Absolutely correct. It starts kinda hilariously; The convergence of computers and music production is now complete, making any sound theoretically possible a

Absolutely correct. It starts kinda hilariously; The convergence of computers and music production is now complete, making any sound theoretically possible at virtually no cost. But I mean… lol. Cmon. Let’s run through the facts: 1. More music is being made now than ever before, both in terms of genre diversity and absolute amount. 2. The average consumer can access an effectively infinite range of that music, which is up from “a few records a year and whatever’s on the radio”, which in turn is up from “whatever’s on the radio”, which in turn is up from “whatever live music might be played at the local pub on Saturdays, plus church hymns.” 3. Across cultures, people think that the music that they listened to in their formative years — say, 15-25 - is the best music. The mechanisms are fairly obvious to back that up: emotional vulnerability, novelty, and number+quality of peer relationships are at life-long highs. In short, nostalgia. I would happen to agree re:pop (other than em!) but I think the scientific facts are all we need here. The article (and, presumably, the original video) is well written and in good faith, but I think they’re lacking some serious self-awareness. As the optimists always say regarding macro timelines: the world is much better than it was, the world is gradually getting better, and the world can be much better. This article would be covered under the first clause!