The state of music today

Was looking at the Anything Goes board and noted the thread Best Rock Albums of the Year had a grand total of 8 posts and 117 views after 6 hours. Meanwhile, the 70s-80s-90s music thread was on page 4. Is this a reflection of the true state of music today or more a reflection of the board's general demographic? Just wondering if there truly is a shortage of quality and impactful compared to other rock decades.

I have to admit I am way out of touch with a lot of today's music, having become the middle aged man I swore I wouldn't be twenty some years ago. But, it does seem like the music of today is more rap and bubble gum pop one hit wonders than bands or acts whose releases leave indelible footprints on the musical landscape.

And there's certainly been instances where the bubble gum posters dominated in the past--in the early 70s, you had the Carpenters, the Osmonds, David freakin' Cassidy for godsakes--but there was a new Stones or Zeppelin album as well, or a Bad Company or Aerosmith being discovered.

Perhaps the radio industry is so fragemented today with XM/Sirius, and so dollar driven with no one will to risk a format not heavy on either top 40 or as a buddy of mine calls it, the old familiar "warhorse rock', groups can't make the musical impact they once did.

And if I'm missing the boat here, what music is making that impact? Sure, we have U2 and Pearl Jam, and I'm clued in on bands like White Stripes, but, who else? And are they really reaching that broad level of appeal that establishes an iconic brand that will be remembered years down the line?

I guess in twenty years, when someone starts a thread about music from the '00s, will it generate more than a dozen replies? Or will this truly be the decade of the zeroes?

I'm definitely interested to hear what the under 30 crowd on here has to say.

 

I'd say there is a lot of great rock music being made right now, but relatively few outlets for it to come across.

MTV and VH1 rarely do anything with music anymore, having turned into versions of E!

I watch more of Fuse than anything, and would recommend the two-hour block of "Steven's Untitled Rock Show" at 4 p.m. and "Later with Jools Holland" at 5 p.m. (both times eastern). The first covers most everything, including lots of studio guests, new videos and a few blasts from the past.

Holland's show has been a staple in Britain for longer than I can remember, and usually has an eclectic mix. Coming up in 7 minutes are (according to my guide) Red Hot Chili Peppers, Keane, Thom Yourke, Bellowheads, Be Good Tanyas and The Klaxons.

 

It's interesting that rap and country albums are far outselling rock and pop...

 

As far as rap goes, with the exception of Jay-Z and maybe a handful of other artists, the genre itself has become an embarrassment.

IMO, almost everything made after 2000 is complete garbage. No wonder the XM in my car never leaves 65 The Rhyme -- old-school all the way.

 

Whatever happened to The Alternative on VH1 Classic? Did it get canned?

 

Norman, you are so right about that. As I've grown older, my preference for the kind of hip-hop I listen to has changed. When I was in high school and college, I would have never listened to guys like Kayne West, Common, Lupe Fiasco, etc because I wasn't trained by the radio stations to listen to that stuff. It was always about how bling everyone had, how many cars you had, how many hos you were banging, etc. I don't mind the drug dealing stuff because that is how these guys grew up and they are telling a story about it. But everything else I can do without.
Turn any hip-hop station on the radio and you are going to hear a lot of garbage. It's the fault of three groups: the record companies giving these rappers tons of money produce catchy songs that are crap, the radio stations for playing them, and the listeners not asking better of artists.
You have an artist like Lupe Fiasco who put out a quality album in his first effort that critics loved, but didn't sell because of what he rapped about. It's ricockulous. They you have a guy like Joell Ortiz who raps about being real, Brooklyn, being Hispanic, how he scored 1300 on his SATs only to stay in the hood to make sure his mother wasn't killed not getting major air play because he wasn't rapping about hos and bling. It's absurd. Sorry about the rant, but I needed to let that out!

 

It's not just rock. Contemporary country and hip-hop suck balls, too.

 

You know, I was actually thinking about this very topic today while driving around doing some Christmas shopping.

I was never really into Pink Floyd for most of my life (I'm nearly 31). One day, I was at a friend's house and noticed his son had a copy of the movie The Wall. Watched it, and I was hooked on Pink Floyd's music. I even bought The Wall album and The Dark Side of the Moon, and I never buy CDs. Maybe once a year.

The same thing can be said for Johnny Cash. Never really was into his music. Then my brother and I took a road trip one day and he popped in a Johnny Cash CD. Again, I was hooked. My gawd, there's some great, great fucking music on my Johnny Cash CD and on my mp3 player.

My wife is into American Idol and other "modern" music more than I am. I give her music a try when we go on road trips. I just cannot get into it. It all sounds the same to me. Some artists are OK like Carrie Underwood, but I just can't get into modern music. I mean, I never ever listened to Pink Floyd or Johnny Cash for most of life. Then it took one close listening to both of their music and I was hooked.

My new music is stuff decades old.

 

Welcome to a better music era, kingcreole.

No way Fox will ever redo "American Idol," because of the obvious cash register it has become, but it is poisoning music.

People use the term "talent" to describe a voice. Not about a virtuostic instrumentalist, a way to not only play an instrument but also make the instrument sing, give the notes color, make that chord feel like it ties loose ends together perfectly, but because someone can warble.

Congratulations. What is now "talent" is little more than Voice Lessons 101 at a low level (don't want to piss off good people like HC ... I hope she knows where I'm going with this). Now sing. Write music for something other than a human voice.

Also, kudos to the stupid term "triple threat." People are having their minds twisted by idiots in the entertainment industry that it's not enough to be good musically. They must also dance and act. So now it's not good enough to give a superb concert, a choreographer must be hired to make sure the dance moves are just like so lest we lose someone who calls them boring.

And for all the good technology tends to do for life and hobbies, things like the iPod and such has killed music, as well. Too many producers and idiots running record labels tell someone to write one hit ... they'll market that one track to death and don't worry about developing your writing, your timbre in the music - no time to develop anyone's skills any more. No thoughts of ever writing a great album or more than one good track. And most of the albums out there have one track of something somewhat passable with huge gobs of filler.

C_K is right ... any super bands besides U2, Pearl Jam and the White Stripes making any sort of lasting music? Nope. We might want to hold on to these bands ... I've yet to see their successors.

 

Right on, GB. I used to get all my "new" music, back in the '90s, from MTV. But for the last several years, it went from a rock station to seemingly strictly a rap station -- that is, when it shows videos -- and I can't stand the genre.

Steven's Untitled Rock Show was a can't-miss when I had Fuse. Now I rely on the word of mouth, concerts and the Internet to find new music. It works out well for me, but it kind of blows that you can't really turn to the music stations to find music.

I listen to punk, primarily, and prefer the late '80-late '90s, though there's a lot of good new music floating around in the genre. But I don't listen to the new rock at all. Given a choice between a classic rock station and a contemporary rock station, I'd turn to the classic and break off the knob. Rock and roll 30 years ago, like Zeppelin, Floyd and Skynard, were so much more innovative than the shit today. Music today seems like a cookie-cutter version of what was recorded five minutes ago. It's boring.

The last rock band I really got into was Rage Against The Machine. No band sounded like them before and no band has sounded like them since. Kind of like Floyd.

 

Great post, Sam.

I've enjoyed Death Cab and Snow Patrol recently, and I like Paramore quite a bit, too. But even then, some of their stuff is hit or miss.

I peruse the charts and download things, just seeing if anything ever catches my eye. Usually, though, I stick with my faves from the 80s and 90s.

 

You're right, what passes for "popular" music today largely sucks. And there are worlds of grab-you-by-the-throat great music that was written prior to this decade (as was at least 80 percent of all rock music). But let's not overstate things here.
Recent years have actually been pretty good when it comes to good rock, if you look a little for it. Much better than, say, 10 years ago, when it seemed the Dave Matthews Band was the only game in town.
In the last three or four years you have bands like the White Stripes, Wilco and Arcade Fire at the top of their games. Great songs/albums from the likes of Modest Mouse, Franz Ferdinand, the Drive By Truckers. Great rock bands like U2, Pearl Jam and Springsteen still putting out quality work. Newcomers of all varieties.
You may not hear it on big-time commercial radio (who listens to that?!?), and so you may be right on the "impactful" part of your question. But the quality's out there. You just won't see it on MTV or American Idol (and that's their problem, not yours).