Winter Driving Best Books of the Month Learn more nav_sap_SWP_6M_fly_beacon Chi-Raq Bose SoundLink AE All-New Amazon Fire TV Luxury Beauty Valentine's Day Cards Valentine's Day Shop Create an Amazon Wedding Registry Amazon Gift Card Offer chiraq chiraq chiraq  Amazon Echo All-New Fire Kindle Paperwhite Prime Exclusive Savings in Video Games Shop Now Sale
Customer Discussions > Music forum

Is today's Music really that bad?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 176-200 of 668 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 12:42:24 PM PDT
Emery Would

Actually, my musical tastes are still evolving, and I'm 59. Where I grew up, there were a bunch of top 40 stations and we all played dial search to avoid as much dreck as possible. When NY FM underground radio hit, many of us never went back to AM. Also, '67 was the axial year, before that 'the good stuff' didn't really exist, at least on radio.

The science fiction writer Theodore Sturgeon came up with what is now known as Sturgeon's Law - '95% of everything is crap'. It's the same in '12 as it was in '67.

Posted on Nov 1, 2012 12:43:54 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
May I say, posts like these remind me of the outlandish example of a gang of 8 year old boys (who naturally still 'hate' girls) asked to judge a beauty pageant!

I don't know if that makes sense to anyone but me..but it is a recurring image..

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 2:07:26 PM PDT mean like the He-Man Woman Haters Club?!

Posted on Nov 1, 2012 2:08:23 PM PDT
Vote for Spanky!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 2:39:54 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
how did they get the dog's eye like that?

Posted on Nov 1, 2012 3:59:48 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 1, 2012 4:00:56 PM PDT
J. Hand says:
There's still lots of good stuff out there but more than any other time that I can recall, it's up to the listener to find it. Good music never really went away. So much media we used to depend on to give us variety and bring out new artists have all been taken over by companies and corporations run by accountants and money men, not music lovers. They want to make every market the same with the same programming with the same music, same artists, same broadcast formula. No local flavor is allowed. No experimentation. Just stick to what we think works. It's about making money, not promoting musical careers or expanding the horizons of the listener.

That's why I use satellite radio, Pandora, and forums like Amazon to find recommendations. There's more music I like out there than I can afford to buy. With a lot of it I enjoy I find that hardly anybody who doesn't go to the measures I do to seek this stuff out has heard of 90% of the artists. That's the mainstream for ya! But even s**t needs a home!

Posted on Nov 1, 2012 5:21:44 PM PDT
This discussion pops up pretty often. As I get older, I realize it's partially a matter of perception - when I got into music in high school, I had lower standards, and could accept the decent bands. By the time I discovered "great" music (for me Iron Maiden, Jethro Tull), the scene had started to change. When I got my first Quiet Riot album, it was fun, but I hadn't heard Maiden yet. By the time Nirvana, etc., came out, I knew this wasn't nearly as good as Iron Maiden. That said, my current favorite music from the 80s (Iron Maiden, Marillion, Fates Warning) is mostly stuff that wasn't really mainstream (at least not in America). And my favorite bands from more recently (Nightwish, Blind Guardian, Tyr) are as brilliant, and as not-on-the-radio as my favorite classic bands! I tend to think music was better in the 70s (Jethro Tull, Deep Purple, etc. were hitting the record charts), but if you look at the actual record charts from then, most of the stuff on their was mediocre, forgettable stuff just like today . . .

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 5:43:02 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
heh, you're 59, can you remember how you knew what was dreck?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 9:05:34 PM PDT
E. Dill says:
Emery Would:

It's all subjective. I'd surely rather listen to Light My Fire and Groovin than Iron Maiden but that's no knock on's just my taste in music.

I'm 66 BTW and do agree that every year from the beginning of rock has had its share of popular music that, shall we say, wasn't my cup of tea. That includes the 60's and the 10's and every decade in between. I've never been much on judging entire years or decades output whether it be Top 10 or Top 200. I always find more music I like than I know what to do with. And yes, some I'd rather forget.


Posted on Nov 2, 2012 8:19:30 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 8:19:56 AM PDT
vivazappa says:
Emery Would:
15 years old sounds right to 1972 I was set for life!
Of course I have gotten into tons of rock bands since then but they all have one thing in common...the relate back to where I started!

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 3:07:12 PM PDT
John says:
It depends on what you mean by "Today's" music. Some of it is good (Daughtry for example), but much of it doesn't qualify as music in my opinion. I play 4 instruments and I can sing well. I don't think that someone who does not right their own songs, uses a computer rather than an instrument and uses Autotune because they can't sing, should be classified a musician. Older artist have much more talent. The Scorpions for example have more than 300 songs on more than 24 albums. Today an "artist" will have one song and remix it 24 times. Today the focus is money, not real music.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 5:46:18 PM PDT
E. Dill says:

<<Today the focus in money, not real music.>>

Daughtry and The Scorpions, huh?

Like I've said many times before, our view of music is subjective as hell. I could easily list 500 albums released in 2012 alone that I'd gladly take over anything released by either of those in their musical lifetimes. (I guess they're both still cranking them out). I may even throw in a few remixes, some electronics and at least one autotuned vocal for good measure.


In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 6:05:16 PM PDT
"I could easily list 500 albums released in 2012 alone that I'd gladly take over anything released by either of those in their musical lifetimes."

Having already witnessed Dill's list making powers, I would refrain from a challenge.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 6:56:08 PM PDT
E. Dill says:
@Under the Influence:

What challenge? That I could name 500 albums that I THOUGHT were better than two of his favorites? It's all subjective.


Posted on Nov 3, 2012 4:22:13 PM PDT
A says:
I'm with Schwarz on this one. Seems to me that most of us "discovered" music at a particular point in our developing years, and what we consider to be "good" music will always and forever be rooted in comparing what's new to that early benchmark. Dating myself here, but I still remember the first two albums I ever listened to on a Walkman: Iron Maiden's "Piece of Mind" and an early Oingo Boingo album. I remember the sound quality was so much better than anything than I'd ever heard anywhere else that I was instantly hooked. I recall paying close attention to musical elements I'd never noticed before, and being fascinated by how they all fit together so seamlessly. So in the decades since(ouch!), perhaps even unconsciously, I've always been comparing the new stuff to those two pivotal benchmarks - I'm always looking for musicianship and passion, and I'm glad when I find it in a new band, though it seems harder and harder to come by lately. The Gaslight Anthem comes to mind...Then again, I'm the first to acknowledge that music doesn't seem all that important to some people, so they're happy to embrace whatever seems popular in the moment for the social boost it provides them. How else to explain Kesha and Lady Gaga, to name just two?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 3, 2012 4:26:47 PM PDT

By listening. Even at that tender age I didn't much approve of Top 40. But for many of us it was all we knew about. My older brother and sister had very conventional taste, but I was saved by underground radio.

Posted on Nov 3, 2012 5:49:26 PM PDT
Micaloneus says:
Generally speaking, music today is geared for the eye, not the ear.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 3, 2012 8:16:22 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
it would seem logical that Top 40 would have the best written songs, since that's where the money is (or it used to be anyway). If Top 40 doesn't appeal to your ears because of the productions that would be an interesting subject.

I've never gotten an answer to this question. It might be so instinctual that it's not relatable.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 11:04:44 AM PST
What challenge? Not whether you *could* name 500 albums that you prefer. I was expressing my fear that you *would* list all 500 albums. Just teasing you about our silly tiff from the past.

I'm surprised that you let werranth413 off the hook after she made the comment:

"May I say, posts like these remind me of the outlandish example of a gang of 8 year old boys (who naturally still 'hate' girls) asked to judge a beauty pageant!"

My take: A veiled insult to the other posters. As in plebes, those who don't make an attempt at formal music study (eight year old boys), outlandishly evaluating music (beauty pageant). w413 must be tiring you out.

Posted on Nov 4, 2012 11:40:32 AM PST
A. Strong says:
Where is the quality today?
I wish the Spice Girls would return.

Posted on Nov 4, 2012 11:41:17 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 5, 2012 9:48:06 AM PST
The Norminator says:
Randy, you got that right about Idol, or now even X Factor or The Voice. Season 1 contestants from the voice sold terrible numbers. Recent news stories are asking if these shows can even produce pop stars anymore like they did with Clarkson or Underwood. Daughtry broke out, but Lambert is doing so so compared to the three, as is Sparks and it goes downhill from there.

My family and I enjoyed Idol when it first started. Because of all the over-saturation, we've grown rather fatigued of these shows now.

I think it's funny that many of the singers are back to where they got started - no record label, performing in bars or theme parks or cruise ships and so on.

I'm eagerly hoping for another family drama show to come along. Something like Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman or Touched By An Angel.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 11:46:27 AM PST
70s Soul says:
Yep, it's really that bad. And I submit the decline began after 1979. I rarely listen to any music I collected from the '80s.

However, there are exceptions.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 11:52:29 AM PST
Severin says:
I don't watch "reality" shows as a rule but I thought there were a couple of American Idol singers that never lived up to their potential, Crystal Bowersox and Katherine McPhee. But I'd rather listen to a singer-songwriter with a lesser voice who has something original to say.

Posted on Nov 4, 2012 12:03:05 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 4, 2012 12:03:59 PM PST
The Decline began after 1979?

There is: R.E.M. The Plimsouls, The Cramps, X, The Long Ryders, The Waterboys, The Replacements, Dream Sydicate, Paul Kelly, Los Lobos, Peter Case, XTC, The Blasters to name just a few. U2 wanted to conquer the world from day one onwards and they did pretty well. There is a little more to the 1980's than "Thriller" and Bruuuuce.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 1:46:58 PM PST
J. Hand says:
Not to speak for Hinch but I am more successful explaining quantum physics to my 4 cats than anyone could be trying to convince werranth of anything other than what she has embedded in her head. She's a teacher ya know so she knows everything already. ;-)
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Music forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  85
Total posts:  668
Initial post:  Oct 19, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 17, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 11 customers

Search Customer Discussions