What's the definining music of the current era?

Cafe Society
1

I feel like I can identify a major theme in the popular music of each decade of the latter half of the 20th century. It goes as follows:

50s: Rock and roll (a major revolution, but the music is less enduring than later stuff)
60s: Rock music proper, thanks largely to the Beatles. Timeless stuff here.
70s: Hard rock (most notably Led Zeppelin), later punk. Highly influential.
80s: New wave/electronic music. Hard to comment on the influence of this and later music.
90s: Grunge/alternative. Obviously Nirvana were the godfathers here (RIP Kurt!).

[As an attempt to deflect some flames, please note that I recognize that this is basically the history of pop music made by white guys. Particularly egregious is that while I know that these artists were deeply influenced by (read: ripped off) blues music, I don’t really know where to place the blues in this history.]

My question: what do you think will be the defining music of the current era? For me, the major breakthrough since Y2K has been the new Radiohead. I think Kid A represents a pretty significant muscial advance, though it’s harder (for me) to define exactly what that advance consists of compared to earlier advances. But aside from spawning some lightweight imitators (Coldplay), I don’t think Radiohead has had that much influence. Most of the rock music out there, even really good stuff, sounds pretty derivative of 90s alternative.

I’m guessing the answer might have to do with music that I have trouble relating to like Kanye West and the Black Eyed Peas (I’m probably choosing the dorkiest and lamest examples possible). If so I’d love to hear it, I really want to stay open to musical innovation.

Oh and I thought I should add, maybe it’s hard to see the definitive cultural trends of the era that you’re living in. But I was in college when Nirvana came out, and let me tell you, we all knew that something big was happening. I know my parents felt the same way about the Beatles and 60s music generally. So I don’t think that explains it entirely.

2

Popular music nowadays is all hip hop all the time.

3

[QUOTE=Lemur866]
Popular music nowadays is all hip hop all the time.
[/QUOTE]

I suspected as much.

Look, I’m not ready to become a cantankerous old man. But I fear that I’m losing touch with the music that kids these days listen to. There has to be something with artistic merit out there. I’ve liked things here and there – ‘Milkshake’ comes to mind. Can anyone shepherd me into the world of modern music, not the popular crap that dies within 6 months but stuff that my kids will be listening to in 20 years?

Maybe everyone here’s too nerdy and square like me to be able to relate to it? Nah, that’s impossible – I know there are some young 'uns hanging around. If any of you are reading this, I’m humbly requesting your services.

4

Without knowing anything about either your tastes or modern musical trends, I’ll suggest checking out the following bands (never or rarely heard on the radio):

progressive rock types (think ELP or Yes or King Crimson, maybe)
Riverside
Porcupine Tree
The Flower Kings
The Tangent
Transatlantic
Clutch

“jambands” (think Allman Brothers or Grateful Dead):
Widespread Panic
moe.
String Cheese Incident
Gov’t Mule
Derek Trucks Band

I’m older than you (my daughter was in high school when Nirvana came out) so what do I know (or care) about the latest and greatest, but all my suggestions are active (some more than others) now.

I recognise this is not what you are asking about, I’m just hoping this music will become “stuff my kids will be listening to in twenty years”. I never said I wasn’t a dreamer.

5

[QUOTE=DfrntBreign]
I recognise this is not what you are asking about, I’m just hoping this music will become “stuff my kids will be listening to in twenty years”. I never said I wasn’t a dreamer.
[/QUOTE]

I’m with you on there being lots of great bands around that are active today. Unfortunately, as you say, they don’t tend to get much/any airplay, and that means the odds of them being well-loved by a reasonably broad segment of society in 20 years is nil.

What I’m afraid of is that there’s nothing in popular music now that will really stand the test of time. But then I start feeling like I really am an old man.

Actually, this may be more a function of the media than music itself. There are so many ways to customize your music listening experience these days that there’s not as much music ending up as part of the general culture. So maybe there will not be any single set of music that most people recognize and listen to and enjoy in 20 years, but instead lots of little sub-groups of people like us that have our own personal golden oldies.

But, and this is kind of but not entirely tangential, isn’t that dangerous for the perpetuation of cultural development? I mean, say that Beethoven was never widely recognized as being great, but instead only admired by a small group of those in the know during the decades following his death. Doesn’t it seem likely that the following generations would forget him? I mean, do you and I really think we’ll be able to pass our fairly obscure tastes onto our kids, or anyone in their generation?

I’m sort of skeptical. I’m more inclined to believe that there IS music out there that will be considered to represent the musical achievements of this era, but that I’m too old and clueless to know about it. But could I really be that out of touch? Was there anyone in society who didn’t have at least some clue that Nirvana and their followers were a big deal, even if their only thought was that they were a bunch of lazy slobs smashing their instruments around, and not getting what all the fuss was about? I don’t see anyone of that magnitude today.

6

[QUOTE=spazurek]
I
50s: Rock and roll (a major revolution, but the music is less enduring than later stuff)
60s: Rock music proper, thanks largely to the Beatles. Timeless stuff here.
70s: Hard rock (most notably Led Zeppelin), later punk. Highly influential.
80s: New wave/electronic music. Hard to comment on the influence of this and later music.
90s: Grunge/alternative. Obviously Nirvana were the godfathers here (RIP Kurt!).

[/QUOTE]

Of course I’m nitpicking here but even a lot of other music trends don’t necessarily fit into the model here.

A lot of people think “Disco” when they think 70’s. And while I agree with New wave/electronic music for the 80’s there was also the huge “Hair band” thing happening in the 80’s (Def Leppard, Poison, Bon Jovi, etc.).
And then you also have perhaps the most popular band of the past 3 decades that doesn’t fall into any of your subgroups, “U2”. They were not new wave, electronic, grunge, or alternative. Same for other big names like “Madonna” and “Sting” and “Michael Jackson”.
And I know you put this forth as a white man’s list but you still have to give “Rap” it’s fair due. Even with big name white rappers Beastie Boys and Eminem.

So what will this decade be defined as? Depends on who you ask in 2011. Green Day, Kanye West, The Killers, Coldplay??? All different styles, all popular.

7

I’m going to throw emo in there, but I don’t think there will be any standout bands. The emo music scene is too fragmented, and a “popular = bad” elitism reigns. Even if there was a standout band or two, the majority of emo fans would claim that they suck.

8

[QUOTE=spazurek]

50s: Rock and roll (a major revolution, but the music is less enduring than later stuff)
60s: Rock music proper, thanks largely to the Beatles. Timeless stuff here.
70s: Hard rock (most notably Led Zeppelin), later punk. Highly influential.
80s: New wave/electronic music. Hard to comment on the influence of this and later music.
90s: Grunge/alternative. Obviously Nirvana were the godfathers here (RIP Kurt!).
[/QUOTE]

If I were to pick a dominant musical style of the 80s, it would not be New Wave (although that’s the soundtrack to my own 80s experience), but heavy metal by far. Whether it was the hair bands (Poison, Motley Crue, Def Leppard, Bon Jovi), or the thrash bands (Metallica, Slayer, Anthrax), metal outsold new wave by a country mile AND arguably left a greater imprint on today’s music.

However, I’ve got to say that rap is the only real musical revolution of the past 50 years that (a) was utterly original, as opposed to an outgrowth or evolution of pre-existing styles, and (b) actually appealed to a lot of people.

9

[QUOTE=Hampshire]
Of course I’m nitpicking here but even a lot of other music trends don’t necessarily fit into the model here.

A lot of people think “Disco” when they think 70’s. And while I agree with New wave/electronic music for the 80’s there was also the huge “Hair band” thing happening in the 80’s (Def Leppard, Poison, Bon Jovi, etc.).
And then you also have perhaps the most popular band of the past 3 decades that doesn’t fall into any of your subgroups, “U2”. They were not new wave, electronic, grunge, or alternative. Same for other big names like “Madonna” and “Sting” and “Michael Jackson”.
And I know you put this forth as a white man’s list but you still have to give “Rap” it’s fair due. Even with big name white rappers Beastie Boys and Eminem.

So what will this decade be defined as? Depends on who you ask in 2011. Green Day, Kanye West, The Killers, Coldplay??? All different styles, all popular.
[/QUOTE]

Disco was a major oversight. My apologies.

As for the hair bands, I see them as basically 70s holdovers – no artistic progression to speak of.

And your point about some of the biggest artists not fitting into my tidy little scheme is very well-taken, and casts some doubt on the value of it. However, I’m thinking more about what were the developmental trends in music generally, rather than about people like Madonna, U2 and Michael Jackson who sort of created genres of their own. Still, good point.

As for rap, I readily accept that there has been artistically important rap, that I have indeed heard a fair amount at random times, mostly in good movies by black directors (e.g., Spike Lee) – I simply have no idea how it fits into that genre of music generally, or how it relates to the history and development of rap and its offsprings. I’ve heard a lot more really bad rap – much of it juvenile, some of it hateful or puerile – and I don’t know enough about how the good and the bad relate or how to tell what’s what without just listening at random. That’s associated with my larger question, I think, about how to deal with modern music. Oh and while I think the Beastie Boys are pure genius, I seem to think that they are very much on the fringe of the genre of rap/hip-hop.

I would bet large amounts of money that neither Green Day nor Coldplay will be seen as artistically significant in 20 years. Don’t know enough about the others you cite.

10

There is some great, timeless music being made in the genre called “hip hop.” Don’t dismiss it out of unfmailiarity; it’s worth learning. Try some Lauryn Hill or Wyclef Jean. Or if you’re of a jazzier frame, try some GURU. Thing is, today’s hip hop is a grandchild of jazz and blues more than anything else; it’s improvisational jazz, but with influences accumulated along the way from other sources such as rock, and disco, and electronic, etc. If Louie Armstrong were young today, he’d be doing hip hop. It’s just a different vocabulary, but it’s the same language.

There’s also some great stuff being done in a more prog-y area. Try some Spiritualized, Flaming Lips, Sigur Ros, Radiohead.

There’s timeless music being made in any number of genres. Learn PJ Harvey. Love PJ Harvey.

Listen to KEXP online (kexp.org), the greatest radio station on the planet.

Have fun.

11

I think we’re in a trasitional stage and that Rap is giving way to a more R&B influenced version of rap. There’s actual melody and singing. Though the beat is still the all-important factor as well as complex rhythms. But I think the landscape is slowly morphing again.

12

[QUOTE=OneCentStamp]
However, I’ve got to say that rap is the only real musical revolution of the past 50 years that (a) was utterly original, as opposed to an outgrowth or evolution of pre-existing styles, and (b) actually appealed to a lot of people.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think rap is any more original than rock. Rock had its roots deeply planted in the blues, for sure, but it was a major innovation beyond it. You can’t tell me that Sgt. Pepper was just a slight variation on the blues.

Rap, especially the early stuff, doesn’t sound that different from the later 60s/70s funk of James Brown. (Aside from being far inferior, to my crochety ears…).

13

How many people in this thread are familiar with Calexico? Broken Social Scene? Queens of the Stone Age? Andrew Bird? My Morning Jacket?

They all played to screaming crowds at Lollapalooza - and, along with dozens of other bands I can’t even begin to list here, are becoming hugely popular. You won’t hear them on corporate radio, but you will hear them on college radio.

It used to be you could say “indie rock” and be talking about one specific kind of music. This is no longer the case, and a new musical culture is being created right now among college-age young people that doesn’t involve rap or hip hop.

I’m not saying that this music is the defining music of this generation. I think there is no defining music of this generation. There are so many musical subcultures, and so much diversity, and it’s all constantly evolving.

14

I think for the AUghts you could say something like alt-pop, if there is such a thing. Bands like Weezer, the Killers, etc. These are bands that are popular but seem to maintain at least some semblence of being alternative. In some ways they are spawn of U2.

15

[QUOTE=ddgryphon]
I think we’re in a trasitional stage and that Rap is giving way to a more R&B influenced version of rap. There’s actual melody and singing. Though the beat is still the all-important factor as well as complex rhythms. But I think the landscape is slowly morphing again.
[/QUOTE]

It’s not giving way, it’s just diversifying.

(And for the record, Rap and Hip hop are two different things. Vanilla Ice is rap, but not hiphop.)

16

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
How many people in this thread are familiar with Calexico? Broken Social Scene? Queens of the Stone Age? Andrew Bird? My Morning Jacket?

They all played to screaming crowds at Lollapalooza - and, along with dozens of other bands I can’t even begin to list here, are becoming hugely popular. You won’t hear them on corporate radio, but you will hear them on college radio.

It used to be you could say “indie rock” and be talking about one specific kind of music. This is no longer the case, and a new musical culture is being created right now among college-age young people that doesn’t involve rap or hip hop.

I’m not saying that this music is the defining music of this generation. I think there is no defining music of this generation. There are so many musical subcultures, and so much diversity, and it’s all constantly evolving.
[/QUOTE]

This is my music too. Lots to love in it. But none of it, not a single bit, comes close to the importance of a band like Nirvana. The closest thing is Radiohead, but I just don’t see their contribution being that influential at the moment.

17

[QUOTE=lissener]
There is some great, timeless music being made in the genre called “hip hop.” Don’t dismiss it out of unfmailiarity; it’s worth learning. Try some Lauryn Hill or Wyclef Jean.
…snip…
Have fun.
[/QUOTE]

**Wyclef Jean ** is Hip Hop? Crap, I am out of it, I thought he was Reggae with some Hip Hop influence. :confused:

The have fun part should be the disclaimer of every music thread.

Jim

18

[QUOTE=lissener]
Listen to KEXP online (kexp.org), the greatest radio station on the planet.
[/QUOTE]

As a recent transplant from Seattle, you’re tugging my heartstrings (although it will always be KCMU to me!).

That said…the only truly compelling contemporary music I heard on KEXP during the last 5 years was some amazing Bulgarian women’s choir – singing centuries-old folk songs. Beautiful, yes, but hardly innovative. KEXP was actually part of what led me to my state of anxiety – they would mix in rap/hip-hop and I would never, ever like it. Is my brain really sclerosing?? :frowning:

19

[QUOTE=spazurek]
I don’t think rap is any more original than rock. Rock had its roots deeply planted in the blues, for sure, but it was a major innovation beyond it. You can’t tell me that Sgt. Pepper was just a slight variation on the blues.
[/quote]

Maybe not, but it is just a slight variation on their earlier material, which was just a slight variation on Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry and The Everly Brothers, which were just slight variations on blues and country. We’re talking about 10 or 12 years worth of evolution here, after all.

I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree here. That’s partly due to Brown being a favorite sample (especially the breaks from “Funky Drummer”) of the very early rap DJs. However, within two or three years rap came into its own with Run-DMC’s Raising Hell and LL Cool J’s Radio, and it was a whole new ballgame – easily as different from James Brown as Sgt. Pepper was from Chuck Berry.

20

[QUOTE=spazurek]
This is my music too. Lots to love in it. But none of it, not a single bit, comes close to the importance of a band like Nirvana.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think you will feel this way in 10 years.