today's music

[tom]

At the moment, here in the UK, the music industry in general seems to be bereft of new ideas. Having said this, there is still the odd song that occasionally stands out head and shoulders above the rest, and, being ever the optimist, I live in hope that eventually the industry will come out of the doldrums.

In my opinion, the music industry is fast approaching a dead end, and the way to recovery may come from taking a step backwards to embrace earlier styles.

This may not be such a drastic step as it sounds. My 'kids' (aged 19 and 23) have to a large extent abandoned today's music, both preferring to listen to stuff from the 50s, 60s and 70s - well before they were born! The Matthew Street Festival, which features tribute bands, mainly playing music of 60s and 70s vintage (The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, etc) attracts crowds of 500,000 over a 3-day period, is attended by many who are much too young to remember the original acts.

Also, one or two recent chart entries in the UK have had a distinctly '60s feel' about them.

Tom

[M.Maestro]

tom said:

At the moment, here in the UK, the music industry in general seems to be bereft of new ideas. Having said this, there is still the odd song that occasionally stands out head and shoulders above the rest, and, being ever the optimist, I live in hope that eventually the industry will come out of the doldrums.

In my opinion, the music industry is fast approaching a dead end, and the way to recovery may come from taking a step backwards to embrace earlier styles.

This may not be such a drastic step as it sounds. My 'kids' (aged 19 and 23) have to a large extent abandoned today's music, both preferring to listen to stuff from the 50s, 60s and 70s - well before they were born! The Matthew Street Festival, which features tribute bands, mainly playing music of 60s and 70s vintage (The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, etc) attracts crowds of 500,000 over a 3-day period, is attended by many who are much too young to remember the original acts.

Also, one or two recent chart entries in the UK have had a distinctly '60s feel' about them.

Tom

Along those same lines, Tom, here is something that you will appreciate: Andy Williams, in a recent Biography program on the A&E network, said that some of his biggest, and most enthuastic fans are over in the U.K.! And he was amazed at the number of young people in his audiences, who weren't even born during his heyday! So props to your fellow Brits for having good musical taste!

[socal]

I kinda think that today's music is quite inferior to the stuff from the 50's, 60's, and the 70's. I can't understand the lyrics most of the time, and to me it's just a bunch of noise.

[M.Maestro]

socal said:

I kinda think that today's music is quite inferior to the stuff from the 50's, 60's, and the 70's. I can't understand the lyrics most of the time, and to me it's just a bunch of noise.

Agreed, socal! All that you need to know how true that fact is, look at the number of Pop stars that are doing standards-oriented albums/CD's. The latest is Carly Simon's "Moonlight Serenade" that just was released. Even a couple of Country Music's superstars got into the act last year: Willie Nelson & Ronnie Milsap. Just another great reason to keep the music of the early 20th alive, which we will try our best to do on this very forum!

[peridot44]

Agree with everyone here (though as I know almost nothing about today's pop music, my thoughts are not important). I've always thought that the most important thing about any song is that it actually has a melody and some interesting scoring (too many 60s groups had drums and 3 guitars and no ability to sound different to all the others).
All too often a song relies on a gimmick to sell it. This is not too bad as long as it clever, and is never used again. I rely on the advertizers to single out the better songs. Going back to the early 60s and 50s will produce lovely melodies (sometimes) but surely things must move on and every era continue to have its own sounds?
The Beatles were on their own, producing melody after melody, getting better and better. We need more like them.
By the way anyone know a song called "I Feel Free" from about 20 - 25 years ago (maybe more)? I have a vague recollection of something like that.
Cheers
P

[M.Maestro]

peridot44 said:

Agree with everyone here (though as I know almost nothing about today's pop music, my thoughts are not important). I've always thought that the most important thing about any song is that it actually has a melody and some interesting scoring (too many 60s groups had drums and 3 guitars and no ability to sound different to all the others).
All too often a song relies on a gimmick to sell it. This is not too bad as long as it clever, and is never used again. I rely on the advertizers to single out the better songs. Going back to the early 60s and 50s will produce lovely melodies (sometimes) but surely things must move on and every era continue to have its own sounds?
The Beatles were on their own, producing melody after melody, getting better and better. We need more like them.
By the way anyone know a song called "I Feel Free" from about 20 - 25 years ago (maybe more)? I have a vague recollection of something like that.
Cheers
P

1) The rock band Cream did a song in the mid-60's with that title; 2) Jack Bruce has a song with that title on his album "More Jack Than God" and 3) David Bowie has a song with that title on his 1993 album "Black Tie, White Noise". Could it be any one of those?

MM

[tom]

peridot44 said:

Going back to the early 60s and 50s will produce lovely melodies (sometimes) but surely things must move on and every era continue to have its own sounds?

I quite understand where you're coming from, peridot, and I'm not suggesting that music should not move on. I'll try to illustrate what I'm getting at by using the following analogy (I hope that's the right word!):

I like to think of the evolution of music in the form of a tree.

The roots underground represent the first and most primitive forms of music, from the time when humans made music for the first time.

From that grows the trunk - which is the basic structure of music.

Each branch represents a different genre: classical; pop; jazz; rock, etc. Each of these branches splits into smaller branches - that is, each genre produces many different variations (for instance, classical produces baroque, operetta, renaissance, etc.).

If one 'branch' is followed along a single path, eventually you will reach the smallest 'twig', or in other words, a dead-end. This means that it is impossible to evolve further along that particular route. It then becomes necessary to retrace the path back to a point where a different route can be chosen.

That is what I meant when I said that to progress further, music may need to take a step backwards.

I hope I haven't totally bored everyone to death with my attempt to explain my view of music. I know it's a highly-simplified explanation, as it doesn't allow for genre crossovers, but it was the only way I could think of illustrating my point.

Tom

[peridot44]

"The rock band Cream did a song in the mid-60's with that title; 2) Jack Bruce has a song with that title on his album "More Jack Than God" and 3) David Bowie has a song with that title on his 1993 album "Black Tie, White Noise". Could it be any one of those?"

Thanks MM for the info. The first suggestion may be correct, or the second. I'll try and find out.

Tom, it's not just pop that hit the buffers, serious music did too arriving at a point that only the composers could appreciate their own 'music'. Perhaps all this is inevitable given the striving to be different in every way. There was even talk of a completely silent piece of 'music'. Imagine that (so to speak).
It's like the artist who actually produced (and had exhibited) 3 very large canvases, all painted pure white. Where do you go from there? firebricks?
I'm a traditionalist in that I like melody in music and skill in the artist and sculptor, able to do something I couldn't do myself.
How do you feel about an 'Unmade Bed', for instance? or am I getting just too old to appreciate the new?
Cheers
P

[M.Maestro]

peridot44 said:

"The rock band Cream did a song in the mid-60's with that title; 2) Jack Bruce has a song with that title on his album "More Jack Than God" and 3) David Bowie has a song with that title on his 1993 album "Black Tie, White Noise". Could it be any one of those?"

Thanks MM for the info. The first suggestion may be correct, or the second. I'll try and find out.

Tom, it's not just pop that hit the buffers, serious music did too arriving at a point that only the composers could appreciate their own 'music'. Perhaps all this is inevitable given the striving to be different in every way. There was even talk of a completely silent piece of 'music'. Imagine that (so to speak).
It's like the artist who actually produced (and had exhibited) 3 very large canvases, all painted pure white. Where do you go from there? firebricks?
I'm a traditionalist in that I like melody in music and skill in the artist and sculptor, able to do something I couldn't do myself.
How do you feel about an 'Unmade Bed', for instance? or am I getting just too old to appreciate the new?
Cheers
P

No, sweetheart, you are NOT too old to appreciate the new. I (to a lesser degree) have the same concerns toward "Today's" music. The overwhelming majority of it seems to be noise, not melodies; more anti-societal garbage, not romantic lyrical content. Being a baby-boomer myself, I find myself torn between two generations sometimes; those who danced in ballrooms to the Big Bands, and those who danced in arenas to techno-rock. There are some artists of today that I find tolerable (Celine Dion, Josh Groban, Matchboxtwenty, Train, Goo Goo Dolls, Kelly Clarkson to name a few), but more often that not you will find me listening on the radio (when I'm not playing my own collection, which is quite large, ) to the Nostalgia stations that play Sinatra, Bennett, Fitzgerald, etc. Call me an old fogey if you will, but so be it.

P.S. There is a nationally syndicated program here in the U.S. called "Big Band Jump" that features the music of and artists associated with the Big Band Era. I listen every weekend, and find it quite entertaining. I would suggest that you visit their web site at www.bigbandjump.com. If you'd like to purchase music from that era. you will find it there. Quality product at a reasonable price, & you reminiscing experience will be enhanced greatly!

MM

[tom]

As I said to my kids when I played records like:

Hot Diggity, by Perry Como;
Good Morning Starshine, by Oliver;
Mellow Yellow, by Donovan

"They don't write songs now with proper lyrics like they did in the 50s and 60s!" ;D ;D ;D

Tom

[tom]

After posting on another thread about old 78s, I came up with a theory as to why today's music seems to have stagnated.

One thing that struck me when thinking back to those 78s was the sheer number of different labels in those days, all of them able to compete with each other on a level playing field. Result: countless releases each year, with both new and established artists, with no restriction on the age of the artist, the availability of the records, or the genre.

Many of those labels have now disappeared, or have been swallowed up by a few super-size recording companies. These companies are now run by people who have more love for the marketplace than for the music being produced. If money is made from a certain style of song, the result is a load of mass-produced clones flooding the market. This continues until the golden goose stops laying, and then it's on to the next money-spinner. These companies are so powerful that they are able to guarantee airplay, and are skilled at the 'hype'. They also to a large extent freeze out the independant labels, by being able to limit their point-of-sales.

Exactly the same thing has happened to the Brewing Industry in the U.K., resulting in less and less choice for the consumer, and once-popular brands disappearing, being replaced by insipid mass-produced beer.

Tom

[M.Maestro]

tom said:

After posting on another thread about old 78s, I came up with a theory as to why today's music seems to have stagnated.

One thing that struck me when thinking back to those 78s was the sheer number of different labels in those days, all of them able to compete with each other on a level playing field. Result: countless releases each year, with both new and established artists, with no restriction on the age of the artist, the availability of the records, or the genre.

Many of those labels have now disappeared, or have been swallowed up by a few super-size recording companies. These companies are now run by people who have more love for the marketplace than for the music being produced. If money is made from a certain style of song, the result is a load of mass-produced clones flooding the market. This continues until the golden goose stops laying, and then it's on to the next money-spinner. These companies are so powerful that they are able to guarantee airplay, and are skilled at the 'hype'. They also to a large extent freeze out the independant labels, by being able to limit their point-of-sales.

Exactly the same thing has happened to the Brewing Industry in the U.K., resulting in less and less choice for the consumer, and once-popular brands disappearing, being replaced by insipid mass-produced beer.

Tom

Are you saying that the brewing industry is in a state of crisis, Tom? Is not the market determing what sells and what doesn't? And what are the beer consumers saying about the changing landscape of the adult beverage?