3 ms·

It's more than news; it's everything else as well. Even the music. Go ahead and listen to pop music from any previous area - there is a lot of happy music, an

It's more than news; it's everything else as well. Even the music. Go ahead and listen to pop music from any previous area - there is a lot of happy music, and a lot of slower tempo, beautiful music. 'Beautiful' stopped being cool in the 1990's, since then everything has to be trounced in some kind of faux-noir or whatever. Even sad songs by Simon and Garfunkel are beautiful, honest. Even the slightly cheezy soft rock like Air Supply, Chicago ... it was relaxing in a way. Even the music was upbeat was still positive: 'Jump' by Van Halen' - a ridiculously rubbish but positive song, almost child-like. Even the unconentious pop music of today lacks a kind of naivte. It's in lyrics, timbre, instrumentation, production, presentation - everything. My all time favourite band - Radiohead - is kind of guilty of this. They just can't be happy, now matter what. They must be dour. Have you ever seen an interview or video with Thom Yorke just clowning around the the lads, laughing, enjoying himself, not really caring about much at all? It's 'not their brand'. Spend a day listening to music any time before the 1990's, especially the slower tempo stuff (of any genre, big band classical), and it changes your demeanour.

lacampbell 7y ago
> 'Beautiful' stopped being cool in the 1990' Was this coincidentally around the time when your adventure through puberty came to an end? There has been plenty of 'happy music' in the past two and a half decades. It's likely you just view as cheesy saccharine garbage because you didn't listen to it during a formative time of your life.
- sonnyblarney 7y ago
  Hot 100 today: https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100 https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100 Hot 100 1980: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Year-End_Hot_100_singles_of_1980 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Year-End_Hot_100_sin... They still make good music, it doesn't go on the radio and can't compete on billboard, which is beyond rigged. There are also technical issues such as audio levels, creeping volume etc. - Simon & Garfunkel doesn't use enough of the spectrum to be played, it's too quiet, it would be 'filled up' were a producer to touch it today, whereby the nuance is lost. Related, compare the amount of 'energy' in the sounds - the hot 100 today is almost all verging on aggressive, it's like a caffeine jolt. Even the slower tempo songs are 'in your face' musically, and usually lyrically as well. There is the very subjective issue of overall quality. I don't think there is a single track on the Hot100 today that will be played in any number of years wherein people will really 'remember that jam', in any way other than to a very few select few fans. While it's not a fair comparison because the 1980 list I linked to was a 'year end list' and not a 'current list' - many people would instantly recognize a whole host of songs on that list. If not by name, by sound. 'Radio' and distribution channels were a rough collusion between artists and industry, now it's almost entirely industry. I really don't think there is anything relaxing about any of the Hot 100 songs: they are heavily produced, 'loud', assertive, repetitive, low-risk products. Maybe if we take it back further than 1980 for example, before rock and roll, almost all (non colloquial) music was fairly authentic and beautiful, being orchestral in nature. The soundtrack of every film was 'pretty'.

lacampbell 7y ago

> 'Beautiful' stopped being cool in the 1990' Was this coincidentally around the time when your adventure through puberty came to an end? There has been plenty of 'happy music' in the past two and a half decades. It's likely you just view as cheesy saccharine garbage because you didn't listen to it during a formative time of your life.

sonnyblarney 7y ago
Hot 100 today: https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100 https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100 Hot 100 1980: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Year-End_Hot_100_singles_of_1980 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Year-End_Hot_100_sin... They still make good music, it doesn't go on the radio and can't compete on billboard, which is beyond rigged. There are also technical issues such as audio levels, creeping volume etc. - Simon & Garfunkel doesn't use enough of the spectrum to be played, it's too quiet, it would be 'filled up' were a producer to touch it today, whereby the nuance is lost. Related, compare the amount of 'energy' in the sounds - the hot 100 today is almost all verging on aggressive, it's like a caffeine jolt. Even the slower tempo songs are 'in your face' musically, and usually lyrically as well. There is the very subjective issue of overall quality. I don't think there is a single track on the Hot100 today that will be played in any number of years wherein people will really 'remember that jam', in any way other than to a very few select few fans. While it's not a fair comparison because the 1980 list I linked to was a 'year end list' and not a 'current list' - many people would instantly recognize a whole host of songs on that list. If not by name, by sound. 'Radio' and distribution channels were a rough collusion between artists and industry, now it's almost entirely industry. I really don't think there is anything relaxing about any of the Hot 100 songs: they are heavily produced, 'loud', assertive, repetitive, low-risk products. Maybe if we take it back further than 1980 for example, before rock and roll, almost all (non colloquial) music was fairly authentic and beautiful, being orchestral in nature. The soundtrack of every film was 'pretty'.