Well, maybe because new music suxx

[EddiePlaysBass]

Only if you let it. The music I was listening to in my teens and early 20s seems so prosaic and boring now. I try every year or so to reengage with some of it, but precious little of it stands up.

In my 20s (which was not much earlier than yours, btw) I was a huge, and I mean HUGE fan of some female singer/songwriter. Had several albums, CD-singles etc. A couple of years back I thought, oh yeah let's put those records on again and reconnect. I ended up getting rid of all of them. Literally no song whatsoever did anything for me, on the contrary I kept wondering what exactly I used to like about that music.

I have several colleagues who are 15 years younger than I am. We often exchange music tips. Sometimes I like what they suggest, sometimes I don't. And vice versa. We always give it a fair chance, though. And I quite like that approach.

I suspect that young people are more open to older music than old people are to new music.

So true!

 

[BarqsBitMe]

It's what we are fed.

Corporations run radio conglomerates, and they play what is statistically least likely to not have people not change the station.

Corporations are purchasing the rights to artist's catalogs, and want a return on their dollars.

Corporations commodify the most familiar music in order to get us to open up our pocketbooks ... because it works.

But sure, keep blaming young folks while your cover band plays a setlist of fifty-year-old songs, with instruments chosen for their historically-accurate aesthetic in order to fetishize a time when this music stood for pushing back against what had come before it; the grand irony of your role in facilitating the cashing in will continue to be lost.

Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me!

 

[Ostie]

A couple of my fellow boomer friends are sporting (grey) man buns.

Ugh... looks like they're trying too hard to be cool to me.

No offense to any man bun devotees. But really...

It's because a bun looks so good on an old gray-haired granny. And then there's Princess Leia, with a cinnamon roll on each side of her head. Dead sexy!

 

[BarqsBitMe]

Well, let's face it, Millennials and Gen-Z haven't come up with anything new except avocado toast, the man-bun, and covering your ENTIRE body with tattoos (Yeah, I know, my father's WW2 Navy buddies had tattoos...). No wonder they're constantly trying to cop our music.

Lol...ok boomer.

 

[el murdoque]

First of all: I'm Generation X.
I sit in the middle between the boomers and the millenials and therefore I'm not biased - so my word is the only word that carries any weight around here.

All I wanted to say is:

Greta Van Fleet.

Thank you for your attention.

 

[murphy]

I hate to disagree but you are referring to mostly rap music


Dua lipa and the weekend are actually very 80s inspired albums as well as Miley cyrus and her newer material !

Silk sonic and Bruno Mars really does give a Marvin Gaye vibe

You guys should listen to @PeaveyPlayer ..He is young and plays cool music.
Trust what he says

Now...Get off my lawn

 

[Brich]

Well, the last two words up there constitute an oxymoron.

okay bud...

 

[knumbskull]

i think there is a tendency to look back on your preferred era as if it never ended - like there should be a new Zep or Temptations or Beatles or whatever, and it's a sign that things are worse now because there's nothing comparable to them. But what it really means is that times change and that era is over. There couldn't be anything like that now because it's already happened, it's like trying to land on the moon for the first time, again.

 

[truand85]

okay bud...

That was hard to listen to.

 

[truand85]

It's what we are fed.

Corporations run radio conglomerates, and they play what is statistically least likely to not have people not change the station.

Corporations are purchasing the rights to artist's catalogs, and want a return on their dollars.

Corporations commodify the most familiar music in order to get us to open up our pocketbooks ... because it works.

But sure, keep blaming young folks and not, say, boomer cover bands playing sets of fifty-year-old songs, with instruments primarily chosen for a historically-accurate aesthetic in order to fetishize a time when this music stood, ironically, for pushing back against what had come before it.

tl;dr: kids didn't embrace the consolidation and commodification of this art form; their parents did. Don't blame the kids.

Ok there Zapata. Keep fighting the good fight on internet forums.

Ever thought people play the music they play because... That's the music they like and that's the music that gets them gigs?

 

[Brich]

That was hard to listen to.

you know opinions...I find Yellow Submarine/most Beatles hard to listen to.

 

[scott sinner]

OK, Old Guy Confidential:

I only have two problems with Today's Music:

I'm generally put off by the modern digital recording process when it is (often) overused. I've got good enough ears to hear perfectly stacked vocal harmonies that have zero waver or vibrato or any of the slight differences you'd hear in three or four part harmony. I'm REALLY put out by time that's been squared up in nanoseconds where the groove never breathes. So much of what I hear is polishing less-than-capable performances with the precision of a computer-driven 5-axis lathe that often just isn't musical to me. I often think of artists who could not really be captured fully in recordings, and yet now it seems there are lots of artists who live in their recordings and can't deliver live . . . without LOTS of help.

On the other hand, done right (with an ear to approximating a first-rate analog/tape mix) it can be wonderful. But I rarely hear that kind of digital recording.

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.

 

[truand85]

you know opinions...I find Yellow Submarine/most Beatles hard to listen to.

Sure, I'm a big hip-hop/rap fan though, so without comparing apples to oranges, guys like Mac Miller who can't rap in tune (nevermind singing) and are all about the mumble... Well, nuff said.

Let's attempt to redeem thread:

 

[Brich]

Sure, I'm a big hip-hop/rap fan though, so without comparing apples to oranges, guys like Mac Miller who can't rap in tune (nevermind singing) and are all about the mumble... Well, nuff said.

Let's attempt to redeem thread:

Ill agree that vocally Mac's stuff is an acquired taste, but no one can deny Thundercat's bass or the musicianship behind the songs

 

[G On Bass]

I tired of 99% of Classic Rock years ago, both listening to and playing. But thanks to streaming services, I have discovered an entire new world of music from all around the world in many genres, much of it sung in beautiful languages like Portuguese, French or Spanish. I rarely know when it was recorded, but it seems to cover many decades. I'm not against 'new music' though I have yet to hear much that appeals to me. When I step into other co-workers' areas I often get a taste of it, and so much of it sounds overproduced and artificial. I was amused to hear that there is now a genre called 'hick-hop', combing country and rap in the same song. Big pass on that, personally...
While I begrudge neither the kids today who accept curse words as lyrics nor those who seem unwilling to broaden their musical tastes beyond the same handful of Classic Rock radio songs and bands, there is an amazing world of music out there to discover.

 

[cheapbasslovin]

I admittedly don't have a very sophisticated way of hunting for new music, but when I do search it's hard to find any that doesn't reinforce the status quo. Indie stuff today sounds like indie stuff 20 years ago. Hip hop is all about lyrics, but lyrics that mostly don't resonate with me. Metal puts me on edge and I don't care for that much anymore. Pop is, well, pop; easy to listen to, hard to get lost in. It's so easy to slip into comfort music when finding stuff that both catches your ear and is out of that zone is so tough.

 

[ugly_bassplayer]

Sure, I'm a big hip-hop/rap fan though, so without comparing apples to oranges, guys like Mac Miller who can't rap in tune (nevermind singing) and are all about the mumble... Well, nuff said.

Let's attempt to redeem thread:

Classic Big L !!

 

[Matt R.]

LOL

 

[bucephylus]

Things are always changing; our music is just one aspect.

The whole music scene context has drastically changed. To begin with, non-music folks just don't go out to hear, play, and dance in the clubs nearly as much any more. That's probably the biggest thing I've noticed. From an Economic perspective, lower Demand is putting massive pressure on Supply. There just literally isn't the same kind of fertile oven for popular musical performance any more. My gigs are increasingly at clubs dominated by older patrons, who mainly want to hear classic material - Motown, R&B, and Rock; primarily the big hits. And emphasis is on getting closer to replicating the hits.

That latter point is the thing I notice the most. It used to be that bands could cover material; and that it was expected that you would put your own musical spin on it. That alone kept things fresh. More and more, the older patrons want live juke boxes.

The internet, DUI limits / enforcement, COVID, ASCAAP enforcement, Club owners requiring bands to bring their own audience, etc etc; the broad population has generally turned away from popular music performance in live venues. Jazz scene? Not so much that I've noticed. Sure, there are a few restaurants still supporting this interest; but it has become isolated, with few gigs for many artists.

At a minimum, we need to get past this COVID thing. Lord help us.

Oh yeah, new music? Here's the deal on that one; the A&R folks no longer need players. They just use computer patches and make more money. All they need are song writers and front people / artistes. There are still great new tunes on the airwaves. They just generally aren't played by human beings any more. The only issue I've noticed performing new material in clubs is that the older folks don't know it, and there aren't enough younger folks in the live venues to get a large response. YMMV.

 

[lfmn16]

I don't feed click bait articles. There's still good music out there, you just have to look for it. In the "good old days" there were only a couple of outlets so it was easier to find good music. Old farts, myself included, sometimes forget that there was a lot of God awful music produced in the "good old days" although I do believe that the 60's was an era that will never be replicated. The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Aretha Franklin, Otis Redding, Sly and the Family Stone, Led Zeppelin, and dozens of other killer musicians/bands. If you think that depth and breadth of talent exists today, you're just delusional.