3 ms·

> It seems that so many people my age mustered out of finding new music sometime in their college years. As they age they return to that music to, I imagine, re

by bsder 3y ago

> It seems that so many people my age mustered out of finding new music sometime in their college years. As they age they return to that music to, I imagine, remember that time in their life. It also used to be an age where music is simply prevalent, but even that has changed. Being associated with something even slightly popular can resurrect a 4 decades old hit familiar to the elders from obscurity. However, I haven't yet seen the reverse where something is really popular and drives across age groups. Where the hell is the modern equivalent to Gangnam Style, for example? (I chose that because it's more modern, but you've got mega-hits that everybody knows from most decades--until about 2010 (see: check any karaoke night--start a betting pool on how long it takes until someone does something from Journey, for example--you won't reach the fifth song) or watch an entire venue join in for something from Neil Diamond) Taylor Swift is supposedly killing it, yet I probably wouldn't be able to name anything she did in the last 10 years. Depeche Mode is releasing a bunch of new stuff--anybody heard any of it? Johnny Marr has released a bunch of new stuff in the last 10 years--I somehow actually bumped into one song somewhere in public. Has anybody not already a solid David Bowie fan heard anything off of Blackstar? How about Tori Amos? She's still just as brilliant as ever.

rainonmoon 3y ago
The modern equivalent to Gangnam Style was probably Billie Eilish's 'Bad Guy' in terms of ecumenical appeal but in terms of internet-spawned reach, TikTok is generating these hits every year. If you can't name anything Taylor Swift has done in the past 10 years, you're missing out on her strongest and most mature songwriting. From 1989 to her latest album, this has been Taylor Swift's golden era. The rest of the world is aware of this and I hope you'll take this opportunity to jump on board.
- bsder 3y ago
  And you promptly proved my point: unless you are specifically plugged in (aka tweeny grinding TikTok) you have zero exposure to these things. I pointed it out: go to a karaoke night. You might catch someone set up "Shake It Off" (okay, I guess I'm wrong--that counts as Taylor Swift within the last 10 years--barely). Maybe. That's it. And we're talking mostly 20-somethings--not 50-somethings. In the 70s or 80s, you simply couldn't avoid the music. Now, it's quite easy.
  - rainonmoon 3y ago
    A lot more people are enjoying the expansive breadth of modern music tonight in all of its inventiveness and variety through TikTok (and via streamed TV and movie soundtracks, Spotify, Bandcamp and the rest of the music platforms, via the vinyl resurgence, etc etc etc) than they are via... karaoke. Your unwillingness to notice it is a shame, but not the fault of anyone else.
randomdata 3y ago
The musical monolith is no doubt dead at this point. Much improved distribution of music in the last decade means now people can listen to what they like, not what the radio DJ happens to like. Which means it is much less likely that the population will converge on a shared music experience.
- bsder 3y ago
  > Which means it is much less likely that the population will converge on a shared music experience. Is that true? All of the music writing I see seems to contradict that. The general consensus seems to be that the mega winners are not as big as yesteryear in terms of numbers, but, contrariwise, they are MUCH bigger in terms of percentage. ie. the market has shrunk but the remaining market is now dominated by a very few players.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    I don't see the contradiction. A market requires music to have value. Most music is worthless. Historically, there was no practical way for the average Joe to find and obtain worthless music. Only well connected hardcore music geeks had a chance, and even they often would fall short. Now it is right there at everyone's fingertips, every bit as easy to listen to as Taylor Swift, and recommended to them by algorithms. Of what music that has been able to find value, it stands to reason that segment is shrinking with people now finding and listening to more and more worthless music. It also stands to reason that with more and more time spent listening to worthless music, it has become more and more difficult for music with potential value to find its place, thus leaving a market ripe for monopolization. But the rise of worthless music has broken down the monolith. We're not stuck all listening to the same 1,000 valuable songs. Now we have 1,000,000,000 worthless songs that divides up the attention and some remaining segment paying for 100 songs that rose above being worthless.

by bsder 3y ago

rainonmoon 3y ago

The modern equivalent to Gangnam Style was probably Billie Eilish's 'Bad Guy' in terms of ecumenical appeal but in terms of internet-spawned reach, TikTok is generating these hits every year. If you can't name anything Taylor Swift has done in the past 10 years, you're missing out on her strongest and most mature songwriting. From 1989 to her latest album, this has been Taylor Swift's golden era. The rest of the world is aware of this and I hope you'll take this opportunity to jump on board.

bsder 3y ago
And you promptly proved my point: unless you are specifically plugged in (aka tweeny grinding TikTok) you have zero exposure to these things. I pointed it out: go to a karaoke night. You might catch someone set up "Shake It Off" (okay, I guess I'm wrong--that counts as Taylor Swift within the last 10 years--barely). Maybe. That's it. And we're talking mostly 20-somethings--not 50-somethings. In the 70s or 80s, you simply couldn't avoid the music. Now, it's quite easy.
- rainonmoon 3y ago
  A lot more people are enjoying the expansive breadth of modern music tonight in all of its inventiveness and variety through TikTok (and via streamed TV and movie soundtracks, Spotify, Bandcamp and the rest of the music platforms, via the vinyl resurgence, etc etc etc) than they are via... karaoke. Your unwillingness to notice it is a shame, but not the fault of anyone else.

randomdata 3y ago

The musical monolith is no doubt dead at this point. Much improved distribution of music in the last decade means now people can listen to what they like, not what the radio DJ happens to like. Which means it is much less likely that the population will converge on a shared music experience.

bsder 3y ago
> Which means it is much less likely that the population will converge on a shared music experience. Is that true? All of the music writing I see seems to contradict that. The general consensus seems to be that the mega winners are not as big as yesteryear in terms of numbers, but, contrariwise, they are MUCH bigger in terms of percentage. ie. the market has shrunk but the remaining market is now dominated by a very few players.
- randomdata 3y ago
  I don't see the contradiction. A market requires music to have value. Most music is worthless. Historically, there was no practical way for the average Joe to find and obtain worthless music. Only well connected hardcore music geeks had a chance, and even they often would fall short. Now it is right there at everyone's fingertips, every bit as easy to listen to as Taylor Swift, and recommended to them by algorithms. Of what music that has been able to find value, it stands to reason that segment is shrinking with people now finding and listening to more and more worthless music. It also stands to reason that with more and more time spent listening to worthless music, it has become more and more difficult for music with potential value to find its place, thus leaving a market ripe for monopolization. But the rise of worthless music has broken down the monolith. We're not stuck all listening to the same 1,000 valuable songs. Now we have 1,000,000,000 worthless songs that divides up the attention and some remaining segment paying for 100 songs that rose above being worthless.