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-E

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'.