Why does most new music suck?

The canary's in the coal mine alright, but I'm not sure it's civility. Youth have always been aware of the bullshit they're being put through. They don't waste any time pointing it out. Up here, Canada is still struggling to identify it's culture while the teacher's union is one of the richest. Since when has music not been a reflection of current events? Music soothes the savage breast so subject matter is not the issue. How it's put together is. Problem is, there's nothing left to put together.

There is no good new music. Go ahead, take a deep breath and begin with the word 'there'. Just do it. Now that wasn't so hard was it? Because if it is good, it's a remake. Why is it so hard to face the fact that music can be reduced to a mathematical equation. There simply is not an infinite number of original pleasing harmonies available. This is why the new stuff sucks. No different from the old stuff that sucks. Do the math. And top 40's is a ridiculous comparison. It's time to usher in the brave new world of 'Plagiary'.

The development of technology is not dependent on the evolution of music(or is it?). What are you worried about?

Only the good stuff.

I would have used the word 'vestige' in place of refuge. However, 'refuge' is the place I go as it applies to music, being a built house.

What? No coffee drinkers out there? Pity. Hopefully you'll see the light before you die for the open minded, or on the other hand, hopefully not for the closed. I recently watched a reality flick about a guy who had a half million vinyl record collection. No new music. Good luck hearing each one just one time in your life.

Okay. I'll give you new and interesting, alternate, tweaked, hybridized, familiarized, conceptualized, homogenized, pasteurized, but mostly capitalized. The glaring omission in your post is the word 'pleasing'. Close minded begins when someone is pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining.

I really don't see a lack of civility here. My goodness, look at the op's opening statement. And I don't see a lot of hostility either except for Bongo's 'you're sucking lemons' statement (must have been meant for me). I'd be disappointed had this thread become an exercise in etiquette.

You really gotta hate those snobby tube guys though:)

Frederich Nietzsche... "And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music".

Although I'm not aware of Megan Fox, how is it any less relevant? Call me the author.

Nice connection.

History does.

That thing you asked about, to use your words, sucks expletively big time. How 'big a deal' was it back then as a mere novelty? Pretty big imo as the novelties constituted entire collections. Anybody out there listening to the Beatles on their Magicos? Both Fjn04 and Rok2id are right on the money and you can't not know it along with just about everyone watching this thread.

Most importantly, he didn't ask 'if' it sucks. That is clearly a given.

Oh but it is! This is where we differ. Do you think that the great melodies of the past would not exist had those who wrote them not done so? They simply beat everyone else to the punch. There are no punches left to punch.

Different dynamic way back when. Music was full of politics; industrial revolution in fruition, birth of rock n' roll, beatniks, long hair, hippie movement. It was 1963 when I saw two guys walking down our street with hair way down past their shoulders(serious pioneers). The 'Beatle' hair cut and boots were in vogue. As they walked by, my father commented "Look at those degenerate apes. From behind you can't tell if they're women or men". His tone was literally murderous. His ignorance was the catalyst for his hatred of the new music. He was 38. To a kid, definitely an old codger. Once his and even older generations got used to the hair, there was lots of toe-tapping and humming then current music going on. It took about 5-6 years. Maybe not hard-rock but there was lots going on besides that. 'Yesterday' became my dad's fav in 1967. Longer hair covering the ears became fashionable for older men, 'Beatlemania' having taken root to the farthest reaches of society. So kids and old codgers always agreed on which music is good and which sucks whether they admitted it or not.

I couldn't agree more. But keep in mind that within conservatism live the checks and balances, the anchor to the future. Without which there is no new starting point. Without market driven formulas there is no dissent. This is the earmark of the artist, is it not? However when it comes to music, there is only so much gold in the mine. As it is depleted, so also is the karat value of the alloy.

But what if the shady spots aren't shady after all? What if they are simply your own personal discovery in retrospect? What is the value of sifting through a heap of scrap hoping to find a lost treasure when it's alive and well right where it belongs?

We're kind of on the same page. I'm talking about all the thousands of pre 90's recordings you haven't heard yet.

So what's stopping you?

Just my position in answer to the op's question that there's plenty of good music to find without having to settle for current new offerings. Rok2id hit the nail on the head though. I'm still stuck in the 70's. With me it's still all about the music. The gear really is secondary. I would not be interested otherwise. I don't care how good or bad the recording is. Good ones are a bonus, bad ones a challenge.

Well, the proof is in the pudding. If we took an audiophile wide survey, what direction do you think it would take? Even just here on Audiogon? Are you willing to wager?

Nonoise, I think a little of everything you've said applies to all of us. I certainly relate to your last statement. Don't we all long for the 'good ole days'? I knew they were happening when I heard Carly Simon sing about them. There's a lot of music from that time frame I haven't heard yet. Why would I sweep it under the carpet in favor of something that by necessity is sub-par. The gear does matter but it's secondary. My interest has not evolved. The goal is still to make the best music sound as good as it can. Every time I put a poor recording on I rescue it.

Acman3, I rest my case. It's virtually impossible to distinguish one of those bands from another. There must be some kind of a generic hat they all draw their material from. They could interchange members and still not change a thing. On the suck meter they're off the scale. I'd like to see you whistling or humming one of those tunes at your work place or walking down the street. Yeah, sure. And the slow tunes are no different, just more pathetic. Nothing but an act of desperation as Nonoise stated. However in this and most if not all other cases we're not talking about actual artists, just greed.

Who do you think you are? God? Only He is infinite. If there is somewhere further to go, it is He that will light the way. Otherwise, use your math skills, quantum science, geometry, etc. to calculate your limited existence and face it!

Acman3, I hear you. But it is what it is. You can't deny it. You can only try. What's the big deal? It doesn't change anything else. It's still all fun. So carry on.

Rok, it doesn't change the truth. Give me an alternative.

I think a clear distinction should be made between lyrics and melody. My son came home one day after school indignant that the new assignment was to write a poem. He thought 'How absurd to demand something from someone who may not be particularly talented in this area'. He was 10 at the time. I made an agreement with him that if I can write a poem, so can he. I promptly retreated into the bedroom with clipboard in hand and emerged an hour and half later with a 7 stanza poem which he thought was fabulous. He then diligently wrote a pretty decent one himself. Attempting to add music to it is the hard part. This is where his contention would have made sense. In my recollection, all of the most important players of the 60's and 70's did in fact write their own material. Something that was always pointed out back then. It was considered a very important attribute and highly respected. However, great music stands alone and all those who did Bacharach, who imo was the key player for pop, were very well liked. So it really is always about the music isn't it. Any one can do the lyrics. The dilemma artists are faced with today is finding good original melody. There's simply none left. Not sure what that Simpson article was trying to convey.

Well done Rok. But Marty, Do you think you may be over complicating things a bit? Definitions of art become irrelevant to those offended by it. Why would I grade something I consider degenerative? To consider as you suggest, that early blues in any way has a similarity to Warhol or Picasso. Completely different motives and intentions. I do agree with your assessment of Johnny B. Goode, but the Beatles were 'better'.

Absolutely, yes. It is our intelligence that brings the best to the forefront of the myriad possibilities which can be calculated mathematically. Sure there are zillions of possible melodies, the vast majority being pure garbage as relates to our ears. But it's ridiculous to think any of the best ones are somehow still hidden in the math. Someone else would definitely have come up with something similar enough that if put side by side, would be considered plagiary. There have been lots of law suits regarding this issue. I believe it's called sampling.

Exactly. Talented musicians are not necessarily artists. Imagine teaching yourself not only to play an instrument but to come up with some of the best music of all time. There's lots of information available to corroborate the statements I've made. Do some research. Here's where the absolute quashes the idea of subjectivism. Except for the insistent foolhardy of course, thinking he can raise a dead horse and soldier on not realizing he's just standing there.

My last response was to Tostadosunidos.

My initial challenge was 'Audiophile wide", globally. Let's not cloud the issue here. If these guys are writing these tunes to satisfy themselves, fine. They're second to none. However, if they're competing with the past trying to pass it off to the general public as viable art, they're kidding themselves and anyone else as desperate to break out of current establishment, or just exploiting such for monetary gain. I would think that Rok2id's challenge extends to everyone here.

You haven't answered my question, as I've noticed you don't actually address the meat of any one's post.

I happen to love Rok's style. As far as the op's concerned, I think we can take license to extend his query to all genres since it applies to all. It's already been made clear but just to state it, 'new' music is not a genre. Youtube examples are mediocre to bad at best. I still want to see the list of the new 'Greats' as it were. Musicianship is irrelevant to this question imo. Good musicians are a dime a dozen(no offense, but no exaggeration either). Some of the best songs of the past were done by moderate to poor vocal ability so that doesn't matter either unless you're an American Idol fan. Still pondering that last post, Marty.

Maybe, but it's always been the simplest melodies that are the most pleasing. History or not. That's the problem with originality. The more complicated it gets, the less pleasing until finally it's just garbage.

Frogman, I believe my last post is self explanatory.

Rok, I think here in lies your dilemma. Too much is being expected from some of us. I wouldn't change a thing:)

You beat me to the punch.

I've heard that tune before.

I guess I just don't get it. What I do get is that certain similarity apparent in everything presented so far except the plagiarized one Rok presented. First time I heard Dark Side Of The Moon in 71, it took a few spins to really get it into my blood as with lots of other music as well. But the potential has to be there. Interestingly enough, as all these bands seem to be trying too hard, the effort it demands to like it is commensurate. It's just work. Where's the fun part?

Mapman, it's just my perspective, I suppose. I don't mean to stink up the thread but in my mind it stands to reason that one would have to really flog it into acceptability. The very nature of being an audiophile is isolating. However virtually all younger people I've encountered into rap and the new stuff also love the early stuff. Interesting how this problem doesn't exist in reverse. Boring? Maybe if there was only a few tunes to play over and over. But my collection consists of less than 500 albums. I haven't even touched the surface and I dare say no one here has heard anywhere near the full gamut of what's been done in the past.

Okay, sure. Let's be friends.

Great tune, wasn't it? I loved it when it came out. No wonder our young folks want to follow suit.

You're kidding, right? You've melded two peoples' opinions on different issues into a collaborative position of your own. And you're talking about narcissism? What are you on?

Any way, I'd like to bring up Bowie for a moment. He declined 'All The Young Dudes'. But wasn't he awesome? Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel. Took what was left and made the best of it. And you can bet it needed the production it got.

Whoa. It's only hindsight that's 20/20, maybe? The suggestion that complex melodies were being bandied about versus the ones that actually took place is a little overly optimistic don't you think, in retrospect? Seriously.

I happened to be in Kastle, Germany in 70'-71'. In a Hungarian boarding school run by priests and nuns. I was 14 at the time and I first heard 'Whole Lotta Love'. That and Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Hendrix, and the Beatles were the mainstay there at the time. Oh, and Lee Micheals' one hit wonder, 'Do you know what I mean'. It was fabulous growing up now that I think of it.

No shit, Rok.

Marty, I believe the simplest melodies are in fact the best but all it has to be is good. I consider all the older stuff to be in that category even though some of it may be more involving. It's when you get into the 'complicated territory' that things seem to fall apart. As I mentioned before, Bowie pretty well scraped the bottom of the barrel imo.