5 ms·

But I would hazard to say that the quality of well written likable music that will stand the test of time and keeps people interested has nose dived with the pr

But I would hazard to say that the quality of well written likable music that will stand the test of time and keeps people interested has nose dived with the progression you outlined. Or at least, what is popular doesn't highlight the good music any longer. Being easier to write, produce and release didn't seem to have made music better from what I can see and what I have read. I'm sure there is still good stuff being produced, but by Jebs, it's very hard to find now. Edit. Quality isn't just my measure. As mentioned, I've read about the topic a few times as well articles and studies showing what music gets listened to the most, the complexity of music, how the simpler music gets the less it remains in listenership for long periods etc etc etc. Even playlists show that music pre 2010s, maybe 2000s can't remember now, is preferred by even people in their 20 to 30 year olds with some questioned stating new music is too simple or is rubbish. And by no means does it mean all modern pop music is bad, this is not a blanket statement. There is still good stuff, it's probably just getting drowned out by the weekly flavour changes.

slyall 4y ago
Unlike the great music that was produced when you were aged between 12 and 22 ?
- pleb_nz 4y ago
  Personally I like music regardless of when it was made. If it sounds good then I like it. Time has nothing to do with it. And I can't remember exactly what dates the studies focused on as there have been a few I've read. One was over the last 60 years of music if I remember right and across all age brackets in 2022
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    Except that autotuned singing is inferior.
jakelazaroff 4y ago
How do you measure “quality”, though? To my ear there’s a ton of great new music being made today, rivaling music from basically any point in recording history. As for whether it will stand the test of time, well, only time can tell that. But most people are forever stuck waiting for more music that sounds like it did when they were in high school and college, which is a mindset destined for disappointment.
- pleb_nz 4y ago
  As I mentioned, good music is out there. But finding it seems to be harder now as a lot of it doesn't make it into the charts and stays hidden except to those who know about it.
  - jakelazaroff 4y ago
    The charts are still there, though? And only a fraction of good music has ever made it onto them. To be honest, I’m not quite sure what exactly you think has changed.
mjr00 4y ago
> But I would hazard to say that the quality of well written likable music that will stand the test of time and keeps people interested has nose dived with the progression you outlined. People have felt this way since time immemorial: the music they grew up listening to in their formative years was just better than whatever exists now. Your dad's dad, or his dad depending on your age, thought that Led Zeppelin was just a bunch of talentless idiots making noise.
- pleb_nz 4y ago
  People probably have, but now it seems to be getting some backing by statistics. This isn't me just saying something random, it's something I've read about recently and had come out of studies of changes in music over the last 60 years.
  - filoleg 4y ago
    Unless those studies have managed to verifiably predict the future and quantifiably measure how a particular album would affect the industry decades down the road, I wouldn't put much salt into those "studies". And if they have somehow managed to successfuly accomplish that, I think that only raises way more questions. There have been quite a few examples of albums that were bombed on release by both critics and the audience, but then ended up as critically (+publicly) acclaimed and massively influential (+still standing the test of time) many many years later just from the past 2 decades. That alone tells me that whoever claims they have a method to predict the future influence and "standing the test of time" on aggregate is just playing around.
    - mjr00 4y ago
      Yeah exactly, two examples that immediately come to mind during my lifetime are My Chemical Romance - Welcome to the Black Parade (the song more than the album) and Green Day - American Idiot. At the time they were released, many people saw them as emo-pop dreck, a complete departure from "real" punk-rock music of the 80s and 90s into something far too watered down and palatable for the masses. Now if you look at YouTube comment sections for those songs, it's full of people wistfully remembering the good ol' days when people played real music with real instruments. Hell, even Limp Bizkit, Limp fucking Bizkit, has been widely retconned into being a charmingly nostalgic relic of music at the turn of the millennium instead of just, you know... bad. A study in 2022 saying that most people say music from before 2010 was better is meaningless, because a study in 2032 will show that music from before 2020 was better.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

slyall 4y ago

Unlike the great music that was produced when you were aged between 12 and 22 ?

pleb_nz 4y ago
Personally I like music regardless of when it was made. If it sounds good then I like it. Time has nothing to do with it. And I can't remember exactly what dates the studies focused on as there have been a few I've read. One was over the last 60 years of music if I remember right and across all age brackets in 2022
- WalterBright 4y ago
  Except that autotuned singing is inferior.

jakelazaroff 4y ago

How do you measure “quality”, though? To my ear there’s a ton of great new music being made today, rivaling music from basically any point in recording history. As for whether it will stand the test of time, well, only time can tell that. But most people are forever stuck waiting for more music that sounds like it did when they were in high school and college, which is a mindset destined for disappointment.

pleb_nz 4y ago
As I mentioned, good music is out there. But finding it seems to be harder now as a lot of it doesn't make it into the charts and stays hidden except to those who know about it.
- jakelazaroff 4y ago
  The charts are still there, though? And only a fraction of good music has ever made it onto them. To be honest, I’m not quite sure what exactly you think has changed.

mjr00 4y ago

> But I would hazard to say that the quality of well written likable music that will stand the test of time and keeps people interested has nose dived with the progression you outlined. People have felt this way since time immemorial: the music they grew up listening to in their formative years was just better than whatever exists now. Your dad's dad, or his dad depending on your age, thought that Led Zeppelin was just a bunch of talentless idiots making noise.

pleb_nz 4y ago
People probably have, but now it seems to be getting some backing by statistics. This isn't me just saying something random, it's something I've read about recently and had come out of studies of changes in music over the last 60 years.
- filoleg 4y ago
  Unless those studies have managed to verifiably predict the future and quantifiably measure how a particular album would affect the industry decades down the road, I wouldn't put much salt into those "studies". And if they have somehow managed to successfuly accomplish that, I think that only raises way more questions. There have been quite a few examples of albums that were bombed on release by both critics and the audience, but then ended up as critically (+publicly) acclaimed and massively influential (+still standing the test of time) many many years later just from the past 2 decades. That alone tells me that whoever claims they have a method to predict the future influence and "standing the test of time" on aggregate is just playing around.
  - mjr00 4y ago
    Yeah exactly, two examples that immediately come to mind during my lifetime are My Chemical Romance - Welcome to the Black Parade (the song more than the album) and Green Day - American Idiot. At the time they were released, many people saw them as emo-pop dreck, a complete departure from "real" punk-rock music of the 80s and 90s into something far too watered down and palatable for the masses. Now if you look at YouTube comment sections for those songs, it's full of people wistfully remembering the good ol' days when people played real music with real instruments. Hell, even Limp Bizkit, Limp fucking Bizkit, has been widely retconned into being a charmingly nostalgic relic of music at the turn of the millennium instead of just, you know... bad. A study in 2022 saying that most people say music from before 2010 was better is meaningless, because a study in 2032 will show that music from before 2020 was better.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]