff I had not and started liking stuff like Bon jovi. Stuff that as a teen would be uncool to listen to cause teen reasons.
Once I started playing guitar seriously I even got in to classical music. So as a lover of a diverse amount of music. I can honestly say that computers tool have made music crap.
Even if you listen to say rap of today vs rap at is roots it's just so different.
I can go even further chase you know girls....if you listen to a Britney Spears album of the 90s vs one of today. You can tell the difference.
Music with out mistakes, proficiancy, talent, and rawness is just stale.
Reminds me of a deep space nine episode....ok going to stop talking to my self.
+John christopher Yeah I don't really care for most of the Megadeth re-masters. That highly compressed "modern" sound robs a lot of the subtlety from the music, especially on Rust in Peace, which is actually a quite dynamic metal album.
"I listen to black metal all day, so of course I like Arnold Schoenberg."
Instant like and sub.
All day?
I think BOTH the best AND the worst music ever comes out today !!
Yea i love lyrics like "nanana nanana nana nana down down" 10/10 or "i love when you call me sěnorita"
The best music does NOT come out today.
@@zaksmith3304 I guess we disagree
@@QazwerDave I suppose we do. Musicians are not as talented as they once were, perhaps it is because of the movement away from instrumental music into the realm of electronic music. I am not saying that there are no talented musicians at all, just that they are much less common. I have music production software and ANYONE can shit out music there with just a keyboard and mouse. I use instruments with the software, but instrument proficiency is not required as I can edit any mistakes with the click of a button (I am legitimately good at the piano and guitar). Not very many can pick up an instrument and play it properly today. In my opinion the pop music today is much less profound lyrically and musically, no doubt in my mind. It is mass produced by insecure teenagers because they can do it on their home computer. People can't sing anymore either. Popular artists are not musicians, they are insecure, immature teenagers at best. The Beatles were profoundly more talented than today's pop artists and they were still garbage musicians. Yes garbage has existed for years, but there are twice as many people living now than there were in the 70's and technology has crippled the interest in real instruments for young people in many regards (NOT ALL). Tool I would say is a great example of great musicianship in the modern age, there are more, but that is the best example that comes to mind. They are a no bullshit band. Those are few and far between now and then but definitely more so now than then.
@@zaksmith3304 I think that while the percentage of shit, especially in the pop music scene, has undoubtebly gone streadily upwards along side techonogical inovation and proliferation, I do think that the number of talented musicians, as well as their actual level, have never been higher than right now, also this spurred on, at least partly, by technology. Learning an instrument has never been easier, and resources like youtube in overflowing with sources for learning and mastery. There are people today doing things never seen before, simply because everyone can see what all of their colleagues are doing and how they're doing it. Rivals are pushing each other from the other side of the globe.
The only thing worse than a jazz or a classical snob is a metal snob. There is nothing wrong with simple music. Making music is like making food, it only takes a few of the right ingredients to make something sublime (think a salted steak). To continue the analogy, the problem with Top40 pop is like making a dish with all food substitutes. It is like cooking Tofurkey with cheap knock off margarine and Sweet 'n' Low. It has no soul. And some people will lazily consume whatever shit is shoveled in front of them. What makes music great is that same X factor that makes great food great. You know it when you experience it, but there is no way to explain it.
Complexity in music can be great (Bach is a great example). Much like Indian food, you can add many ingredients and end up with art. But mindlessly complex music has the same effect of just throwing the whole pantry into a blender. To that effect, much of metal, while technically impressive, is just mindless guitar wanking. Not all of it of course, there is some great metal. But 9 times out of 10 when I hear a metalhead shitting on "simple music", they're all about guitar wanking.
Pop, in and of itself, isn't bad. Most pop is bad because pop is catchy, and the accountants that run record companies want catchy to move their otherwise dull product. So it is less about most pop music being bad, and more about most soulless corporate music being pop.
Livid Imp you are 100% true. I hate people who hate modern music. They are so closed minded.
I've realized that if I wanna hear good music these days, I hafta write it myself ;)
No
yeah xd kinda my plan
the problem with that is that there are standards or else , ONLY You , will think its good .
or just listen to older stuff because it's better.
Some really near sighted and limited opinions applied on way too broad a base. Pop music and repetitive music "sucks" to intelligent people who require more complex music? While music today sucks, it has nothing to do with simplicity, or repetition, but rather a lack of any sort of relatable connection to life in the subject matter except for self indulgence and self destruction,whether it is money, drugs, or sex. Superficiality is much different than simplicity.There are people who only think of these simple things 24/7, and people who don't. There you go.
100 % agreed. Complexity doesnt make something good. Relateabilty, feeling, soul, meaninging, emotion do imo. Todays music has none of those things which is why it sucks.
It doesn't need to have deep lyrics (I don't relate to most music from the 70s/80s/90s and I love it anyway) it just needs to sound GOOD.
It's funny, back then Michael Jackson was considered a dancing machine, now I look at all these popular brain dead dances and ask myself what happened!!??
the difference is that Jackson had style and charisma and smarts............today its just go along to get along
And it gets worse: The kids today don't even know anymore, what music COULD sound like. When they eventually start making music, they start out with a very limited musical vocabulary, which of course leads to even poorer music to emerge from the young generation. Just take young singers: They all sound the same, because there's only one singing style left, that's the R'n'B style, that everybody imitates these days. Since this music is so omnipresent, they neither get to hear anything different, nor will they be able to find their own unique way for constant bombardment with the same crap over and over again!
Love Me Do may not have many sections but what it does have is a soulful performance, incredible harmonies, an epic harmonica section, and an incredible groove. Love Me Do is definitely on par with their later work. It would be incorrect to say that The Beatles progressed. Their r&b phase was just as groundbreaking and their psychedelic rock phase. I Wanna Hold Your hand is not pop, it's rhythm and blues. "The Way We Were, that sucked" If you seriously think Barbara is not a good singer and that the string arrangement was not good, you're insane. My Sharona is a great groove, lot's of cool rhythmic things happening between the guitars and the drums. George Michael is an amazing singer and Wham! was one of the best artists of 80s pop. I hate Ke$ha too but Alicia Keys is actually decent and The Black Eyed Peas are a great dance group. Usher is an incredible singer. The White Album is more like a 4 star album. "Spice Girls was the top album of 1997" Deservedly so, it's an amazing record with incredible vocal harmonies, they took what they learned from Wilson Phillips and En Vogue and brought it to a massive audience by combining it with the sounds of what was modern hip-hop at the time, brilliant work. "There are artists out there who can actually sing without autotune" Like SPICE GIRLS, there was no autotune on the first two records. 'That level of practice is missing from a lot of artists more recently" No argument there. Totally agree. I think the best composer of the Baroque was Jacquet de la Guerre and the worst was Jean-Baptiste Lully. The Galant style is just flat out boring, let's just keep it real. I love atonal music too. I don't like black metal but I love death metal. Ace of Base, while not as groundbreaking as Nirvana, knew how to make great dance songs. They were very well put together and a huge influence on later styles such as reggaeton. A lot of the music that you say is not very complex may not be so in a harmonic ,melodic, or lyrical way but are definitely so in a rhythmic way. A good example is disco, a lot of people like to give disco a lot of flack but the truth is that a lot of it had amazing drumming, bass work, and percussion. The syncopation and driving counter rhythms are what get you to the dance floor ( a lot of these rhythms have afro-cuban and columbian roots). In terms of the argument of new music getting worse. I look at the billboard charts of the 70s and 80s and I'd say about 70-80% of the songs are good. I look at the billboard charts from the 2000s and 2010s and I find only about 20-30% of it to be good. I was born in 1993.
I think Streisand is egotistical beeyatch, but "The Way We Were" was a lovely romantic tune. And let's look at groups like Tears for Fears, with songs like "Shout" and "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" which are still popular with a large audience to this day. There was so much variety in the older pop music. Now it all sounds the same. And that's been scientifically demonstrated several times over the past couple years!
What many don't realize regarding pop music, which on the surface appears simplistic, is that there is a great level of complexity to simplicity. In a way, it's the art of making something sound good out of very little. For example, music that is considered highly complexed uses many musical notes, and in that lies its appeal. But the appeal of simplistic pop music is that it is catchy, creating hooks out of very few notes. Ironically that isn't as simple as it sounds. That, in my opinion, is why pop music is perennially popular over most highly complexed styles of music, such as jazz or classical. It is melodic structure over rhythmic structure. The melodic structure of pop music is rhythmic, whilst more complexed styles rely on using all the notes available for its effectiveness. But, more isn't necessarily better. So we have to ask ourselves the question, if the music we criticise so much is that bad, why is it so popular? I think the more musically knowledgeable we are, the more we tend to look down on music that appears to operate on a musical skill level below what we perceive as highly skilled, and yet that is not what seems to attract most people musically speaking. It's a musical arrogance and snobbery of sorts, and this blinds us to the attractive and effective simplicity (which again isn't that simple) of pop music.
There was no good music after 1760
I think modern music doesn't suck,but the good modern music has been overshadowed by mediocre pop singer's and overrated bands,some good modern bands are Bloc Party,The War On Drugs,MGMT,Tame Impala,Passion Pit,Klaxons,Two Door Cinema Club,Editors,Atlas Genius,The Killers,The Strokes,Mac Demarco,Kendrick Lamar,Tyler The Creator,and Childish Gambino
And nowadays you can't select nothing because all is shit.
Modern music is just Crap.
The short answer is, *'NO.'*
The great musicians haven't gone anywhere but it's far harder to get support. This is true for all performing arts (I'm a puppeteer and a lot of my friends are musicians) It's harder than ever to get audiences to turn out to your show and harder than ever to get paid to perform.
Getting to be a great musician is a long process. Back in the 80's & 90's I remember how easy it was to pack a local music venue with a band you never heard of. Ten months later that band would be huge. (This happened for me with Green Day, No Doubt, Zebrahead, Smashmouth, etc--not that any of those bands were phenomenal but they got big through live performance) If you can't get traction within the first year, it becomes much harder to keep up the passion. One of my favorite bands (Remy Zero) couldn't find traction even after multiple hits and ultimately dissolved after three albums.
I know at least six bands filled with great musicians who struggled for a couple years and then gave up on the third year.
Art and music are free everywhere you go and that lowers the value of great art and music. No one can afford to split part time work and also be a musician. At some point you have to give up and get a 'real job' and that means great musicians are not making it to the big time. Just the corporate, studio crap put together by marketers.
So, using The Beatles as an example; what if _Love Me, Do_ or _I Wanna Hold Your Hand_ never hit? They were good enough in the 60's to grab attention because there wasn't that much else. No competing entertainment. No Netflix or Internet. There was plenty of other great music at the time but not enough (And not free-enough) to drown out _I Wanna Hold Your Hand_
So, imagine a world with no big hit for The Beatles early on. No Rubber Soul afterwards and no Sgt. Pepper's. The Beatles just gave up after a few albums because they just couldn't get the traction.
I think that's the way it is for _LOTS_ of great bands now. People with passion and talent who put in the work and time but aren't rewarded for it at all. It feels like throwing all that time and energy into an empty void. And then you see Drake. He gets huge and you can't even really consider it "music". That shit is demoralizing.
I think those are the main problems.
Popular music doesn't suck. What sucks is today's rap music
Popular music sucks too
+Mareșalul Alexandru Averescu. Huuuh??? Original rap was jazz influenced.
+Mareșalul Alexandru Averescu. Listen to the earoh East coast black new jack swing r&b of the late 80's early 90's, new edition, Guy, Rene, Tribe Called Quest and tons of other main and not so mainstream. Listen to the instruments, beats and poetic flow. They just don't make it like that anymore, it's sad.
Katy Perry, Bieber, Beyonce, Maroon 5, Twenty One Pilots, Lady Gaga, Pink, One Direction, Rihanna, etc aren't rap, and they are awful.
Bruno Mars ???
I guess you do have a point. Personally, I feel that music as a whole is moving in a direction that I wholeheartedly dislike, where most (if not all) of the instruments are being "played" by a computer program instead of a real person. Take Taylor Swift and Fall Out Boy for example -- their older stuff was pretty good because they had real people playing instruments on their tracks, but when you look at their most recent albums, the only real non-programmed instrument you hear is the vocals, and those are generally tweaked and layered to hell. Guitar has been replaced by electronic tones and strings, while the entire percussion track has been reduced to a standard bass note and ELECTRONIC CLAPS. Like, they can't even use real claps.
As someone who actually plays music, it angers me on such an emotional level when I tell people that a newer Fall Out Boy / Taylor Swift song doesn't have any actual instruments in it, and they point me to the Wikipedia page like, "Look, here's the guitarist and bassist and drummer listed right here on the band page." Yeah, but that entire album is comprised of nothing but programmed keys and strings, electronic claps, a fake bass kick, and tons of vocal layering. No one sat down to play and record the guitar or drums for those tracks. And sure, they need touring instrumentalists, because no one would go see Fall Out Boy if it was just the dude singing while his laptop played the songs in the background.
For the last century we've had popular musicians and bands that have inspired people to pick up instruments and learn them. You had The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, The Who, Pink Floyd, AC/DC, Rush, Def Leppard, U2, Metallica, Iron Maiden, The Police, Pearl Jam, Oasis, etc, all very popular bands of the last half-century, all of which inspired generations of people to pick up instruments and learn to play them. You don't have that now. No one's going to listen to the latest One Direction track and think "Omg I've gotta learn that on guitar / drums!", and there aren't really any popular "bands" around anymore that actually play their instruments. I think Paramore and Fall Out Boy were the last real "rock" bands that fell. So now when people get inspired to learn an instrument, they're being inspired by music that's 20+ years old.
So I think in that regard, yes, the quality of music has been decreasing, because it's becoming less about the physical playing of instruments, and as someone who actually plays an instrument, I think that sucks. However, if I didn't play any instruments and just generally had no idea about music at all, I admit that I'd probably enjoy today's pop music :P
A question for you: if the technology had been there in the ~1960's, do you think music would have became as electronically influenced then as it is today?
Charity Diary music is a beauty, not a playground. Elvis thought it was a playground, and he was kinda good, but it didn't match what quality music had before.
I never answered this comment - music technology (which was new at the time) had a huge influence in the music of the 1960s, so I would anticipate a similar effect if they had the same technology access.
The backing on most of todays tuneless songs sounds like a kid learning the keyboard with just the same few notes.
ruclips.net/video/oVME_l4IwII/видео.html
100 percent right. They pick up there laptops to become "beat makers".
The same sequence also happens in architecture, and tbh, in many things in life.
Architecture gets more and more complex then reverts to a very simple stage, that starts getting more elaborate again and the cycle keeps happening
I'm definitely become more aware of this in architecture recently.
Even the not so good songs of yesteryear are 10 times better than the songs in the charts today.
Popular music: yes
Music: no
Your conclusions and suppositions are woefully erroneous. Music before the 90s WAS better. Music after 2000 generally sucks...HARD. Forget all that "when I was a teen" relativism. I was a teen in the 70s and I can see it. We didn't forget all the shitty songs, there just weren't as many. Now, it's almost ALL shit. That's just the way it is.
I've been hearing people complaining about an imaginary decline in the quality of music since I was a kid. Times have changed. Tech has changed. The biggest difference is today there's a lot MORE music than ever before. Naturally, there's probably more bad (or in some cases maybe just incomplete) music than ever before, but there's probably also more good music than ever before--but you might have to look for it.
I agree but there is not more good music than ever before there’s just not. however I won’t undermine the actual good music that is modern like Alice In Chains 2018 album Rainer Fog and many more. The issue is record producers want give any attention to real talented young people they only want a presentable person they can make a brand out of
Don't you know about the new style honey?
All you need are looks and a whole lotta money."
It's the next phase, new wave, dance craze, anyways it's still rock and roll to me...
But now... I can't be successful in the genre of music I want to play... Cause its just dying.... Like... Listen to the temperance movement..... On Google they had the best rock song of 2016.... And its soooo unknown.... This is just sad...lol
people arent getting stupider, only teens
Ironic Frowning Emoji 😃
Because I partially agree with you but am myself a teenager
@Marco Paez Then how come your using it?
One of the biggest problems of modern music I feel is over production, too much reliance on computer alternation.
I saw the title of this video and I just wanted to scream, "YES! The answer is YES!"
There are always exceptions...main stream music sucks but there are great obscure musicians. ...Now I'll actually watch the video.
;-p
Check out Greta Van Fleet
Best music of genre from each decade
1700-1800s-Baroque
1800-1900s-Romantic/Jazz/Blues
1900s-Jazz/Blues
1910s-Jazz/Ragtime/Blues
1920s-Ragtime/Jazz
1930s-Swing/Jazz/Boogie Woogie
1940s-Jazz/Country/Swing
1950s- Rock/Doo Wop/Folk/Jazz/Soul
1960s-Pop/Rock/R&B/Motown/Soul
1970s-Heavy Metal/Rock/Disco/Funk
1980s-Punk Rock/Hard Rock/New Wave/Synthpop
1990s-Hip Hop/Grunge/Rap/Alternative Rock
2000s-Nu Metal/Southern-Northern Hip Hop
2010-Rap/Pop
The Beatles are like Jesus; if you criticize them, you go to Hell.
think id rather go to hell then if the beatles will be there, seems to be where all the interesting people will end up.
metamorphosis743 my dick is bigger than Jesus'. do something, bitch.
The late Beatles stuff was good, the early stuff was cheesy
As others have said, whether music as a whole sucks now could be debatable..what isnt is that in comparison to the past, mainstream music does suck. I listen to alot of old Top 40 radios show from the 70s-to the 90-s and yeah, alot of it WAS garbage as well, however there is a decent amount of stuff in there as well...sure you had the Osmonds and ELO and a bunch of disco crap, but stuff like David bowie or the Stones or Pink Floyd did manage to make it into the mainstream, which isnnt the case any longer.
Also, it's one think to check Top 40 singles, but if you check the top selling albums from the 60-80's you really do see quite a difference with the quality of music.
Personally, I grew up in the 90s, and while I do think I may have a bias because I do think it was the last decent decade of music, it still wasnt nearly as good as the 60s or the 70s
As for the Osmonds, "Crazy Horses" and "Yo-Yo" are far better than anything you hear today from Katy Perry or the rest of them. I agree that the 90s were the last decade of music, although it only lasted until about 1996 when the alternative rock movement ended for good. It's worth noting that 2001-2004 did produce some good stuff (White Stripes, Strokes, Queens of the Stone Age, Jet, Hives, etc) but other than that, there was nothing else worthwhile after 1996.
I wouldn't call ELO crap at all. Lots of good songs, like 10538 Overture.
But that just reinforces your point, which is all too true.
Not everything has to be metal, or some variation on that brooding theme. As far as mainstream went in the early 2000s, it was slim pickings. You couldn't get much better than that. Unless you were a fan of nu-metal or post-grunge, which I suspect you were. But I wouldn't call that "better" at all. That stuff was awful.
Woah cowboy. ELO made some great songs.
@Kevin L whats the top 40 of 2017-18? It wont be pretty
"Music is just noise" - Frank Zappa
noise that sounds good/melodic!!!
Organized noise
Overproduction and the ease of digital manipulation of music has killed the entire industry. There are still great bands but they are not in the mainstream and they do require alot of effort to discover. The music industry has went the way of the movie industry and general entertainment in general.
The thing is. There's more "bad music" today then there was in the 1970s or whatever. I'm generally open to new music. I was into the whole pop music like rap and daft punk and stuff until I discovered Queen and Zeppelin and became a rock guy. I have to say pop music is pretty bad compare to most pop songs In the past. Music today lacks chord progressions, and is so lost built on a single catchy hook line. And repetition of verses to built up a "bass drop" to the hookline it's pretty dumb and simple. Music today lacks valuable meaning, and good messages. It's just empty bs. Infact a lot of pop music especially rap is negatively influencing pop culture.
Daft Punk isnt fucking pop
Loferix gaming lmao, me too, I was young, I was stuck in the mud, I didn't know guns n roses existed, or acdc, because the community keeps shoving pop music down our throats without realizing it, then I found rock/metal and realized, hey! This is rock eh? 20 times better than pop. Now I play guitar and try to revive it at my school, but too many autistic kids dabbing and whipping.
Loferix I can completely relate to ya lol
Daniel Madison They are now but they weren't back in 2001.
Loferix 70s wasnt bad
It’s only worse today. Our culture is fallen.
All forms of art started on the decline after about 1997, and after 2005 it COMPLETELY shot down the toilet. Not so much about time signatures or complexity. It has way more to do with good old fashioned INTEGRITY. Art has no more INTEGRITY, and every studio and "artist" is only out for the almighty dollar. Sure, some crap existed always, but at least it was EXPERIMENTAL crap. It tried to do something, even if it didn't work. Now it's all about selling out to stay relevant, corporately or even politically. Music, film, TV and even modern sculptural art have become a laughing stock.
SergeTheBlerge No. No, some corporations went down the drain (or were shit to begin with), but there are others that do try to maintain integrity.
I find myself not liking what is currently popular but rediscovering gems years or decades later. I did not like the Beatles in the 60s but love some of their songs now. I agree that each year yields thousands of garbage releases. I have the luxury of a 60+ years to pick and chose MY best favorites.
this era will be forgotten in terms of music and everything the only things that are good is underground music
2000's pop was actually quite fun, and had some cool character. That decade as a whole was just freaky and odd, but definitely memorable. I've noticed how much more catchy those tunes are than the garbage made in the 2010's. There have been only a handful of records in this decade that I'll take along with me for the rest of my life. I sincerely hope the 20's are stellar, and that music becomes valuable again. Spotify needs to die
I'll say todays popular music sucks. There a lot of not so popular amazing artist that still do some really good music.
Bad flamingo kaledia 👀
most radio music sucks if not all, in 2016 there was a lot of great music mostly metal, rock and prog
Great video, David. Tell me, what are your thoughts on Michael Jackson's music? I think his early stuff was good and innovative.
+kane gord I still play my thriller LP frequently. I think it is one of the best produced albums ever. Quincy Jones got the best of the best to help craft those songs (Toto and Eddie Van Halen, among others), and it pays off. Micheal Jackson himself is talented, but it is the whole package that really makes it sound so good, even after all these years.
"I hate Kesha - deeply" Lol!
RnB isn't the same.. No soul or artist that can actually sing
I've heard that by running an analysis of hits from last decades there were some significant finding about the quality of modern music. The tonal range is being narrowed, also volume stays flatter and is just overall louder.
Absolutely Correct!
Something about Timbre
At least you could understand what they were singing, nowadays I need subtitles plus slang dictionary to get a clue what they are on about.
Good topic. I think most commercially successful music thats any good falls in the alternative, adult alternative or adult contemporary charts on Billboard. Not saying that most of that music is good,, but if its good thats where it tends to get categorized. The mainstream billboard chart is almost exclusively hip hop, (hip hop inflected) r&B and house based EDM. The only exceptions I can think of in recent years is some of the girl pop made by Katy Perry, Lady Gaga and Taylor Swift. What used to be considered "urban music" is now the mainstream music in the United States
Katy Perrys 2011 album was good. But something happened in 2013.
I really don't think the comparison of old repetitive and today's repetitive is really fair.
Sure, older songs would do, like, the same chorus, and everything in between was the same tune if not the same lyrics.
But _today..._ if I were to complain about the repetitive nature of today's music, what I mean is the constant "oontz oontz oontz", where there is barely even a tune at all, it's just bass and drums pounding on you for several minutes. That's a rather different kind of repetitive.
Punk,screamo,metal,rock,pop punk,etc. is way better than pop shit, u can hear an actual message and it's just better in all ways
Wow calling me emo, sooooo original
How r they pop
As pop I ment the style of music that most requires auto toon, no instruments, and most have ridiculous lyrics
B K But screamo is emo.
And I mean emo as in emotive hardcore (what it meant originally), not these mall goth scene kids who think pretending to want to kill themselves is cool. Although many people call non screamo bands screamo. If you think bands like BMTH, AA, OMAM, BVB, PTV and ADTR are screamo, then I'm sorry, but you are wrong... go listen to pg.99 or the saddest landscape.
People are now afraid to criticize the Beatles? Shoot, I''ll criticize the Beatles any time...while the are consensus "greatest band ever," I'd say Pink Floyd, the Who, Moody Blues, and others are better. The Beatles aren't "great" because they are great musicians, but because they were targeted by the business and gave in for the money. Then they got into the occult... They were chosen by the biz to reinvent rock music, which went stagnant in 1959 after the deaths of Big bopper, Ritchie Valens, and Buddy Hollyin 1958. So, in 1963-4, they revitalized rock, and the Brit invasion began. Glad to have grown up in late 60s-early 70s...after Led Zep IV, even they began to suck.
I'd like to bring up some points you forgot or completely left out. First of I would just point out that you kind of got yourself trapped in your own cage by cherrypicking and decide yourself what is and what isn't good music. So how can one biased opinion discern and objectively speak about what is good and what is bad? Second of all your whole speak about "classical" music is kinda cliched by giving us a lesson of classical music and its complexity. I've heard that argument thousands of times already. Baroque music isn't somehow objectively superior to all other music. Complexity isn't the only factor to determine such a thing. So what is it? You talk about two things: Novelty and Originality. There's lots of original music out there but does that mean its good? Not really. I'd argue that time signature and melodic/harmonic variation and good mastering is the essential ingredients to good music. A memorable melody is maybe one of the most difficult things to come up with. If you put that melody into the right context you have good music.
I rather listen to David Wise masterpiece from Donkey Kong Country (snes) "Aquatic Ambience" than a "complex" piece by Handel or Bach. Less is more. What modern pop music is missing is memorable melodies and chord progression. They miss that third thing called "magic" which is the third thing after originaly and novelty. Loudness wars and the dumbing down of pop music is to blame aswell.
Metal is really good right now if you know where to look
I walked into a store that was playing pop music today and i literally wanted to rip my ears out i would rather listen to a chalkboard getting scraped than that stupid techno "Music" thats aparently so good. I love 70s rock like carry on wayward son and killer queen and so much more it just goes to show people threw their instruments out and started singing for money instead of for entertainment
I hate that argument, real hip hop artist are musicians even if they don’t “play an instrument”. Jay z, Eminem, nas, 2pac are geniuses and you can’t just copy the shit they do. I would agree music has gotten worse and has less meaning. I also miss when rock was relevant even tho I’m a hip hophead. Back in the late 90’s-07 there were a lot of rock songs on mtv and vh1 I liked, and bands I enjoyed. I couldn’t name any rock band that’s come out in the past 10 years, you don’t even see them on the radio or tv. But I remember a lot of hip hop mainstream wise from 03-07 was garbage juice crunk and snap bs
I think It's internet that ruined music because people dont buy CD's anymore and artists have 0 incentive to make good songs
i still buy cd's
Yes. Artists have to tour more to make money rather spend time making albums for money
I bought two, but yeah, not enough people buy em
But production costs are so much lower thanks to digital recording.
Today everyone can produce music if he wants.
Uzefulvideos That can be a positive thing and a negative thing. It’s cool people can make their own stuff, but at the same time it dilutes the industry. We enjoyed those older bands because partly we aspired to be them, once you reach that point, then what’s the incentive for the music industry to make good stuff.
Beatles, Pink Floyd, Led Zep and Queen and now we have ...............? The fans started stealing music which now gives the musicians ZERO BUDGET to make new music. Musicians all had to go out and get real jobs in order to pay their monthly bills. And so the musicians are all mostly AMATEUR/HOBBYISTS now and does this make a difference? Of course it does. I jammed with Led Zep in the 70s and have many friends in the Beatles camp. Quality music comes from many years of hard work and experience in the studio. You are not going to get another 'Bohemian Rhapsody' from some guy recording in his bedroom. That song cost $500,000 to record. Until we get a realistic budget for Pro musicians we will have an endless stream of mostly dreadful music made by Hobbyists. And 99% of music loses money in this new streaming world. Not a good business to get into! Say goodbye to great songs with Orchestras and horn sections and sax solos on them. These cost MONEY and we need to start paying the musicians again otherwise good music won't be coming back. The fans have only themselves to blame for the dreadful music on the radio! The Beatles used HUNDREDS of other musicians on their albums. They received MILLIONS in advances to make their great albums. Streaming rates have put 60% of Pro musicians out of work. Time for a new business model where the true fans support their favorite bands with MONEY with DIRECT SALES (eliminating the Middle men who still take 88% of the revenues)
Well, music made by non-musicians is like paintings made by non-painters. If the output of a high school art class is all you've ever seen, you think that stuff is pretty good. And it bears various surface similarities to the older works - same size, same type of paints used, same subject matter etc. Therefore, we can conclude that little Brianna's art assignment is truly comparable to the works of Rembrandt and Picasso.
+Mississippi Blues I don't disagree with your assessment, but I'm going give a slightly different analogy. Imagine you have a robot or a piece of software that will paint for you. You tell the robot what parts of older paintings you would like it to contain, then the robot creates the art. You put your name on it because it was you who operated the software. No art involved. That's similar to what a lot of current hip-hop "artists" do these days to create their backing music.
+David Stewart Oh yeah, totally agree with you. It wasn't all that long ago when rap was just recycling every '80s pop song ever recorded, with all the kids giving the rappers full credit for having created it all in the first place.
1975-1985 The peak of pop music, in my opinion. Then it all went downhill.
90s-present music suck, because in general there is no freaking MELODY. The same applies to movie soundtracks: NO MELODY, just generic filler strings. No inspiration. You don´t remember anything after you exit the theater. Of course, there are exceptions...but compared to what we had during the 50s-80s, there was a lot of shitty music, but there was a TON of great stuff, and very varied.....it´s impossible not to see the difference. Compare the John Williams soundtracks for Superman vs The Avengers. Do you remember anything from the Avengers soundtrack? The Spider-Man movies? It´s all dull filler. Repetitive string loops.
I´d say there is some type of melody-phobia...Melodies are "cheesy", because cynicism dominates our society. The consequence is that new music is forgettable.
teenagers.
y
I'd just like to know how the use of crude language can be construed as a form of "artistry". It took us 700 years to get to here? Maybe it's a throwback to what might be genetic, and a throw back to Yelling across the plains, or jungles of Africa.....Kinda like a re-connect and a tribal "in your face"?
Liked for liberal use of air quotes while referring to pop culture
Pop music that I used to think of as really lame in 90s sounds 100% better than stuff in the main stream today. I've never cared for pop, but at least it used to be actual music. I'm in my mid 30s and like metal and punk mostly. My parents didn't get my music because there was too much to it for them to comprehend. This pop today is not even music, I mean from a musicians standpoint it is so boring and generic, there is nothing there TO understand. It just sucks. No melody, progression, and it's not as memorable. This is because most mainstream music is all written by the same handful of producers. There has always been crap music out there, but it has gotten way worse! It just seems that nobody even remembers what good music is. They just call it "old" and don't give it a chance.
I really wonder if there will ever be another band like Pantera with really good music that can be popular also. I don't see it happening anytime soon.
Q: "Can something be called music if no musicians were involved in its creation?"
A: No, but it can be called EDM.
Mainstream.
lol yeah, I forgot that producers just press a button and don't have to work hours and hours composing, mixing, finding sounds etc. yeah, ok.
@@MiniZilla1999 they really dont. Many beats are made in 5 minutes.
Music totally sucks, that's why they don't make high quality stereos anymore. back in the day. You would go over to a persons house and they would show off their great stereo and say what do you want to hear - You walk into a home now days - there is no stereo . Because it's not worth investing money in a high quality stereo to listen to crap. Music Sucks, I loved music for many years - I bought a new truck about 2 years ago, never turn on the Radio. It sucks, it's lousy and the old stuff is depressing to listen to because it reminds you that its the end of good music.Todays song is lazy music - just repetion , no breaks in the songs, no change in the tune that reverts back to the sound - its like struming a guitar over and over in the same chord
As a progressive liberal I have to say that I found your video offensive, your language was triggering, and now I have post traumatic stress disorder, thanks.
+fantana
Send us your details and we'll set up a safe zone around your residence. No we can't move you ours, it's too dangerous.
I would like my safe zone to be inside another safe zone
+fantana I find the word trigger triggering, because guns have triggers and I heard once of somebody who was shot by one.
+fantana Rather that's a "regressive" liberal.
An Evolving Ape please don't refer to me as 'fantana' that is just a name assigned to me, my preferred RUclips pronoun is Sir Mrs Bruce jennerfer
bud what was great back in the time before the 90s,was the bands were bands ,played music using there own guitars drums,the band atmostphere,,,,,,now it's a person on stage ,no band dancers and background music,,and if you call rap singing then you don't know music. i do get it my dad said you kids don't know music,but this is totaly different,no skilled guitarist and so on,,,now it's just not a show,,,one person and dancers,,sad i'm glad i was a teen in the 70s,,best ever even country
Are you implying there is anything "deep" about Led Zeppelin?
+BLKKK SKKKN HEAD Uh oh, we got a cynic here.
But in seriousness... compared to what? Compared to "I wanna hold your hand"? Yeah, Zep is deep.
I'm gonna give you every inch of my love
I understand what you are saying, but man the shit garbage I hear kids and even people my age (20's) listen to is soooooo bad. It's not even compareable to the simple tunes of Elvis and the Beates. I mean their music is reallllllly trash.
I mostly agree that 90's music was the best so far. Rap was on top, rock was fresh with alt, the whole image was fun.
What's your favorite band?
Probably ACDC
TheGameRage1 na man. When you can swith the station a get slim shady on one channel and nirvana on another that is a good time.
What are you smoking, the 90s was the catalyst for why we have all the godawful shit today (nu, core, modern rap, indie, britpop, POP, edm, electropop etc)! The 70s and 80s musical landscape was so much better, plenty of genres got on the pop charts, music was still evolving, the charts was inclusive (hate the word but it was true at the time) in the sense that they didn't try to target one specific audience with complete samey garbage. Sure ok the 90s had SOME good stuff but it was a transitional decade in a very bad way.
@@jpoulter8845 90s was the start but not the death. The end of the mix stations in the early 90s truely was the beginning of demographic promotion and separtion though.
there's bad music in every generation but there is a lot more music in this generation and there is disproportionately more bad music as well. however, just cause what they play on the radio sucks doesn't mean there aren't plenty of good artists/musicians out there! it depends on what you're into. there's still good jazz, just less abundant original material. electronic dance music, if you are into it, is at a peak in creativity and performance. there are good rock and metal bands interspersed throughout depending on what kind of styles you like cause those genres are more diversified or hybridized now. "classical" music styles are waning a bit but there are still good composers, obviously you can look at epic modern movie scores. hip hop and rap are going strong, sure there are a lot more terrible "artists", but there are still some classic rappers and a few newer more innovative ones. there is a lot of great modern music! don't pay attention to the bs stuff. I have to admit there is even some radio pop music that I have grown to enjoy in the last few years. good video!