Well, maybe because new music suxx

[Guitalia]

As someone that has recorded genres from Americana to electronica, I must throw a big thumbs up to the 'squared up in nanoseconds,' issue.

We had briefly tried to incorporate an iPad for electronic elements into our otherwise traditional instrument group and I was astounded to find many of the apps had no provision for mid-song tempo changes. The swing/groove, I could manage because I could simply record or play things in live and my live finger drumming is precise enough, but no tempo changes in songs? Even more shockingly, people argued with me on those forums 'why would you need tempo changes in songs?"

I love the sound design aspects of electronic music, but why would you throw out such an effective tool for adding emotive narrative arcs to a song?

In recording, as an engineer, I love the tool of the click. Makes editing, mixing, layering, etc. easier. But I've always had people give me a run through and constructed a tempo map pre or post so we aren't messing up the song. And in tracking my own an other bands over the years, I've found very few songs that are meant to stay a single tempo. As far as the intra, ya, I don't quantize beats that shouldn't be quantized, if it is too off, rerecord it.

My boys Kraftwerk confronted the problem of making electronic music under conditions of severely limited expressive control in the early '80s. Their solution was to treat every available control parameter as a means of expression. Here are two versions of one song (the original version and a live remix from 2018) as examples that show how far they've been able to take that idea.

 

[truand85]

I think you're wrong with that you think anybody can just do produce songs that are on par with what's on the top. If that was the case then those people would be on top. Yet there's a finite amount of people that actually are. And more often than not it's the stuff that was produced by incredibly skilled producers who are sitting on their bums all day working on a seemingly super simple song. I can agree that the artists are not as skilled as they were but thats because the skill requirement shifted. Either way even the best producer can't fix a horrible performance so you must be good at something to even get a chance. And when it's popular because it is heavily promoted then that doesn't mean it's bad either. It won't be popular unless there's people that enjoy it. Has been that way for decades the way of advertising just changed. In the 60s many got popular by playing small gigs doing cover songs of stuff that was already popular and then they just slowly starting introducing their own stuff to the audience and if they enjoyed it the people stayed. If they wouldn't have done anything to promote their stuff they wouldn't be remembered by anyone nowadays.
I usually hate these sort of comments but all I can say to you is if you think it's so easy then do it yourself. Show us how it's done. The skill has just shifted and yes there's no real chops involved with digital music anymore but I would argue it's harder to learn how to create a song digitally then it is to learn how the basics of any instrument.

Feel free to correct me again if I'm misinterpreting your words but it's really late here and I'm bad at focusing on walls of texts...

You're missing my point again yes, you're very good at wall of text yourself but I'll try and keep it short - it's not about producing anything, it's about marketing, exposure, SEO, ads and online presence. There's a million artists out there focusing on their music that get outearned and outstreamed by quickly manufactured, barely passable music that was marketed well.

 

[5StringBlues]

 

[Fynn]

You're missing my point again yes, you're very good at wall of text yourself but I'll try and keep it short - it's not about producing anything, it's about marketing, exposure, SEO, ads and online presence. There's a million artists out there focusing on their music that get outearned and outstreamed by quickly manufactured, barely passable music that was marketed well.

But what's the problem with that? Sounds like you think it's unfair for those supposedly better artists who are getting out marketed. That's why I mean I don't get your point. I don't really understand what you're arguing. Are you saying that's bad because it's unfair?

 

[truand85]

But what's the problem with that? Sounds like you think it's unfair for those supposedly better artists who are getting out marketed. That's why I mean I don't get your point. I don't really understand what you're arguing. Are you saying that's bad because it's unfair?

No, it's not about fairness just about quality of music being put out. I'm still on topic per the article in the OP.

My point is that old music is rising in popularity today because today's music is not quality. It's a vast overgeneralization that mostly applies to what's popular by today's standards, but still very much a fact based on streaming numbers.

 

[Fynn]

No, it's not about fairness just about quality of music being put out. I'm still on topic per the article in the OP.

My point is that old music is rising in popularity today because today's music is not quality. It's a vast overgeneralization that mostly applies to what's popular by today's standards, but still very much a fact based on streaming numbers.

The quality of the music that has the most attention is bad while the actually good artists are not given attention?

 

[PeaveyPlayer]

I think it's time to shut'er down boys
Whatcha think

I think it took 17 pages just to say that people have their own opinion that new music sucks and I think it's just shows that they're stuck in their old way of thinking that can't grasp the concept that music is music

Why?
Because it's not the cars?
Because it's not Chicago?
Because it's not whoever they remember?

I could say old music sucks ?
But I'm a bass player as are the rest of us
And I'm young enough to appreciate a wide diversity and the good and bad in both

if it sucks so bad?
Why do some of you play it? you probably shouldn't even bother wasting your Time

 

[doran.dragic]

Of course it's a serious skill, but not a serious artistic or musical skill.

It takes a lot of artistic and musical skill to produce a track like this. And I mean a lot because you can't depend on the harmony-cliches that you normally use in other kinds of music (although it's still used in Gangnam Style in the pre-chorus). Many top level EDM producers have classical / jazz / composing background.

it's not about producing anything, it's about marketing, exposure, SEO, ads and online presence. There's a million artists out there focusing on their music that get outearned and outstreamed by quickly manufactured, barely passable music that was marketed well.

I agree with this but I don't understand how this is any different from what the Beatles did. There were other artists in that era who could play their instruments better or made music that was considered artistically much better. A lot of Beatles music is simple pop and reinterpreted rhythm and blues.

 

[truand85]

The quality of the music that has the most attention is bad while the actually good artists are not given attention?

No, the first half of that is part of my point, the second isn't. Those artists making quality music are not getting attention because their focus is not on marketing and online presence.

 

[5StringBlues]

Does this mean we aren't going to play Stonehenge?

 

[truand85]

It takes a lot of artistic and musical skill to produce a track like this. And I mean a lot because you can't depend on the harmony-cliches that you normally use in other kinds of music (although it's still used in Gangnam Style in the pre-chorus). Many top level EDM producers have classical / jazz / composing background.


I agree with this but I don't understand how this is any different from what the Beatles did. There were other artists in that era who could play their instruments better or made music that was considered artistically much better. A lot of Beatles music is simple pop and reinterpreted rhythm and blues.

Not sure I agree there. The Beatles not only made quality music and were accomplished musicians in their own right, but also innovative artists. Yes, there are plenty of "simple pop and reinterpreted rhythm and blues" songs in their repertoires, but they were fresh for the times and aren't the ones that endured through the decades.

As for Gangnam Style well agree to disagree there...

 

[retslock]

"Because it's all I know, as my parents played it every single day in the car for 15 years" is probably a factor, too.

Perhaps but that's an assumption.

 

[TyBo]

I think it's time to shut'er down boys
Whatcha think

I think it took 17 pages just to say that people have their own opinion that new music sucks and I think it's just shows that they're stuck in their old way of thinking that can't grasp the concept that music is music

Why?
Because it's not the cars?
Because it's not Chicago?
Because it's not whoever they remember?

I could say old music sucks ?
But I'm a bass player as are the rest of us
And I'm young enough to appreciate a wide diversity and the good and bad in both

if it sucks so bad?
Why do some of you play it? you probably shouldn't even bother wasting your Time

Uh, no, I think a lot of the thread is about the article that began the topic - the enormous change in the musical landscape that's taken place.

 

[truand85]

Uh, no, I think a lot of the thread is about the article that began the topic - the enormous change in the musical landscape that's taken place.

Right, a lot of people missed the point I think.

Anyway, I had fun and it was interesting (mostly). Apologies to the people I offended without meaning to, listen to what you like, my opinion is just that and it's perfectly fine to agree to disagree.

I'm glad for articles like these that highlight a new generation of listeners that seem to be finding a newfound interest in music that'll still be here a hundred years from now. That's good enough for me!

 

[Fynn]

No, the first half of that is part of my point, the second isn't. Those artists making quality music are not getting attention because their focus is not on marketing and online presence.

Okay, I give up then. Thought my english was fine, but apparently I have problems understanding.
I can only say that I don't think the quality of the music today is poor. I do think that many of these popular artists only play a small roll in the music making process but the people that create these songs and produce them are highly skilled and the songs deserve attention even if just for that fact.
If you don't go with the times you don't deserve to be at the top because the audience wants to be catered to and if you just want to play music you gotta live with being unnoticed by the general populus. Has been that way for aslong as I can tell.

 

[truand85]

Okay, I give up then. Thought my english was fine, but apparently I have problems understanding.
I can only say that I don't think the quality of the music today is poor. I do think that many of these popular artists only play a small roll in the music making process but the people that create these songs and produce them are highly skilled and the songs deserve attention even if just for that fact.
If you don't go with the times you don't deserve to be at the top because the audience wants to be catered to and if you just want to play music you gotta live with being unnoticed by the general populus. Has been that way for aslong as I can tell.

Ah I see, that's where we disagree, popular artists should have some degree of talent, innovation and bring more to the table than a trained voice, in my book. A good backing band and producer is not enough for me to be interested and think the music is good, I need the artist to bring something to the table musically/creatively and want to hear original songs they write that catch my attention.

I wouldn't think Motown hits are good just because the funk brothers are in the back, I need Marvin Gayes and Stevie Wonders and Tammi Terrells too.

 

[James Collins]

This is my experience too. The culture has shifted and everyone seems to be too busy all the time.

I've been forcing myself to slow down. I don't carry my phone with me everywhere. I watch long tv shows without my phone on me (like mst3k). I read paper books. I listen to vinyl records. Etc. Makes me feel better.

 

[brianrost]

17 pages later...a few people have pointed out that Ted Gioia's article is focused on how modern music is being poorly served by what's left of the industry. It is not at all about how modern music sucks, it's about why older music seems to have become more popular to the general public than new music based on various measures....vinyl sales, Spotify play counts, etc. The net result is that new artists have a harder time than ever getting heard simply because the music industry would rather just reissue their deep catalogs.

As the artcle clearly points out, there is a reason music companies are buying up catalogs of ageing rock stars for millions of dollars. That reason is they expect to make a huge return on their investment. Meanwhile the artists get a huge payout now while they can still do something with the money, even if it's just leaving it to their heirs. Bruce Springsteen could probably never make another $550 million dollars from his recordings between now and his death, so it makes sense to sell his rights. Heck, he probably hasn't made $550 million in royalties so far from his recordings over the last 50 years.

Just think how much money EMI is making because of the Get Back movie on Apple TV+. The Beatles have been getting buzz all over teh interwebz for months now, which translates into people buying LPs, buying expensive collectors box sets and streaming Beatles music. Other labels will follow suit...just wait for some Dylan and Springsteen movies to start rolling out and relentlessly marketed.

 

[DJ Bebop]

You're misunderstanding my opinion, perhaps because I'm not wording it the right way. Let me try again:

Competition for good music isn't fierce. It's all about exposure and marketing. A band that is good with SEO, online promotion and ads, will be more popular. Nothing to do with chops or actual talent.

My point about Fruityloops isn't the time taken to make the song necessarily, but the musical skills. Anyone today using software can quickly make something that is onpar with much of the top selling pop music out there, with very little musical training.

I'm not mad at all about people liking what I don't like. What rubs me the wrong way is not seeing quality music and artists make money (I have no dog in this fight, I'm not a professional musician).

Hope that clarifies things.

I was just checking out YouTube and this ad pops up with this offer for midi files or loops of keyboards playing various chord changes you just drag and drop into your DAW, find a key and chord progression and boom, you're Taylor Swift or Paul McCartney, or something.

 

[truand85]

I was just checking out YouTube and this ad pops up with this offer for midi files or loops of keyboards playing various chord changes you just drag and drop into your DAW, find a key and chord progression and boom, you're Taylor Swift or Paul McCartney, or something.

Yup. People under estimate how easy it is to make something passable very quickly and easily nowadays. I was reading this thread on TB where they were discussing autotune for instruments (!!!) and how hard it was to even tell the difference.