Music is dead.

[Pearljam5000]

I agree. I feel the same way.

Thanks
You're the only one who basically agreed with me so far, so thanks
I'm actually surprised that more people don't feel the same way i do, but no one can give me an example of a recent band that is as good as Radiohead so basically i know I'm right without people agreeing with me

 

[mansr]

Thanks
You're the only one who basically agreed with me so far, so thanks

So that's two people who are wrong.

 

[AtomAmp]

Thanks
You're the only one who basically agreed with me so far, so thanks
I'm actually surprised that more people don't feel the same way i do, but no one can give me an example of a recent band that is as good as Radiohead so basically i know I'm right without people agreeing with me

I can even go back earlier than Radiohead, Nirvana, and Pearl Jam. There are notable exceptions, as you stated. A lot of "newer" songs are remakes too. A lot of new song lyrics are like straight sentences cut into stanzas. Older lyrics are poetic.

 

[DeepFried]

Well almost...
I can't help but feel that older music is just is so much better than all the new stuff being released today in all music genres.

Every single generation feels like this, going back as far as we have records.

We all have some preference for the music of our formative years, but honestly I think that's a trap, its a rut we get stuck in. There is so much wonderful music in so many genre, even just going up to the 1990's there is more excellent music than I will ever discover or have the time to listen too, and the sheer volume of options is growing almost exponentially with the internet and information age - there is SO MUCH to experience, so many wonderful and bizarre artists.

I'm listening to EDM right now, this morning French Jazz, yesterday an obscure Japanese producer who makes music with natural sounds. You could listen to something new every day of your life. What a time to be alive honestly.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Every single generation feels like this, going back as far as we have records.

We all have some preference for the music of our formative years, but honestly I think that's a trap, its a rut we get stuck in. There is so much wonderful music in so many genre, even just going up to the 1990's there is more excellent music than I will ever discover or have the time to listen too, and the sheer volume of options is growing almost exponentially with the internet and information age - there is SO MUCH to experience, so many wonderful and bizarre artists.

I'm listening to EDM right now, this morning French Jazz, yesterday an obscure Japanese producer who makes music with natural sounds. You could listen to something new every day of your life. What a time to be alive honestly.

Yes but it's quantity over quality.

 

[AtomAmp]

So that's two people who are wrong.

No. That's two people who feel that way.

 

[Robin L]

I enjoy a ton of modern pop, so to me it's not crappy . I like different genres for different reasons. One reason I like pop is because it has a nice repetitive structure that makes it great for casual listening(like right now while I'm typing this). I can spend of few seconds reading ASR, then jump back in to listening, then type a reply, jump back in etc. By contrast, I have a really hard time enjoying classical or jazz music while surfing ASR. I love those genres, but I have trouble enjoying them unless I'm paying attention to the themes and how they're developing.

I've got something nearly the opposite going on right now. I've got those themes and developments so drilled into my brain, it's easier to multitask than some song where I have to track the lyric.

I was constantly hearing new music up to 2007. I was mostly working in stores that sold recorded music in some form since 1974. So I was used to being exposed to new stuff. Sturgeon's law always applies, I tended to look on the bright side: 5% of it is going to be good. Tastes changed and continue to change. I heard a lot of New Country, Pop Standards, Boy Bands along with back catalog when I last worked at a place that sold CDs. We sold a lot of Dance/Techno when I showed up [2001], were essentially out of the CD biz when I left [2007]. I'm exposed to a lot less brand spankin' new stuff than I used to. I know there's some fine threads at this forum that can connect me to new and interesting music, but right now I'm exploring remasters of back catalog via Amazon Music. Music isn't dead, but it is very old, and some is ageless. I keep digging up music's past and can keep doing that for the rest of my life. I revisit pieces frequently, which works out well with classical music. Multiple recordings of the same piece offers up different angles, the same applies with pop/jazz "Standards". So I can listen to that music in the background. Even if it's Mahler's Resurrection Symphony I can follow it along with something else, though, at some point I have to pay full attention, put the book down or look away from the screen.

If the music is new to me---first heard Lady Gaga about five years ago, was immediately "taken"---I'll give it a few passes with nothing else going on, at levels a little louder than I usually listen. Very hard to process mentally if anything else is going on.

 

[Kegemusha]

Thanks
You're the only one who basically agreed with me so far, so thanks
I'm actually surprised that more people don't feel the same way i do, but no one can give me an example of a recent band that is as good as Radiohead so basically i know I'm right without people agreeing with me

Radiohead have many years now as a band so takes time to get there but I gave some examples before of some pretty new bands, so some more great music: Bill Callahan and John Dwyer, from Oh Sees and all his side projects (Which Egg for example) are just great.
Kings of Leon, Phoebe Bridges, This is the Kit, Motorama from Russia,Tame Impala, Khruangbin, Mosses Sumney, DIIV, Idles, Necks(from Aus) Juana Molina (as creative as Radiohed, from Arg), The Limiñanas (french band I think they are), and these are as good as Radiohead were in their 1st 2 or 3 CDs, I love Radiohead too btw.
If you want a band that also has been as long and same level as Radiohead, for me, Swans.

 

[SIY]

" . . . because pop is as crappy as it's always been, jazz seems to have pretty much stopped innovating since the boppers died off, and rock is mostly moribund . . ."
Yes, you acknowledge there's new stuff worth hearing [I would hope so], but you establish that pop is crap [matter of opinion] Jazz stopped innovating since the Boppers died off [again, you don't like Fusion or Free Jazz, I get it] and rock is mostly moribund [rock isn't making money hand over fist like it used to, though there's plenty of rock happening right now, albeit on a smaller scale than in its glory days]. So, yes---you did say it, if not in so many words

Nope and nope. Pop was crap when I was a kid and when my parents were kids. No better, no worse today. By definition, it's lowest common denominator.

Free jazz was great, but it got played out. There is no modern Ornette Coleman or Andrew Hill. Fusion, ditto, there's some fine players out there, but they're not doing anything that would have been revolutionary or innovative in (say) 1978. Bop and more traditional jazz was pretty much over before I came of age. Sure, I got to see Dizzy and Rahsaan and Mingus and Sun Ra many times, but they were already dinosaurs.

There's some very interesting and innovative things being done in Metal, but in my view, that's different than rock (which played out long, long ago).

Want innovative? Look at some of the stuff on @scott wurcer 's playlist. The stuff that occupies my queue these days is entirely different than the music of my youth, but not as out-of-the-mainstream as Scott's preferences.

 

[Wes]

I am gonna limit myself to Taylor Swift videos from now on.

 

[richard12511]

Thanks
You're the only one who basically agreed with me so far, so thanks
I'm actually surprised that more people don't feel the same way i do, but no one can give me an example of a recent band that is as good as Radiohead so basically i know I'm right without people agreeing with me

I think the issue is that "better" is very subjective here. For me, personally, I don't know of any band that I like "better" than Radiohead, but there are quite a few bands mentioned so far that I assume are "better" than Radiohead for those people. Just because I enjoy Radiohead better than any modern band doesn't make it "better" imo.

 

[richard12511]

I've got something nearly the opposite going on right now. I've got those themes and developments so drilled into my brain, it's easier to multitask than some song where I have to track the lyric.

That's actually something I thought about as I was typing it. "I wonder if that will change over time?". Right now, I'm fairly new to seriously listening to classical(3 years or so). The themes and developments are not drilled into my brain yet, as most symphonies I've only ever listened to two or maybe three(very few) times, and there are still symphonies from some of the famous composers which I've never heard.

For me to best enjoy classical, I've found that it's best to listen once all the way through, then go find a youtube video that explains all the different themes, then go back and listen again with that context in mind. I find that I enjoy that second listen immensely.

 

[Snarfie]

Well almost...
I can't help but feel that older music is just is so much better than all the new stuff being released today in all music genres.
There isn't one modern rock band that even comes close to Radiohead, Nirvana, PJ etc..
No artist that comes close to MJ
No new Bob Dylan, no new Jeff Buckley etc...
Well you get my point.
All new music and artists are just mediocre at best, except in some rare cases (Joanna Newsom, Regina spektor)
Does anyone here feels the same way?

I'm 62 an really like new music an love my old music. But if i stick in the old stuff it get really boring. I'm Searching for Deep Grooves, Sample abuse, Harmonic & Beat matching combined with some "Seductive" 70-80ties undertones..... . I listen these day's more to new music than my old stuff because the interpretations are just great listen for instance too Ghostpoet really great recording way better IMO than the old stuff compared to better kept transients because i guesse of digital recording.

his voice does remind me of Lou Reed. Some other examples an i can go on like this.

Ezra collective:

Kaidi Thatham:

Little north:

Daniel Maunick son of Jean-Paul 'Bluey' Maunick:

R+R=Now:

Robert Glasper Trio:

Snarky Puppy:

Yussef Dayes / Tom Misch:

 

[richard12511]

Nope and nope. Pop was crap when I was a kid and when my parents were kids. No better, no worse today. By definition, it's lowest common denominator.

Free jazz was great, but it got played out. There is no modern Ornette Coleman or Andrew Hill. Fusion, ditto, there's some fine players out there, but they're not doing anything that would have been revolutionary or innovative in (say) 1978. Bop and more traditional jazz was pretty much over before I came of age. Sure, I got to see Dizzy and Rahsaan and Mingus and Sun Ra many times, but they were already dinosaurs.

There's some very interesting and innovative things being done in Metal, but in my view, that's different than rock (which played out long, long ago).

Want innovative? Look at some of the stuff on @scott wurcer 's playlist. The stuff that occupies my queue these days is entirely different than the music of my youth, but not as out-of-the-mainstream as Scott's preferences.

What do you consider Pop? I would consider The Beatles, Rolling Stones, The Who, Pink Floyd, The Guess Who, Jimmy Hendrix, Queen, Zeppelin etc. as pop, and those are probably my favorite bands ever. If all that is "crap", then I guess I just prefer "crap" . For me it's hard to define "good" and "bad" objectively here, as people have very different tastes. IMO, rhythmic/melodic/structural complexity doesn't define "good" or "bad". Neither does how "mainstream" something is. For me, "good" is defined as what I find personally enjoyable to listen to.

 

[Pearljam5000]

There's no new Springsteen, Hendrix, old prog rock era Genesis, no new Pink Floyd.
No one artist / band that stands out.
They're all about the same level these days.
I will always choose to listen to older stuff and that's not because I'm old it's just that older music is simply better.
The magic and passion and soul is gone in this generation, you can't escape that feeling.

 

[richard12511]

There's no new Springsteen, Hendrix, old prog rock era Genesis, no new Pink Floyd.

There are many artists today that are "better" than Springsteen or Genesis imo. Keyword there is "imo", as I'm not a huge fan of Genesis and barely like Springsteen.

 

[Taddpole]

The magic and passion and soul is gone in this generation, you can't escape that feeling.

No you can't escape that feeling.

Partly as you are determined that it's true, your mind is closed and so your passion for discovery is dead.

 

[Taddpole]

What do you consider Pop? I would consider The Beatles, Rolling Stones, The Who, Pink Floyd, The Guess Who, Jimmy Hendrix, Queen, Zeppelin etc. as pop, and those are probably my favorite bands ever. If all that is "crap", then I guess I just prefer "crap" .

A lot of that wouldn't really be my definition of pop, but it's a variable term that means different things to different people. Some of them drift between pop and rock but most of them more the latter. Beatles likely the most Pop but they had some stuff that was so outside the norm.

 

[Sukie]

The magic and passion and soul is gone in this generation, you I can't escape that feeling.

Correction offered to avoid what appears to be an objective pronouncement on a subjective matter!

Just out of interest, do you have this same dissatisfaction with other forms of contemporary culture - films, TV, books?

 

[Kegemusha]

There's no new Springsteen, Hendrix, old prog rock era Genesis, no new Pink Floyd.
No one artist / band that stands out.
They're all about the same level these days.
I will always choose to listen to older stuff and that's not because I'm old it's just that older music is simply better.
The magic and passion and soul is gone in this generation, you can't escape that feeling.

I never liked B Springsteen so to me Bill Callahan is better than him or even Father John Misty, so you can discuss what is good or not depending of your taste, and we could keep saying that there is good music made these days, even from 5 years ago that have or had same quality or passion as the bands you mentioned.
All is a matter of taste, music is an art and can touch us in different ways, you would like Genesis (I dont like Genesis either) and I would like The Doors.