Is there something 'they' really like?

[Alobar]

When are you gonna paint on the eyes? Sheesh, you don't go too far off shore as is do you?

That might help with the orcas that are trying to take a bite out of me!

 

[Superampman]

That might help with the orcas that are trying to take a bite out of me!

Nibbles of opportunity is all

 

[Eric Lloyd]

Like many, no one I know really cares. The only people I know who have a traditional hi fi are old guys, and fewer of those all the time. Everyone says all the records are way cool when they see them, but that's it.

The few younger people I meet who have made a step into LP playback have all bought cheap crap and are generally uninterested in upgrading if it will take up too much space or effort.

 

[Nixxuz]

That's because current offerings are just that...noise. Unless you grew up when music was, it won't be a primary focus because it simply can't, because it just isn't. Sad? No, just fact. Reintroduce what was in the mainstream and it will live, no doubt about it.

I don't find that to be true. There's plenty of music, some is just appealing to some and not to others. I don't know what a "Justice Beaver" is, but apparently, some teenaged girls groove to him. It all seems so strange...though 40 years ago there was someone named GUY MANN DUDE!!!

Of course, no generation should ever have something like the Insane Clown Posse...think of it; "musicians" wearing makeup like clowns! I'm sure you get the sarcasm.

And one of the most well regarded bands of a previous generation was named after a dog in a movie...another, a steam powered dildo from Japan.

I'm not so subtly trying to point out that EVERY generation insists that the following one isn't making "real" music. Herbie Hancock was frowned at by jazz purists when Headhunters came out....

 

[BilboBaggins]

I have to agree with above. Music goes through cycles. I grew up in the 70s, but I’ve found music that I love in every generation. Old school rap, Eminem, shakira, nirvana, soundgarten, etc, and even there is stuff that my youngest kids like, that I find pretty good. I feel we are on the verge of a new cycle of brilliant musicians.

 

[E-Stat]

I don't know what a "Justice Beaver" is,

Here's Justin Bieber:

 

[Superampman]

ź

I don't find that to be true. There's plenty of music, some is just appealing to some and not to others. I don't know what a "Justice Beaver" is, but apparently, some teenaged girls groove to him. It all seems so strange...though 40 years ago there was someone named GUY MANN DUDE!!!

Of course, no generation should ever have something like the Insane Clown Posse...think of it; "musicians" wearing makeup like clowns! I'm sure you get the sarcasm.

And one of the most well regarded bands of a previous generation was named after a dog in a movie...another, a steam powered dildo from Japan.

I'm not so subtly trying to point out that EVERY generation insists that the following one isn't making "real" music. Herbie Hancock was frowned at by jazz purists when Headhunters came out....[/QUOTE You're not bringing up a new argument, rather you're conveniently latching on to a historically repetitive mantra by which you think you can equalize or validate your opinion. Hey, there's lots of shitty stuff from the past too, some of which I would not consider music. There's some jazz produced 40-50 years ago that just is not music and it was being debated then. Granted my statements were a bit extreme to make my point. But the thing that drives my position is not the refusal to be convinced of the value/validity of a new genre as history demonstrates, but that all known genres exhibit the very same bland, monotonic, unappealing content whereas before, that was not the case at all. I'm referring to current offerings of the genres of music I hold dear. Oh, but you'll say it's all subjective. Subjective to who? The young kids being deprived of discovering the pinnacles of musical development? Relegated to being force-fed by the likes of Sony and other social media giants. The topic of the 'end of music' was often talked about in the 70's, nearer to the 80's, when the big names began reaching the end of their stock of possible composition. You see, they'd already long before thrown the crumpled pages containing what's currently produced over their shoulders in an attempt to hit the trash can. It's finally being brought out because it's all that's left. So here's where subjectivity meets objectivity, right? Technically 'unlimited' melodies possible. It's all 'music'. There's no end in sight! Okay, but who wants to listen to it? As I said in my post, bring back what was into the main stream and see what direction preference/taste takes among the ill informed. Do you think that all the great stuff from the past could have been borne of currently produced music? Do you think the likes of The Beatles, Stones, CSNY, The Doors, Pink Floyd, The Eagles et al could under the right circumstances been influenced by today's examples to then go and come up with the same material? Like I said, current music was not new to them, they simply discarded it as inferior, not worthy of further attention.

 

[DaveVoorhis]

You're not bringing up a new argument, rather you're conveniently latching on to a historically repetitive mantra by which you think you can equalize or validate your opinion. Hey, there's lots of shitty stuff from the past too, some of which I would not consider music. There's some jazz produced 40-50 years ago that just is not music and it was being debated then. Granted my statements were a bit extreme to make my point. But the thing that drives my position is not the refusal to be convinced of the value/validity of a new genre as history demonstrates, but that all known genres exhibit the very same bland, monotonic, unappealing content whereas before, that was not the case at all. I'm referring to current offerings of the genres of music I hold dear. Oh, but you'll say it's all subjective. Subjective to who? The young kids being deprived of discovering the pinnacles of musical development? Relegated to being force-fed by the likes of Sony and other social media giants. The topic of the 'end of music' was often talked about in the 70's, nearer to the 80's, when the big names began reaching the end of their stock of possible composition. You see, they'd already long before thrown the crumpled pages containing what's currently produced over their shoulders in an attempt to hit the trash can. It's finally being brought out because it's all that's left. So here's where subjectivity meets objectivity, right? Technically 'unlimited' melodies possible. It's all 'music'. There's no end in sight! Okay, but who wants to listen to it? As I said in my post, bring back what was into the main stream and see what direction preference/taste takes among the ill informed. Do you think that all the great stuff from the past could have been borne of currently produced music? Do you think the likes of The Beatles, Stones, CSNY, The Doors, Pink Floyd, The Eagles et al could under the right circumstances been influenced by today's examples to then go and come up with the same material? Like I said, current music was not new to them, they simply discarded it as inferior, not worthy of further attention.

It's true that mainstream pop music seems rather repetitive and derivative -- and as current fashion dictates, its focus is frequently on lyrical, rhythmic, and timbral exploration at the expense of melody -- but mainstream pop music is rarely where interesting new music happens. It's always been that way -- except for occasional and brief interludes where musical innovation intersects with mainstream pop -- but as we get older it becomes more obvious. We invariably most appreciate the era when pop music seemed new and fresh because we were young and it was targeted at us, and it seemed new because we hadn't heard anything like it before. When we get older, it's no longer targeted at us. We move on, but pop music remains squarely aimed at twelve to twenty year olds, and so it no longer touches us the same way. Eventually, we reach the age our parents were when we liked pop music, and just as pop music seemed to our parents when we were young and liked it, for us it now either seems repetitive and derivative or it sounds like crap.

But that's because mainstream pop is not for us.

So we have to look outside of mainstream pop to find interesting new music and interesting new musicians. Turns out there's plenty. Most of it will never come near a record, CD, or the usual streaming sources; and it definitely won't appear on radio. That's where mainstream pop still holds sway. Instead, interesting new music is live or on YouTube. Just a few random samples:

Equal parts bass-master and musical comedian, this young Italian has got more funk in his right thumb than a, uh... funky thing.

The original "Marble Machine" video is now famous -- I include it here if you've not seen it before:

The band is Wintergatan, and its frontsman produces a regular series of videos that are equal parts music, invention, and (often) woodworking. An example:

And so on. You just have to look for it.

 

[Superampman]

It's true that mainstream pop music seems rather repetitive and derivative -- and as current fashion dictates, its focus is frequently on lyrical, rhythmic, and timbral exploration at the expense of melody -- but mainstream pop music is rarely where interesting new music happens. It's always been that way -- except for occasional and brief interludes where musical innovation intersects with mainstream pop -- but as we get older it becomes more obvious. We invariably most appreciate the era when pop music seemed new and fresh because we were young and it was targeted at us, and it seemed new because we hadn't heard anything like it before. When we get older, it's no longer targeted at us. We move on, but pop music remains squarely aimed at twelve to twenty year olds, and so it no longer touches us the same way. Eventually, we reach the age our parents were when we liked pop music, and just as pop music seemed to our parents when we were young and liked it, for us it now either seems repetitive and derivative or it sounds like crap.

But that's because mainstream pop is not for us.

So we have to look outside of mainstream pop to find interesting new music and interesting new musicians. Turns out there's plenty. Most of it will never come near a record, CD, or the usual streaming sources; and it definitely won't appear on radio. That's where mainstream pop still holds sway. Instead, interesting new music is live or on YouTube. Just a few random samples:

Equal parts bass-master and musical comedian, this young Italian has got more funk in his right thumb than a, uh... funky thing.

The original "Marble Machine" video is now famous -- I include it here if you've not seen it before:

The band is Wintergatan, and its frontsman produces a regular series of videos that are equal parts music, invention, and (often) woodworking. An example:

And so on. You just have to look for it.

Except that when I was a kid, right when it was all happening, there were no real age limits to it's appreciation. My dad's fav in 1965 was The Beatles' Yesterday. He was 40 then, in Canada for 7 years having escaped the Russian invasion of Hungary in '56. He had great disdain for their garb/hair cuts but had to capitulate in terms of the music. Music(pop) appreciation was ubiquitous across all age groups back then. New and fresh to everyone. It was a totally different world.

 

[GChief]

t was a totally different world

#mustbelivinunderarock

 

[Superampman]

#mustbelivinunderarock

Oh you're puzzled alright. Do I have your sympathy?

 

[GChief]

Oh you're puzzled alright. Do I have your sympathy?

Only puzzled that you tried to state your opinion like its fact with that many key strokes. I listen to everything from Classical(not often) to Death/Black Metal and everything in between and there is plenty of great music being made that is just as innovative as back in the day. If I miss understood your point then my apologies. If your one of the many old guys (and I am one) on here that think that physical media is the only to listen then I understand your point and will tell you that you are missing out on lots of great music.

 

[Awesomeaudio]

I tried to tickle a friend into vintage gear and I showed him a few photos of vintage Pioneer Silver faced stuff like the SX-1250 and even the Grand daddy, the SX-1980.
Wasn't interested in the least and even went on to say this.. "I'd be embarrassed to show one of those in my house"
Some people just think old gear is shit. They have no idea.
I love all my vintage gear and I couldn't give two hoots what others think or say. I know what I have and their value, and that's all that matters.

 

[Superampman]

Only puzzled that you tried to state your opinion like its fact with that many key strokes. I listen to everything from Classical(not often) to Death/Black Metal and everything in between and there is plenty of great music being made that is just as innovative as back in the day. If I miss understood your point then my apologies. If your one of the many old guys (and I am one) on here that think that physical media is the only to listen then I understand your point and will tell you that you are missing out on lots of great music.

The facts I stated are just that, separate from my opinion. I'm sure you've heard the tune 'I'd Love To Change The World' by Ten Years After. All kinds of things going on by all kinds of people/ideas

 

[GChief]

The facts I stated are just that, separate from my opinion. I'm sure you've heard the tune 'I'd Love To Change The World' by Ten Years After. All kinds of things going on by all kinds of people/ideas

Ummm ok?? Have a good day

And yes it’s one of my favorites.

 

[DaveVoorhis]

I tried to tickle a friend into vintage gear and I showed him a few photos of vintage Pioneer Silver faced stuff like the SX-1250 and even the Grand daddy, the SX-1980.
Wasn't interested in the least and even went on to say this.. "I'd be embarrassed to show one of those in my house"

Being that we're audio hobbyists, it's easy to forget that it is just a hobby like any other. For most of the vast unwashed, having audio gear is no more interesting than having a stamp collection.

Unless you're a stamp collector who isn't also an audio hobbyist, and then audio is even less interesting. You probably try to get your friends interested in stamps too, and wish that audio guy would stop trying to interest you in his ugly silver-faced whatnots.

 

[Superampman]

Ummm ok?? Have a good day

Sorry, I meant not always for the better however inevitable.

 

[Awesomeaudio]

Being that we're audio hobbyists, it's easy to forget that it is just a hobby like any other. For most of the vast unwashed, having audio gear is no more interesting than having a stamp collection.

Unless you're a stamp collector who isn't also an audio hobbyist, and then audio is even less interesting. You probably try to get your friends interested in stamps too, and wish that audio guy would stop trying to interest you in his ugly silver-faced whatnots.

I should also mention that said friend does like audio gear. He brags about his bose system and always sends me links to photos of multi millionaire audio set ups that are 200k plus. Stuff of dreamers.
I guess my point was that he thinks vintage gear is rubbish and modern gear is the rage. If you got a lazy 100k or so

 

[GChief]

I should also mention that said friend does like audio gear. He brags about his bose system and always sends me links to photos of multi millionaire audio set ups that are 200k plus. Stuff of dreamers.
I guess my point was that he thinks vintage gear is rubbish and modern gear is the rage. If you got a lazy 100k or so

We must have the same friend lol. My friend like that shut up when I hauled all my old shit to his house and we set it up next to his Acousticrap.

 

[BilboBaggins]

I look at it this way. I’m a hobby picker. I’m willing to spend all kinds of my time hunting for cool things, fixing them up, and then presenting them to the public for a profit. I do it because I enjoy so many different aspects of it. And I’m successful because the majority of people don’t want to put that much time and effort into it, and would just like to do one stop shopping and walk away with what they want.

Audio is similar. To create a great system, you have to spend a lot of time and money. Most people don’t want to do it, or do, but don’t have the time or the money. So they settle.