New Music Stinks

[NWBasser]

Or so say the experts....

http://news.yahoo.com/pop-music-soun...171714762.html

[R_of_G]

Though I definitely know the difference between anecdotal experience and empirical evidence, I don't know what songs from that span they analyzed because it seems to me one can get a completely inverted result with varying samples. It's an interesting study I suppose, but I don't buy the validity of the conclusion.

[deeaa*]

Half a million random songs sounds like quite enough data for good results.

And I do agree with the results - I've talked about it for years with my friends. Sometimes it seems to me over half the hit songs on the radio are built upon the same four chords and the rest of them merely change a few odd notes, and ever since the radios started compressing their music on the air so much there's no volume difference between a quietly picked intro and a smashing chorus, the producers have used more and more compression on records until modern (popular) music largely has almost zero dynamics left to it.

I'd also extend it to song structures, there aren't many song intros in popular music any more and the songs fast forward to the chorus quicker and quicker every year it seems, until much of it sounds just like prolonged choruses with some interesting sounds in between.

That's basically the reason I do not listen to commercial pop-music playing radio stations any more. At least indie and metal / rock stations still play music that has some variance to it...big record company produced popular music for the masses has indeed become just a continuum of changes over the same exact formula and base, all ground and pushed out as a leveled-out, ready-chewed paste from the tube.

[R_of_G]

I don't disagree with you Dee, though the results of the study seem more a condemnation of what's considered popular music than a challenge to modern music itself.

There's also the matter of defining popular music as "what gets played on the radio" and the broader definition which would encompass a wide variety of bands that play styles that are clearly in the "pop music" arena. By that definition, the one applicable to musical styles, not the fickle tastes of key demographics manipulated by big budget corporations, there is plenty of music being made that challenges the popular norms.

[Bookkeeper's Son]

Just casual observation on my part, but I agree that most modern music seems to be lacking , especially in the melody department. I often tape the last 5 minutes of Letterman to hear whatever musical act is on. Most of the acts are newer and relatively (to me, at least) unknown, so I figure that over time I'm hearing a good cross-section of what's out there. More often than not, I turn it of after less than 30 seconds. The main reason: boring.

[deeaa*]

I agree R of G, I suppose this deals with 'mainstream' music i.e. what sells the best and is played on radio the most.

[guitartango]

Dee

I do agree but many hit songs have been composed with only three chords, trouble with today's music is that there is no real talent anymore. Can you imagine Dustbin Beaver dropping some acid and writing an album worthy of Sgt Pepper or Pet Sounds,of course not. Music goes in cycles and the moment I want to get off this tandem.

[deeaa*]

I'm not so sure it's a lack of talent really - hell we have such a lot of incredibly talented people right here on TheFret - it's just that the media and the record labels etc. prefer to not seek out talent but instead make a quick buck and do something that sells for sure. There are lots of great, superbly talented bands out there too, but they're not usually heard on mainstream radio etc. at all.

Actually there might be way more talent out there than ever before. I mean, there's like four billion more people out there than in the early 70's for instance, and a huge number of them have been exposed to a wide variety of music right from birth...and an incredible number of people actually take up an instrument and play these days. I've venture that if there were 100.000 guitarists out there in the 60's, the number must now be something like ten million aspiring players. There just has to be an incredible amount of talent to be found there.

[Bookkeeper's Son]

Perhaps, but how much songwriting talent?

[deeaa*]

Perhaps, but how much songwriting talent?

Statistically, there has to be ten times the number of talented composers as well.

Plus since each new generation is smarter than the last, possesses more and more talent etc. quite naturally...so yeah, I do think there is more of everything out there every passing year.

[Hampus]

I have to agree with Deeaa. There has to be more talent today. Maybe not so much taste None, or almost none of the music that I imagine most people on this forum would consider to be good hits the radio stations or night clubs. Why it is like it is is a whole other matter. I think it would be a great subject for research.

As to the complexity of a song or the talent of the song writer; the number of chords have, in my humble opinion very little to do with those two things. It's almost the other way around, the more you can do with less, the more talent you have. Take songs like Born in the USA, 2 chords. All along the watchtower (Hendrix version), 3 chords. Eleanor Rigby, 2 chords. Working Class hero, three chords. Lots of good songs have three chords or less. Actually, if you google "songs with three chords", one of the results is this http://www.the-joy-of-guitar.com/listof3chordsongs.html

[R_of_G]

I'm not so sure it's a lack of talent really - hell we have such a lot of incredibly talented people right here on TheFret - it's just that the media and the record labels etc. prefer to not seek out talent but instead make a quick buck and do something that sells for sure. There are lots of great, superbly talented bands out there too, but they're not usually heard on mainstream radio etc. at all.

Actually there might be way more talent out there than ever before. I mean, there's like four billion more people out there than in the early 70's for instance, and a huge number of them have been exposed to a wide variety of music right from birth...and an incredible number of people actually take up an instrument and play these days. I've venture that if there were 100.000 guitarists out there in the 60's, the number must now be something like ten million aspiring players. There just has to be an incredible amount of talent to be found there.

Statistically, there has to be ten times the number of talented composers as well.

Plus since each new generation is smarter than the last, possesses more and more talent etc. quite naturally...so yeah, I do think there is more of everything out there every passing year.

Wholeheartedly agree with all of this.

While the 60s were indeed a watershed time for popular music in which much incredibly influential and groundbreaking music was made, let's not be too enamored with the nostalgia as to convince ourselves that the 60s represent either the beginning or the end of envelope-pushing popular music.

Justin Bieber makes a nice straw-man to burn as the supposed standard-bearer of current popular music when contrasted with the Beatles. Let's not forget the 60s also gave us Ricky Nelson, Fabian, Bobby Rydell, Neil Sedaka, et al. Let's make them stand for their entire time period and see how they fare against some of today's more talented songwriters and musicians.

[guitartango]

100 Greatest Albums, 500 greatest albums, always mention the same artists, Beatles,Jackson,Dylan, Floyd and so on...... why ? Is it record sales or is that they are talented musicians.

1.The Beatles-Revolver
2. Radiohead - Ok Computer
3. Michael Jackson - Thriller
4. The Beatles-Seargent Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band
5. The Beatles- The White Album
6. The Beatles - Abbey Road
7. Nirvana - Nevermind
8. Pink Floyd-The Dark Side of the Moon
9. Bob Dylan-Highway 61 Revisited
10. Led Zeppelin-IV
11. Marvin Gaye- What’s Going on
12. Massive Attack-Mezzanine
13. Michael Jackson-Dangerous
14. Pearl Jam-Ten
15. The Beach Boys-Pet Sounds
16. The Beatles- Rubber Soul
17. The Clash - London Calling
18. Metallica-Metallica

[Spudman***]

I do say that in regard to Pop music I agree with the article...and this is why I listen to Progressive music, it doesn't follow the Pop trends. That keeps me happy. If I had to only listen to Pop music I'd shoot myself.

[poodlesrule]

We (US) could do something like the French do: dedicate a day to live street music.

People would get a chance to listen to often original live music, and perhaps realize how much the recording and broadcast industries have done to the medium. Or get the idea of taking an instrument!

People need to get off their butt and go see live music, even if it is outside their comfort zone.
it is quite healthy, and good for the soul!

[guitartango]

We (US) could do something like the French do: dedicate a day to live street music.

People would get a chance to listen to often original live music, and perhaps realize how much the recording and broadcast industries have done to the medium. Or get the idea of taking an instrument!

People need to get off their butt and go see live music, even if it is outside their comfort zone.
it is quite healthy, and good for the soul!

About two years ago I took my wife and the children to see Take That, not my type of music but to be honest with you I really enjoyed the show. Gary Barlow may not be everyone's cup of tea, but he is a good songwriter and musician.

[Lev]

Isn't the whole point of Pop music that it appeals to a wide audience? To this end the rhythms, chord structures, melody and even lyrical content need to be something that the audience can easily relate to. Lots of dissonant chords, dark lyrics, complicated melodies would surely defeat the purpose. I think there are two ways for music makers treat pop music, as a commercial venture or as a form of artistic expressions. I believe that possibly in modern music there are too many that treat it as a commercial venture fueled by an audience that all want their slice of fame on Xfactor, American Idol etc. Occasionally though there are musicians and bands that produce artistically credible pop music that is also commercially successful. I've often tried to sit down and write a 'pop song' and to be honest it's not that easy, even with the so called formula of 4 chords, big chorus, catchy hook it is still not easy. So I applaud the talents of people who write pop music. I appreciate the work that goes into creating a good pop song even though the singer/band might have has very little to do with the creative process.

I do quite a bit of driving for my job and sometimes I switch on mainstream radio for a while and to be honest I don't think modern pop music is all that bad. There have been good and bad pop music through the decades and this is no different. I find myself humming along to Adele, Train, Maroon 5 etc. quite a bit. I guess that means it's catchy & accessible and maybe even good pop music?

[R_of_G]

100 Greatest Albums, 500 greatest albums, always mention the same artists, Beatles,Jackson,Dylan, Floyd and so on...... why ? Is it record sales or is that they are talented musicians...

That's hardly an objective empirical set of data, which is pretty much my whole point. It seems as if you're trying to quantify something subjective.

[Spudman***]

There really isn't the same quality of content as there used to be in what we considered "Pop" music. It really has become less than what it once was and what we are willing to accept has certainly become much simpler.