This comment section has some major boomer energy. Anyway, my take on this is different from the author's. He cites the following as (anec)data: 1) According t

This comment section has some major boomer energy. Anyway, my take on this is different from the author's. He cites the following as (anec)data: 1) According to MRC Data, old songs now represent 70% of the market share 2) The 200 most popular tracks now account for less than 5% of total streams. 3) The current list of most downloaded tracks on iTunes includes CCR and The Police etc. Not going to touch 1), because I don't feel like going hunting for that data. But a single data point is useless. Let's see the trend, please. 2) has nothing to do with old versus new. The average music consumer today has so many music discovery avenues open to them on a level that is completely unprecedented. Should we really be surprised that people are listening less and less to the top 200 songs when the sheer catalog of music accessible to (and actually discoverable by) them has grown by orders of magnitude in the last 10 years? This data point tells us nothing about old versus new, because there's so much new music that is never going to hit top 200 that people can find and easily listen to now. 3) I mean, really, are you surprised? You're looking at music people bought on iTunes. _Of course_ that would biased towards people old enough to actually pay money for tracks. This is equivalent to trying to figure out the most popular porn categories by looking at DVD rental data, ignoring the fact that 99.99% of porn consumption has moved to online streaming platforms..