4 ms·

I think the real point is that "pop" music sucks and has always sucked, for the most part at least. A teen is more likely to listen to "what is popular" rather

I think the real point is that "pop" music sucks and has always sucked, for the most part at least. A teen is more likely to listen to "what is popular" rather than "what I like best" to fit in, but once they grow up they realize a lot of it sucked. The music we remember being good "back then" is really just a hand-picked set of artists/songs that stand out in our memory. I remember listening to a Classic Rock station in high school with my dad, and him commenting on how he loved the station -- it was the music he listened to when he was young, but he didn't have to sit through all the crap, since it was basically a "Greatest Hits" from an era. I mean, we tend to regard the 60s and 70s as a great time period for music, but how much of that music was terrible and has since faded into obscurity? I guarantee the old, grumbly people who say "music was better back in my day" can find artists and songs they like in the current generation of music. It's probably going to be different, and they're probably not going to find it on Top 40 stations or whatever (so yeah, they're less likely to try if it takes effort), but it's out there.

Swizec 11y ago
I think what you're saying is: Survivor bias. We are comparing the best songs of the past to all songs of the now. That is not a fair comparison. I think that there is a lot of very good pop music being made today. Non-pop as well. Just a lot of very good music in general. But you have to give it a decade or two to really separate the grain from the chaff. I'm 27 and I discover awesome new music I like almost daily. These days a lot of it is pop because pop is amazing music to work to. Upbeat, high tempo, just varied enough, plenty of loops. Can't think of anything better for getting in the flow. I also think pop these days is more varied than it was in, say, the 90's. For instance both Uptown Funk[1] and Summer[2] fall into pop[3] even though they sound like different genres. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPf0YbXqDm0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPf0YbXqDm0 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebXbLfLACGM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebXbLfLACGM [3] pop defined as hitting tops of charts, getting thousands of hours of radio play, and winning pop music awards
- PopeOfNope 11y ago
  > I think what you're saying is: Survivor bias. We are comparing the best songs of the past to all songs of the now. I hate how quickly people are to trot out "survivor bias" or "survivor fallacy" here. It doesn't apply to his argument at all. He's saying 90% of everything sucks and this includes pop music. He's also saying that we form emotional attachments to less than stellar pop music for reasons that have nothing to do with the music. In high school, we signal social (ie: tribal) alliances by dressing a particular way and becoming fans of particular things. People tend to like things they normally wouldn't because popular people they respect like them. Social proof. Unfortunately, social proof doesn't hold up after you leave the social structure (ie: leave high school). Hence, how we can love something in the 80's that we despise a decade later. We also associate the music with other things that might have been happening in our lives at the time. For example, Barbie Girl by Aqua is a terrible, horrible song that deserves to die in a fire. But, it will always have a special place in my heart because of a radio show in 2004 where my co-host decided to sing both the ken and barbie parts himself on the air. He's also saying time has very little effect on musical tastes. If you liked the musical brilliance of 80's hair bands, there are still newly formed bands pumping out new music that sound very similar. Because of that, the whole concept of "new music sucks" has no basis in reality anymore since you can go out and find whatever tickles your fancy. As for "pop these days", I'm not sure the term even applies anymore. After digital music displaced the radio, it's much harder to figure out what qualifies. It's no longer curated through an individual system, as it was in the past.

Swizec 11y ago

I think what you're saying is: Survivor bias. We are comparing the best songs of the past to all songs of the now. That is not a fair comparison. I think that there is a lot of very good pop music being made today. Non-pop as well. Just a lot of very good music in general. But you have to give it a decade or two to really separate the grain from the chaff. I'm 27 and I discover awesome new music I like almost daily. These days a lot of it is pop because pop is amazing music to work to. Upbeat, high tempo, just varied enough, plenty of loops. Can't think of anything better for getting in the flow. I also think pop these days is more varied than it was in, say, the 90's. For instance both Uptown Funk[1] and Summer[2] fall into pop[3] even though they sound like different genres. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPf0YbXqDm0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPf0YbXqDm0 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebXbLfLACGM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebXbLfLACGM [3] pop defined as hitting tops of charts, getting thousands of hours of radio play, and winning pop music awards

PopeOfNope 11y ago
> I think what you're saying is: Survivor bias. We are comparing the best songs of the past to all songs of the now. I hate how quickly people are to trot out "survivor bias" or "survivor fallacy" here. It doesn't apply to his argument at all. He's saying 90% of everything sucks and this includes pop music. He's also saying that we form emotional attachments to less than stellar pop music for reasons that have nothing to do with the music. In high school, we signal social (ie: tribal) alliances by dressing a particular way and becoming fans of particular things. People tend to like things they normally wouldn't because popular people they respect like them. Social proof. Unfortunately, social proof doesn't hold up after you leave the social structure (ie: leave high school). Hence, how we can love something in the 80's that we despise a decade later. We also associate the music with other things that might have been happening in our lives at the time. For example, Barbie Girl by Aqua is a terrible, horrible song that deserves to die in a fire. But, it will always have a special place in my heart because of a radio show in 2004 where my co-host decided to sing both the ken and barbie parts himself on the air. He's also saying time has very little effect on musical tastes. If you liked the musical brilliance of 80's hair bands, there are still newly formed bands pumping out new music that sound very similar. Because of that, the whole concept of "new music sucks" has no basis in reality anymore since you can go out and find whatever tickles your fancy. As for "pop these days", I'm not sure the term even applies anymore. After digital music displaced the radio, it's much harder to figure out what qualifies. It's no longer curated through an individual system, as it was in the past.