From a couple of days ago on the Howard Stern Show - just Billie singing, accompanied by her brother on piano:
I don’t think anyone would deny that. I think the point is that in the 50’s and 60’s, there were some recording that became legendary and deservedly so. For example:
The Coasters, Down in Mexico
The Beach Boys, Good Vibrations
The Animals, House of the Rising Sun
Jefferson Airplane, Somebody to Love
Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell, Ain’t No Mountain High Enough
Righteous Brothers, You’ve Lost that Loving Feeling
and others. But what music released in the past ten years is going to be legendary?
I’m almost 60 years old, and I still regularly find new songs that I like. Not so much on the radio, but even there it happens once in a while. More often I get recommendations from Facebook or Twitter. The key is that I’ll try just about any recommendation. Most don’t do anything for me, but I’ve discovered some real gems.
[quote=“Baron_Greenback, post:41, topic:841128”]
From a couple of days ago on the Howard Stern Show - just Billie singing, accompanied by her brother on piano:
[/QUOTE]Okay - she’s got some range, obviously a bunch of fans, and has undoubtedly made more $ at 17 than I ever have or ever will. And she and her brother write the songs - good on them. Doesn’t matter that I’m personally not thrilled w/ her delivery.
Let’s see what she (and her brother) are doing 3-5 years from now.
and remember, Elvis was considered rather “lewd” for the time; outrage over his moves led them to only film him from above the waist during a later performance on the Ed Sullivan Show.
See Nicolas Slonimsky’s Lexicon of Musical Invective, a few centuries’ of bad reviews. Beethoven’s “barnyard animal” sounds; Debussy’s rubbish; the joy of being born deaf. Old music is always stale. New music always sucks. The C in rap is silent.
And the key to finding those gems is to hunt for them, or have someone else recommend them. Luckily, I have kids and students with good taste (my daughter just walked down the aisle to this Bon Iver song).
Same as the 60’s or any decade. I’m well over 60, and I remember all the dreck from back then, and how your car radio only played the Top 40… think about that, and imagine listening to the same 40 songs over and over and over. So much of it was crap; I clearly remember trying to leap into the front seat and immediately punch the AM radio buttons to avoid “Honey” by Bobby Goldsboro.
I just randomly looked up the 40 you’d hear many many timesat the beginning of 1963… the top 10 were a mixed bag:
1 TELSTAR –•– The Tornadoes
2 GO AWAY LITTLE GIRL –•– Steve Lawrence
3 LIMBO ROCK –•– Chubby Checker
4 BOBBY’S GIRL –•– Marcie Blane
5 BIG GIRLS DON’T CRY –•– The Four Seasons
6 HOTEL HAPPINESS –•– Brook Benton
7 PEPINO THE ITALIAN MOUSE –•– Lou Monte
8 RETURN TO SENDER –•– Elvis Presley
9 ZIP-A-DEE DOO-DAH –•– Bob B. Soxx and the Blue Jeans
10 TELL HIM –•– The Exciters
the mom of one of the neighbor girls says "Ariana grande is the daughter madonna should of had "
And my point is that they’re comparing the stuff that they still listen to after 50 years with the stuff they happen to hear when they happen across some contemporary music. Which has an extremely high likelihood of being run-of-the-mill crap, today’s equivalent of the forgettable top-40 stuff of 50 years ago.
The Coasters song is so legendary that I literally have never heard of it before. I can take or leave the Righteous Brothers, and I have to say I’ve been unaware that their songs were considered legendary by people who weren’t particular fans of the Righteous Brothers. And besides the fact that I actively dislike “Ain’t No Mountain,” I didn’t know it was legendary either. But I’ll agree that the other three are legendary, and deservedly so.
My point not being that your list is crap (it isn’t) but that we clearly have great disagreement about what songs from 50 years ago have stood the test of time, let alone which are ‘legendary.’ And that’s after 50 years of winnowing. How are we going to tell about now, even if we’re familiar with today’s music?
How do you know, until you see what survives the test of time? I could give you a list of my favorites, that I think I will still be listening to in 20 years, but when we get to 30 years out, I may or may not still be around to listen to anything. And 40 years is almost certainly right out.
Which brings up the point that I’m not part of the generation whose opinions will determine which songs from this decade are legendary; the people who will be the judge of that are 50 years younger than me, give or take a decade. All I can tell you is that some very good music is still being made, songs that I listen to over and over again.
Thanks, RT! Those are the points I’ve been* trying* to formulate in my head ever since I read the OP.
Sometimes I catch myself or one of my friends starting to bitch about “the hogswallup what passes fer music these days, dadburn these rapscallions!”… and we sound just like my grandparents: “You can’t honestly call that music!” “Ummm, that’s ‘Let It Be’, Gramps…”
Yeah, JZ’s experience is not shared with my daughter and her friends who went through a Sinatra phase in the 8th grade, inspiring her and her friends to buy record players and vinyl albums.
It’s YouTube. It’s compressed time and eliminated, as far as music is concerned, anyway, eliminated the generation gap.
For many years I’ve been saying that music from the 1960’s was much better than today’s music. (“Get off my lawn!”) It turns out … I was right!
This 20-minute YouTube discusses a variety of scientific measures to confirm that, yes, music from the 1960’s IS much better than later music in several ways: e.g. harmonic complexity, timbral diversity, lyric “intelligence” (by a full grade level). And, by compressing dynamic range, modern music forces an aggressive loudness on the listener.
Examples: a huge number of modern pop songs were all written by the same man: Max Martin; and
a huge number of modern songs employ a g-e-g or g-e-g-e note progression (with vocal Wa-ho-Wa-oh) called the “Millennial Whoop.”
I’m not sure what you mean - I would say that the average person was certainly aware that there were extemely explicit songs in existence. Were they aware of those specific songs? Probably not, but they probably wouldn’t find it that surprising if they found out that someone had a bootleg of one that they played at a stag party. On the other hand, has the average person actually heard those three songs madsircool linked? I hadn’t heard any of them, and had only heard of one of the artists before.
Haven’t like one or two guys written every radio pop song over the past two decades? I wonder if this has anything to do with the perceived lack of talent in today’s musicians.
I mean, yeah Bob Dylan does not have a great singing voice, but at least he could write.
Dylan was not a technically skilled singer. Wasn’t then, isn’t now. “He has emotion” is fine, and he’s famous for a lot of reasons, but stop kidding yourself. Singing skill is not what made him a legend.
-
The Ramones did not revolutionize music to nearly the extent the guys at Rolling Stone want to believe they did, and
-
You have epically, horribly missed the point.
The point here is not that Bob Dylan, the Ramones, or Ringo Starr don’t deserve to be famous and weren’t great acts. (The Ramones have been overrated, really, but Dylan and the Beatles certainly have not.) The point is that
-
The idea there is less talent in popular music now is just stupid, and
-
Musicianship and skill in a particular aspect of music isn’t necessarily indicative of greatness.
Bob Dylan is not a legend because he’s a great singer (he isn’t) or a great guitar player (not really top tier there either.) He is a legend for his songwriting, but that’s kind of understating it. Dylan didn’t just write great songs, he wrote great songs that captured the zeitgeist of the times and changed the way people thought about popular music. Zillions of people have been better singers. None of them wrote “All Along The Watchtower.”
The Beatles aren’t the greatest rock act that ever existed because they were the most musically talented. They were talented, but not among rock’s great virtuosos. There have been greater guitarists, singers, bassists, and way better drummers. They were the best rock act ever because they created songs and whole albums and a new kind of popular music nobody had ever heard before or, hell, even thought of before.
I’m not saying talent doesn’t matter or there aren’t legendarily great musicians among the greats; Prince, for instance, was absurdly skilled. But there is just as much raw SKILL today - it’s crazy to say there isn’t - and skill has never been totally correlated with greatness in rock and pop music.
This reminds me of how i first heard the infamous “the rodeo song” It was passed around school on self-recorded tapes in the mid-80s… heck I didn’t know it even had an actual name until i told my nephew about it and he found it on youtube …
That’s exactly correct. The best time to be listening to music is right now, because it is all available. The young team don’t care when stuff was made, and they don’t particularly care how it was made either.
The 90s was a special decade for music. Music of multiple genres. I find this hard to dispute. But I’m also quite biased. I dont have a lawn yet but i will!!!
As a thirty-[mumble mumble] year old I have to point out that some of you have hit on the difference between top 40/pop and… let’s just call it serious music. The subject came up in real life this summer when Tool’s latest album came out, and it happened that I was hanging out with my (younger) brother and his wife. My brother is a serious music fan, he bought Fear Inoculum the minute he heard about it. His wife likes top 40 stuff and hasn’t bought an album in years, listening to whatever comes on the radio/streaming service. My brother will be listening to Fear Inoculum when he’s in a nursing home while his wife will have forgotten about the top songs of 2019.
Similarly there are songs and bands from the “classic rock era” that I’ve only recently discovered, despite having listened to classic rock stations for most of childhood. Roky Erickson; Uriah Heep; most of Emmerson, Lake and Palmer’s catalog; most of the Grateful Dead’s catalog. Not to mention all the blues, classical, jazz, metal, etc. that never got played on the radio. Maybe acts like Tool, the Black Keys, Hatebreed, and Heilung will be tomorrows Roky Erickson and EL&P.
Tool is not considered “pop music” but it is considered “popular music”. In fact, “pop music” is considered a subset of “popular music”. So all “pop” is under the “popular music” umbrella but not all “popular music” is made up of “pop music”.