• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Why music is getting worse. It's only 12 minutes, it's worth the time.

Late Boomer said:
Should not it be turning NPR on when you can really focus on it?
Click to expand...
The kind of attention span that I have to absorb information vs the kind of that I have for appreciating something artistic are very differnt things for me. Keeping abreast of the news is kind of automatic for me, while really appreciating music feels like more of an effort... an effort that's very worthwhile though, just not something that I'm ready to key into as often.
 
jdwk said:
it's the 18 to 35 demographic. so yeah. I don't care for it, but this does not mean music is getting worse. many people love it. older people said that to me about my music when the crappy popular music was what I liked, and the cycle just continues.
Click to expand...
When Beato laid out his criticisms of some popular music of the current era, it was really twofold. One, his specific points (few if any chord changes, overwhelming use of auto-tune, machine-like quantization of music elements such as rhythm, etc.) are totally factual. Two, his opinion of these stated points - he doesn't like them and feels these things have degraded the quality of music. The points themselves are absolutely true and cannot be disputed, even though this doesn't apply (although perhaps sometimes in varying degrees), to some of the other popular music. Obviously though, there are many people who simply don't care about the points he made. They just like it and that's it - end of story. I have a feeling that, even if you cornered these people and carefully demonstrated the truth of Beato's points, the big majority of them would simply shrug their shoulders and say "So What!" or something to that effect.

So in the end, it's subjective according to each individual's personal taste, but that doesn't mean that there isn't substantive, objective differences between the aforementioned popular music and popular music of past times. Although quantization entered the picture some in the 1980s, the other points he made didn't apply, although there were certainly notable exceptions of simple structure like "Louie Louie" for instance. Overall though, most songs had more complex structures than that. Great efforts were made to create involving verses, choruses and breaks, as the song sections were widely known. Practically every song had an intro and an ending (or outro) too, something which is so often lacking in the previously mentioned current music. There always seemed to be a real attempt to draw in the listener with "hooks" (something that I don't disparage at all) and then create a mood, whatever that may be. These things were often referred to as songcraft, which was widely admired in past times.

Now, I can almost predict some responses ... "c'mon, artists like that still exist today!" I know that already. Of course they do. The big issue is that the big majority of them are submerged in that huge body of music outside the popular "Top 40" area which is partially occupied by those previously mentioned "artists". Despite that, the access to such a great amount of music today which I may never have heard otherwise, is a wonderful thing, and more than compensates for any of these negatives.
 
intro6 said:
When Beato laid out his criticisms of some popular music of the current era, it was really twofold. One, his specific points (few if any chord changes, overwhelming use of auto-tune, machine-like quantization of music elements such as rhythm, etc.) are totally factual. Two, his opinion of these stated points - he doesn't like them and feels these things have degraded the quality of music. The points themselves are absolutely true and cannot be disputed, even though this doesn't apply (although perhaps sometimes in varying degrees), to some of the other popular music. Obviously though, there are many people who simply don't care about the points he made. They just like it and that's it - end of story. I have a feeling that, even if you cornered these people and carefully demonstrated the truth of Beato's points, the big majority of them would simply shrug their shoulders and say "So What!" or something to that effect.

So in the end, it's subjective according to each individual's personal taste, but that doesn't mean that there isn't substantive, objective differences between the aforementioned popular music and popular music of past times. Although quantization entered the picture some in the 1980s, the other points he made didn't apply, although there were certainly notable exceptions of simple structure like "Louie Louie" for instance. Overall though, most songs had more complex structures than that. Great efforts were made to create involving verses, choruses and breaks, as the song sections were widely known. Practically every song had an intro and an ending (or outro) too, something which is so often lacking in the previously mentioned current music. There always seemed to be a real attempt to draw in the listener with "hooks" (something that I don't disparage at all) and then create a mood, whatever that may be. These things were often referred to as songcraft, which was widely admired in past times.

Now, I can almost predict some responses ... "c'mon, artists like that still exist today!" I know that already. Of course they do. The big issue is that the big majority of them are submerged in that huge body of music outside the popular "Top 40" area which is partially occupied by those previously mentioned "artists". Despite that, the access to such a great amount of music today which I may never have heard otherwise, is a wonderful thing, and more than compensates for any of these negatives.
Click to expand...
Best post of the thread, written in true AK fashion (all audio, no attitude).

Salute, sir.
 
Objective - Top 40 has been the vehicle to promote sales for a long time, recall the payola scandals.
Subjective - Back then Top 40 had more decent music than now.
Objective - Good music was made then, it is made now.
Objective - Back then you had to scour stores, ask friends, read foreign magazines to go beyond Top 40, today you can do a simple search on YT.
Objective - Back then a well-educated salesperson would recommend something "like this", today YT will recommend something "like this", also YT comments are a great source! I always find good recommendations there, it is like a hundred store associates in one place, free!
Objective - Back then young people found new music on FM radio, today they find it in computer games. Yes, for those who does not know, soundtracks for computer games are as big or bigger as movie soundtracks to promote music.
Objective - Modern pop-music mostly has rigid beat structure and heavily uses samples.
Subjective - whether you like metronome-style music and samples and autotune is up to you. I hate autotune with passion, but I like rigid rhythm for dance music, makes it easier to mix on a electronic DJ console.
Objective (um, maybe not) - Most people have simple tastes, most people like music they can follow - and predict! Most people like to sing along. Simple music can be created easily today on a computer, which is why we are flooded with zillions of subpar simpleton tunes.
Objective - All of the instruments that have been created in the human history still exist, so musicians still play them. Ah, here is one:


Here is another:


And another:

 
Last edited:
120,000 new songs downloaded each and every day, probably about 119,950 of them suck. That is 7000 hrs of new music for each 24 hr day so we will never know because it would take a music promoter 291 days working 24hrs a day to listen to what came out just yesterday. This happens when you have computers generating music. What is needed is some way to weed the crap out for us and pick the good ones, we need quality over quantity. Local DJs worked great in the past but Iheart, Audacy and Cumulus fired them all and replaced them with central programmers that suck. This may surprise some but 18 to 49 year olds spend more hours listening to radio than watching TV.

Will ask a question that should shine some light on the problem. Name 20 songs of the last 10 years that MOST people are a fan of? In the past there was a song or two released each year that transcended genres and generations that were appreciated by the majority of people. I cant remember the last song that was appreciated by most teenagers and old people alike. We live in a age of pigeon holed disposable songs being promoted, we just need our music execs and radio stations to do a better job at promoting and playing the better songs. Most would agree those 3 songs listed above would NOT be able to transcend generations or genres like better music is able to.
 
Last edited:
Late Boomer said:
Objective - Top 40 has been the vehicle to promote sales for a long time, recall the payola scandals.
Subjective - Back then Top 40 had more decent music than now.
Objective - Good music was made then, it is made now.
Objective - Back then you had to scour stores, ask friends, read foreign magazines to go beyond Top 40, today you can do a simple search on YT.
Objective - Back then a well-educated salesperson would recommend something "like this", today YT will recommend something "like this", also YT comments are a great source! I always find good recommendations there, it is like a hundred store associates in one place, free!
Objective - Back then young people found new music on FM radio, today they find it in computer games. Yes, for those who does not know, soundtracks for computer games are as big or bigger as movie soundtracks to promote music.
Objective - Modern pop-music mostly has rigid beat structure and heavily uses samples.
Subjective - whether you like metronome-style music and samples and autotune is up to you. I hate autotune with passion, but I like rigid rhythm for dance music, makes it easier to mix on a electronic DJ console.
Objective (um, maybe not) - Most people have simple tastes, most people like music they can follow - and predict! Most people like to sing along. Simple music can be created easily today on a computer, which is why we are flooded with zillions of subpar simpleton tunes.
Objective - All of the instruments that have been created in the human history still exist, so musicians still play them.
Click to expand...
I would only dispute your second point, although like I previously said, some Top 40 stuff is decent. I mean the subjective label in relation to the sort of thing that Beato spoke of.
 
Last edited:
petes'picks said:
120,000 new songs downloaded each and every day, probably about 119,950 of them suck.
Click to expand...
So what. Youtube/Google pays for the storage. Are you worried of their energy usage? I guess this is a valid reason for concern.
petes'picks said:
What is needed is someone to weed the crap out for us and pick the good ones
Click to expand...
Some people seem not only to be lazy to find new songs, they are lazy to look for curated playlists that fit their taste. I personally don't care about Iheart or Audacy "programming" especially after they nixed half a dozen HD Radio stations I actually listened. I am done with FM radio.
petes'picks said:
Name 20 songs of the last 10 years that MOST people are a fan of?
Click to expand...
I have never cared what most people are fans of. Well, I did, when I was in middle school. Have you? Unless it is important for you to join your friends singing at a party...
petes'picks said:
I cant remember the last song that was appreciated by most teenagers and old people alike. We live in a age of pigeon holed disposable songs being promoted
Click to expand...
We live in an age when you are free to choose your own pigeon hole and stay there, or get out and explore the long tail. There are more tools than ever before that help exploring. The choice is yours.
 
petes'picks said:
120,000 new songs downloaded each and every day, probably about 119,950 of them suck. That is 7000 hrs of new music for each 24 hr day so we will never know because it would take a music promoter 291 days working 24hrs a day to listen to what came out just yesterday. This happens when you have computers generating music. What is needed is someone to weed the crap out for us and pick the good ones, we need quality over quantity. Local DJs worked great in the past but Iheart, Audacy and Cumulus fired them all and replaced them with central programmers that suck. This may surprise some but 18 to 49 year olds spend more hours listening to radio than watching TV.

Will ask a question that should shine some light on the problem. Name 20 songs of the last 10 years that MOST people are a fan of? In the past there was a song or two released each year that transcended genres and generations that were appreciated by the majority of people. I cant remember the last song that was appreciated by most teenagers and old people alike. We live in a age of pigeon holed disposable songs being promoted, we just need our music execs and radio stations to do a better job at promoting and playing the better songs. Most would agree those 3 songs listed above would NOT be able to transcend generations or genres like better music is able to.
Click to expand...
Going back more years, you mean something like this:
 
I love music off all Genres if it sounds good I'll listen to it. It's a great day we are in as you can stream any song you can think of in your home, car or at work. My wife, daughter and her sisters live for a good concert, me not so much. I would rather listen to the group on my system in the man cave with a cold drink and comfortable chair.
 
Yeah, even now people can name multiple super groups ( individuals) with multiple hits from the 60-90s, the industry still supports a few (a few of them are still around) but nothing like the past.

Something has certainly happened to the industry, and it’s not as productive as it once was…no matter what one thinks of the music.


VR
Andy
 
When a single artist has 3 or 4 of the top ten albums in a single year that just means they are giving all the promotion and coverage to that artist. None of my kids in grade school or high school like that artist nor do their friends, neither do my parents, siblings, friends, grand parents or any one I personally know. I know she has her fans as that is evident, I just find it odd I dont know any of her fans.
 
Last edited:
There is a problem: If one man (the engineer or now computer whiz) seems to have 90% control of the final sound without any musician interactions ---- the connection and feel between instruments may be lost.

I wonder if AI-driven software will invade the Classical world. :idea:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom