Page 1 of 3
#1
I saw an interview with joe walsh and he was saying how he thinks musc has become clinical and templated, I agree what do you think ?

Not being funny Adele does nothing for me especially when compared to someone like roy buchanan.
#2
Old guy complaining about how things are different than they used to be? Someone preferring one thing to another thing?

Alert the media!

Modern music is better than ever. You've got everything from the past to build on plus all kinds of unique things and technology allows musicians talented musicians to create higher quality tracks and gives them the means to distribute them. Also what a lot of people forget is that mainstream music was never good and older people only think music was better because the have found d memories of old music, not because the music was better.

What does mojo even mean? It's one of those abstract words that isn't quantitative and doesn't have any real meaning to it.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#3
joe walsh called stevie wonder an "ungrateful black multi millionaire"

fuck that talentless dipshit
modes are a social construct
#4
I think Joe is referring to the perfection factor. The way music is created today it often involves months if not years of overdubs, auto tuning, sampling and over production that takes the dynamics and heart out of some performances. Every note is subject to seamless replacement and every word to a punch-in. In previous years a band was signed to a contract that called for recording and releasing a new album every six months. They went in and recorded basic tracks in a few days maybe a week or two tops then came in for a few days of overdubs, mix master release, go out on the road and promote. Today many bands are lucky to get out new product every 3 years and there are many  tales of bands that record one instrument at a time and rarely play all together. 

I think there is some really good new music but I also think there is a lot of cookie cutter music out there. I don't know if it's the artists fault or the public that accepts it. 
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Sep 28, 2017,
#5
Quote by Rickholly74
I think there is some really good new music but I also think there is a lot of cookie cutter music out there. I don't know if it's the artists fault or the public that accepts it. 


You say "cookie cutter" like a) it hasn't always been the case and b) it's an inherently bad thing.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#6
I feel the same way as Joe, but I guess it is just grumpy old man syndrome. I agree that "cookie cutter" has always been with us, but a lot of modern popular guitar-oriented music (ie the past 40-odd years ) just sounds clever rather than musical to me, but there again that is also true of, say, bebop jazz.
Last edited by Tony Done at Sep 28, 2017,
#7
A much lower S/N ratio today.  There is still some great stuff out there but you gotta wade through 4' of steer manure to find it.  Music with Mojo moves you in that special place. No Mojo, no movement.
"Your sound is in your hands as much as anything. It's the way you pick, and the way you hold the guitar, more than it is the amp or the guitar you use." -- Stevie Ray Vaughan

"Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfucker who plays it is 80 percent." -- Miles Davis

Guthrie on tone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmohdG9lLqY
Last edited by Cajundaddy at Sep 28, 2017,
#8
Quote by theogonia777
What does mojo even mean?  It's one of those abstract words that isn't quantitative and doesn't have any real meaning to it.

Oh dear, let me try to write this in the nicest way... "Mojo" is publicly and politely defined in terms of a magic spell, a hex, a charm, or some magical power... etc., but it really comes from the blending of two ideas.

The first idea is that of quality of performance, but it comes with the connotation that this quality is not an intrinsic steady condition of the performer but something special that emerges, increases, and grows to satisfy the presenting situation.

The second idea runs underneath the first in which all the descriptions of performance, emergence, increase, and growth are lightly concealed euphemisms suggestive of, ah... let's say the "special purpose" transformation of a gentleman's "attitude" in preparation for entertaining a lady.

The clue here is that in terms of word origins, the spanish verb "mojar" is the infinitive "to make wet"... and is U.S slang for getting laid. "Mojar" is a transitive verb that takes an object (something is made wet) and "Mojo" is first person "I make (something) wet". So when someone says, "I got my Mojo on" they are saying, "I have my wetness maker ready".
Quote by reverb66
I'm pretty sure the Bible requires that you play through a tube amp in Texas.
#11
Cajundaddy

I've never had to wade through modern music any more than old music (try wading through the 39 1/2 feet of manure that is Merle Haggard's discography to find the gems). If you have people or blogs or other sources you trust, finding quality new stuff is easier than ever.

PlusPaul

That's an awful lot of words to say nothing.

That etymology also sounds like nonsense and after looking it up, that etymology is indeed nonsense.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#12
Quote by cdgraves
That was a different Joe Walsh... (apologies if you were being facetious)


it's a lot funnier to me if i just put them together, honestly

"man, cmon, i had a rough night, and i hate the fuckin eagles, man"
modes are a social construct
#13
I think pop music has a lot more going for it now than it did 10 years ago. Texture is quite a bit richer with the better synth and production technology, and I think the focus is more on rhythm than melody, which suits my tastes. 
#14
Quote by Hail
it's a lot funnier to me if i just put them together, honestly

"man, cmon, i had a rough night, and i hate the fuckin eagles, man"

you can get the fuck out of my cab right now
#15
Quote by Hail
it's a lot funnier to me if i just put them together, honestly

"man, cmon, i had a rough night, and i hate the fuckin eagles, man"


The Eagles: terrible band, terrible football team.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#16
www.dcj20 I guess there's millions and millions of folk in there teens, twenties, ... that would disagree with that view.

I am often delighted by the imagination of folk putting stuff together with "cut-and-paste" in a home studio to create some great grooves.  I wonder what would happen if they had some more understanding in how music works?

cdgraves I agree with your take.
#17
"mojo" by and large seems to refer to/touch on qualities like "swagger", "soul", "rawness".

Modern music has all those things - however you subjectively interpret them, vague as they are - and in spades. There's a lot of shit today it's true, and the most popular music does have its cookie-cutter factor amplified to the max by the aggressive perfection going on (which, I agree, can actually make one feel some sort of distance from the work at times), but it's worth bearing in mind that a perfect swing band performing in the days before recording was invented might well have brought out the same reaction from some debutante - "oh, they're so mechanical", "oh, it's all just a cold money-grabbing people-catcher!", "won't somebody think of Brahms!?!?!?!". Same can be said of people in the 50s hearing Ink Spots and (presumably) thinking "oh, it's so saccharine, this has nothing of what I hear down the club every Friday!". And have you ever listened to most 80s pop?

Do some real digging. You ever gone through a record store, flipped through 500 meh vinyls for one fantastic record? Same with digital, only now you can cross-reference the genre sections and it's more independent.
Last edited by Banjocal at Sep 29, 2017,
#18
As a mod of this site I hereby declare every single thread ever that accuses modern music of lacking "soul", "artistic value", "excitement" or in any other way implies that modern music is inherently bad stupid. I'm tired of these threads, Joe Walsh has no idea what he's talking about, modern music is great, a lot of of "old" music is boring and uninspired, and if you don't give modern music a chance it's your own loss, and a huge loss at that. 

Also Adele blows most classic rock out of the water imo, hell of a singer and has a lot of memorable songs. To each their own, of course, but I'm tired of this crusade dad rock fans have against pop, hip-hop, electronic music and modern rock, if you don't like it that's fine but there's no need to insult modern music as a whole just because you don't understand it in the slightest. Sorry if I sound crankier than usual but this is just such an asinine topic.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#19
I remember having that "old music was better" idea in my head when I was about 13. I really don't think there's anything at all to it. I guess possibly a lower-quality recording on older tech sounds a bit nicer than a compressed mp3 file or whatever, so there's that. There is something genuinely charming in a slightly imperfect old recording, but that doesn't make the music better by any means.

As far as whether they "don't make them like they used to", there really isn't any significant fundamental difference between musicians now and musicians 50 years ago, just they have different (and more) inspirations to work with. Some of them are miles more technical than anyone who came before, while some value simplicity, and on either end of that spectrum there are plenty who deliver incredible musicality. Different things are in fashion, as always, so we no longer have to listen to so much mediocre blues rock made/plagiarised by douchebags you wouldn't leave alone in a room with your kids, nor so much Spandex and caricatured male sexuality from glam metal, but on a basic level making music is really...

...same as it ever was.


Okay, I've changed my mind. Music peaked on July 7 1996 when that came out.

Anyway, I could use this as an excuse to plug a bunch of bands and performers I really like but I think that would be largely self indulgence. People like different things but I'm sure any of you can find things to enjoy from any given year of recorded music if you look hard enough. As nebulous and, yes, pretty much devoid of genuine meaning as "mojo" is, it is what it's all about and there's plenty of it now as ever. There's amazing modern rock, metal, jazz, hip hop, house, pop, whatever.
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Youre officially uber shit now.

Quote by StewieSwan
3d9310rd is far more upset than i 

Quote by Bladez22
I'm a moron tho apparently and everyone should listen to you oh wise pretentious one
#20
www.dcj20 Well, when you come right down to it, Joe Walsh is sort of a burnout anyway. His "James Gang", never really went that far, and "Life's been Good", is sort of the "medley of his hit". The Eagles still play it, when they play, of course.

With those things said, I think what's missing today is the great lyrics. Al Stewart's "Roads to Moscow", of course Bob Dylan's more expansive stuff like "Chimes of Freedom", and, "My Back Pages", and a band led by one David Cousins, "The Strawbs" all managed to turn the grimmest of history into fine art. Jethro Tull's, "Aqualung", was a concept to be reckoned with. Pete Townshend in penning "Tommy", managed to hijack every piece of British ceremonial and martial music as a framework for his message.

I will say, you'd most likely get thrown out of every party you ever go to if you used my list of favorites in your set. But realistically, for me the music is/was just a simple backdrop for the inner working of some of the finest, most socially conscious minds ever to grace the industry.

I also like country. But moving from Martina McBride, Mary -Chapin Carpenter, Suzy Boggus, and Kathy Baillie to the now incessant screaming of Carrie Underwood, is a monumental downer...

I never imagined I'd hear my self be saying this, but I do really enjoy modern symphonic metal,. Xandria & Kamelot, are probably my favorites. I find it fascinating how bits a pieces of many or perhaps all of the prog rock bands I listened to in my misspent youth, have contributed to the genre. At least they still use guitars out front,of the mix, and the largely female front persons, who can actually hit G5 without straining, are certainly a relief from the falsetto or perhaps strained counter tenor of Tommy Shaw, Geddy Lee, and Robert Plant. < (Yes,I know the Robert Plant thing is sacrilegious, but that doesn't make me want to listen to him more as penance).
#21
No question that musicianship is better than ever. It should be. We learn from what came before and improve on it. If I could step into Mr. Peabody's Wayback machine and go back to 1970 with the chops I have now, I'd be a superstar guitarist. Playing and production are light years more advanced but call me an old grumpy dude (I am), I'm not moved emotionally by a lot of today's music. I guess that's to be expected. Each generation likes the music they grew up with because there is that intangible nostalgia factor attached to it even if it is not consciously recognized. My father is 92 years old and is convinced that Glenn Miller and Benny Goodman were the be all and end all of the music world and anything that came after 1950 was crap. 
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
#22
This is a meaningless debate. Every generation is going to have an attachement to the music they grew up with, every generation of music has it's cookie cutter cliche it just keeps going.

I am older and I don't like a lot of the newer music but there is a lot of it that I do enjoy, for all of the younger crowd that wants to dismiss the older folks by saying they are clinging to the music of their youth as you vehemently defend the music of your generation just remember someday (sooner than you realise) you will be having this same argument again but you will be the older person that don't like the newer music.

Look forward to the day when your kids punk on your music and call it dad rock or whatever cleaver moniker they choose to call it..

Nostalgia is a powerful thing!
"A well-wound coil is a well-wound coil regardless if it's wound with professional equipment, or if somebody's great-grandmother winds it to an old French recipe with Napoleon's modified coffee grinder and chops off the wire after a mile with an antique guillotine!"
- Bill Lawrence

Come and be with me
Live my twisted dream
Pro devoted pledge
Time for primal concrete sledge

Last edited by Evilnine at Sep 29, 2017,
#23
Just because someone was a famous musician doesn't mean they have something smart to say about music.
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Omae wa mou
Shindeiru



Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
#24
I had my mojo workin', but now it's crashed and I can't get an upgrade.
Quote by Captaincranky

With those things said, I think what's missing today is the great lyrics. Al Stewart's "Roads to Moscow", of course Bob Dylan's more expansive stuff like "Chimes of Freedom", and, "My Back Pages", and a band led by one David Cousins, "The Strawbs" all managed to turn the grimmest of history into fine art. Jethro Tull's, "Aqualung", was a concept to be reckoned with. Pete Townshend in penning "Tommy", managed to hijack every piece of British ceremonial and martial music as a framework for his message.

Obviously this stuff is all personal taste, but for lyrics I don't think you can beat Leonard Cohen and Joni Mitchell.  Much as I love Dylan, I think they beat him hands down in poetic skill.  Their words sing out from the page, finely crafted, whereas Dylan's seem to need the melody and delivery to work (no bad thing, of course).  Paul Simon had his moments too.  
I agree with your main point, of course - these are all from that same 1960s generation (Lenny having maybe a decade on the others).
 
From today - ish - Thom Yorke's lyrics are generally good - cryptic, allusive.  

By rights, the best lyrics of today - especially if it's social conscience you want - ought to be coming from the rappers (seeing as they don't have to care about melody, and it's all about words and rhythm) - but I see little evidence of that.  (Some, but less than there ought to be - and usually preaching to the converted anyway.)

What's harder to find today - because of how modern media work - is a single voice speaking for a generation or for a broad mass of people.  I see no inspiring heroes of that kind anywhere.  Everything seems to be about mannered self-expression, inward-looking but over-obsessed with style.  Of course, that was always the way in popular music, techniques are just a lot more refined now.  There are full-time college courses in popular music performance, an idea that would have seemed ridiculous a couple of decades ago.  Occasionally they nurture talent (Adele, Amy Winehouse), but more often they turn out clones of whatever last year's fashion was.  Slick, well-trained, but pointless.

Still, I'm no old curmudgeon! (I hope...).  Naturally as a 68-year-old, I'm out of touch by definition - but I often hear great new music.  There's a hell of a lot more music of all kinds around now, all of it way more easily available than before.  I don't think the S/N ratio is any different from what it's always been.  
There's vastly more stuff to wade through, of course, and you need more than a few lifetimes to check it all out, so it can seem like the proportion of good stuff is lower.  
It's easy, in the face of the overwhelming choice out there, to say the hell with it, I'm sticking with what I know!

"They don't write songs like they used to."  Nope, but they never did, and that's a good thing.
Last edited by jonriley64 at Sep 29, 2017,
#25
When modern music is good, it's very good. However, the fact that tasteless idiots like One Direction, who might as well just copy+paste from a book of all the trendy chord progressions and song themes, get more attention, causes the illusion of "music these days is so cheap". 
#26
Quote by Evilnine

Nostalgia is a powerful thing!

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be.

#27
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Just because someone was a famous musician/celebrity doesn't mean they have something smart to say about music.

FTFY

Or politics LOL!
"A well-wound coil is a well-wound coil regardless if it's wound with professional equipment, or if somebody's great-grandmother winds it to an old French recipe with Napoleon's modified coffee grinder and chops off the wire after a mile with an antique guillotine!"
- Bill Lawrence

Come and be with me
Live my twisted dream
Pro devoted pledge
Time for primal concrete sledge

#28
On the mainstream side, yes it had, and it has for a reason. The Music industry - as in the big fat cats in their high rise office buildings - are not in this for the art, or the craft, or to put something original out there and see if it sticks. We are in a world now where business is about anything BUT taking a risk because the cons outweigh the pros. And if the industry is failing, they can't take as many risks. So much easier to hire a pair of hit writers (2 in particular), and bring in an impressionable teenager for a singer and build an image around them all. Heck, they even use the same chord proigressions over and over - and that last part is how it's always been. I used to work with an old guy who went to college songwriting courses and he stuck to those standard pop chord progressions for his "radio friendly" rock music. The trick is to be repetitive and do it in a way people won't notice, but today, the composers are so bad I easily notice.

Part of what brought the mojo in the old days was a cult-of-personality around the artist(s) in question. Sure we have some Dave Grohls around who are well behaved AND make good music, but that's a rare combo and Foo Fighters came to light because when they came about rock was still being accepted. What I'm getting at is the unstable guys, all those drugged up guys whose music came from a place within of much torment with many demos that caused them to possibly be really detrimental to the business side - Kurt Cobain comes to mind as just one example, Morrison another example, those guys had demons, they were tortured, and that was the catalyst for some of their greatest work - oh, and Joe Walsh has seen/been through some shit too - thing is who is a record company going to financially back? A impressionable teenager who can be easily cajoled into singing what they don't want but will make the most profit, a literal "yes (wo)man" who won't fight back because they will be rich beyond their wildest dreams? Or some moody, ratty guitar player who will probably die when they turn 27 and then the record company will have to do a bunch of legal wrangling over their estate in the aftermath to put out yet another Greatest Hits package?

But.....and this is a BIIIIG but.....

THERE IS MOJO, it's just the music with the mojo is not as well received or as backed by major labels, and even some of them are. I think what people need to do is look away from the radio and the TV and look to other outlets for new bands. I get almost every new band I like through YouTube or some other odd corner of the internet, not from the radio, not from MTV (most certainly), not from anything mainstream, The reason a lot of the old guard does not see that is they come from a time when achievement was hypocricially by being an anti-establishment "company man". Today it's about holding more responsibility. The holy grail of music today, is to be a smart, talented new band with a new sound who brings something new to the table while drawing the old-timers in, and you become your own company around your own band's music, that's an idea I've had.
My Current Mains
- 1996 Fender Jag-Stang with EMG Pickups
- 1998 Fender Jaguar with Cool Rails
- 1982 Hondo Paul Dean II (DiMarzio Super II X2)
- 2010 "Fender" Jazzmaster (Home built)
- 2013 Squier VM Bass VI (stock)
#29
Quote by theogonia777
The Eagles: terrible band, terrible football team.
No, the Eagles are the greatest Jackson Browne cover band ever. The Eagles football team,, is another thing entirely...
#30
People who think popular music peaked decades ago should be reminded that the Billboard #1 song the week before the Beatles debuted was by - no joke - a nun singing with an acoustic guitar.

The filter of time is very thorough. It's easy to point to a lot of bad music now because we're exposed to it all as it hits the radio. What was #1 between the now-classic hits? What was #2? #3-40? A lot of unmemorable garbage that nonetheless was still very popular.

Think How many songs have survived even 10 years of regular radio play. It's not too many. Apply that selectiveness to 30, 40, 50 years and we today get a ridiculously narrow picture of what music was like back then.

Frankly I think those who judge music by its cultural signifiers have the narrowest minds as listeners.
Last edited by cdgraves at Sep 29, 2017,
#31
Is it a fact that it has no mojo?

No, that's an opinion, usually shared by people who hit their prime decades ago and now sit around discussing all the things wrong with the current generation they themselves raised or close-minded music snobs who think pop punk is a pile of shit compared to older punk bands because they play in drop d and sing about their hardships in life instead of playing in standard and singing about the politics that they themselves have never actively been a part of... other than the few that went on to become politicians, of course
Well, I think I'll go turn myself off an' go on down
All the way down...
Really ain't no use in me hanging around
You know what I'm trying to say
Music, sweet music
I wish I could caress, and-a kiss
Manic Depression is a fustrating mess
#32
Quote by Mad-Mike_J83


THERE IS MOJO, it's just the music with the mojo is not as well received or as backed by major labels, and even some of them are.  I think what people need to do is look away from the radio and the TV and look to other outlets for new bands.  I get almost every new band I like through YouTube or some other odd corner of the internet, not from the radio, not from MTV (most certainly), not from anything mainstream,  The reason a lot of the old guard does not see that is they come from a time when achievement was hypocricially by being an anti-establishment "company man".  Today it's about holding more responsibility.  The holy grail of music today, is to be a smart, talented new band with a new sound who brings something new to the table while drawing the old-timers in, and you become your own company around your own band's music, that's an idea I've had.

Things are different but not necessarily in a bad way, just different. 40-50 years ago bands (artists) made records in hopes of having radio hits to get more exposure so they could tour more, play live and make money from their shows. Many artists didn't expect to make a killing on record royalties (and many didn't). It was all about having a hit or two so you could increase your performance fee, headline shows and keep the ball rolling. It changed years ago and since the advent of the internet, mp3's and pretty much free downloads there isn't much money in sales so it's back to looking for exposure and getting out and touring. The record companies aren't making the huge profits they use to so they expect you to arrive with your  album already done, mixed, mastered and ready and they might distribute it. Most record companies have long ago closed their in house studios and don't have staff producers, engineers etc. that were once staples of the industry. There isn't much competition in the record business because long ago Sony Music bought almost every major label (Columbia, RCA, Epic, Arista and others) and iHeart/Clear Channel owns almost all the radio stations in every major city and tightly controls the playlists (as of today they own 855 radio stations and lease two channels on Sirius Radio). 

So things are different and still the really good music finds it way through this jungle. I think the market is back to playing live shows using your recording output as way of attracting a paying audience.   
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Sep 29, 2017,
#33
Quote by Rickholly74
So things are different and still the really good music finds it way through this jungle. I think the market is back to playing live shows using your recording output as way of attracting a paying audience.   

This is pretty accurate, nowadays the market is in performing and having a quality merch tent. The digital era hasn't completely killed the recording aspect, but unless you manage to get enough hits on Youtube/Spotify etc you're not going to profit much on that end, and a lot of the artists you see that do have often been active for a decade or two before you even hear about them because they have to build up reputation by pulling crowds before major labels even consider backing them. It's a pretty cutthroat business, many of the more talented artists are often completely overlooked in it. If you truly want to find the mojo in modern music, you pretty much have to get involved with underground music scenes or follow blogs that are. The main thing to keep in mind is that even though it revolves around music, its still a business designed to sell you a product and products that achieve commercial success aren't always very high quality (Windows 10, anyone? I personally love having to reinstall drivers after every update!)

tl;dr: the lack of anything worth listening to on a radio station =/= lack of anything worth listening to being released, a lot of people are just very against approaching their music from a business perspective and have very small fanbases as a result
Well, I think I'll go turn myself off an' go on down
All the way down...
Really ain't no use in me hanging around
You know what I'm trying to say
Music, sweet music
I wish I could caress, and-a kiss
Manic Depression is a fustrating mess
#34
28,024 songs.

That is how many tracks I have bought that I have on my HDD. The actual number of songs I have bought is higher, because I left about 125 CDs in the UK that I hadn’t ripped before I emigrated. They will come back with me when I visit the UK at Christmas.

Over half of those songs were released in the past decade. If modern music has ‘lost it’s mojo,’ then I highly doubt I will have paid so much cold, hard cash on modern music. Finding new music has never been easier (I use a software called Roon as my music player which is fantastic for showing the links between the music I have, and beyond). Getting into creating music has never been easier, and distributing music has never been easier. And of course, taste is subjective. As we all know, just because you don’t like thing, doesn’t make it bad. If you can’t find something you like now, then you aren’t looking at the right channels, just like in the past if you couldn’t find something you like, you were listening to the wrong radio stations or reading the wrong magazines. The concept is the same, it’s just the medium that’s different.

Whilst the industry being resistant to change has been an issue, there is something else that is the fault of the consumer, even with these people that say they love music.

People don’t listen to music, they hear it.

Music has become a commodity of convenience. Back when I was younger, Kazaa and Limewire were king, but memory was expensive so we wanted to fit as much music onto these MP3 players as we could. As memory got cheaper, we continued with quantity over quality, in quality of sound, of reproduction and quality of our own personal choices. We wanted music playing wherever we were, but it became relegated to background noise. When you actually start listening to music, you will begin to appreciate it in a complete other level, and find intricacies and layers in almost every song that may take you from hating it to tolerating it, or tolerating it to loving it. The idea I’m getting at here is that you are no longer hearing a recording, but listening to a performance.

How many of you guys actually sit down and listen to music? And I mean having nothing else going on. Not watching a computer screen, not doing some homework... just you and the music, like you would sit down and watch a television show. Listen, don’t hear.
#35


The speech here is relevant. For those who can't see it (and about 1:49 for those who can):

Ok, um, I wanna say that we live in a world of disposable music, fast food music without any content and I think that [winning the Eurovision Song Contest 2017 with his song "Amar pelos dois"] could be a victory for music, with people that make music that actually means something... uh... Music is not fireworks, music is feeling, so let's try to change this and bring music back, which is really what matters.

I didn't really start listening to mainstream music until my single-digit years were over, and while some of the stuff is interesting, a lot of it is formulaic, often more obviously than before. However, even within the formulas, people manage to write interesting stuff.

What does "modern" mean, though? Music in the past 100 years has been quite diverse and interesting. Folk musics are still being uncovered and combined with known idioms to create interesting combinations (this is limited to my experiences rn):







I mean, modes of communication vary from era to era, and some people respond more readily to a certain paradigm present in a certain era/vibe of music, but making blanket statements about anything is an unwise idea.
#36
nuh huh im a 28 year old, only got into old school music recently, specifically blues/rock
#37
theogonia777 lol i am 28 and two years in to my musical discovery of the blues. I don't know why but nothing gets me going like some real old school melodic blues like roy buchanan. rory gallagher, and on the rock front gary moore. I dont know why modern music jus dont seem to get me, and i it. used to and still do like a few bits, but foo fighters nah, new queens of the stone age nah, even new kings of leon nah, modern music is just too clinical for me, I am after wholesome earthy tones and melody. I will post two of my fav songs and u try to find me something comparable.


#38
Quote by jerrykramskoy
www.dcj20 I guess there's millions and millions of folk in there teens, twenties, ... that would disagree with that view.

I am often delighted by the imagination of folk putting stuff together with "cut-and-paste" in a home studio to create some great grooves.  I wonder what would happen if they had some more understanding in how music works?

cdgraves I agree with your take.


lol I am 28, got intot he blues like 2 1/2 years ago and never looked back, after eharing the above tune once, never have i so instantly bonded with a music. I know what it is that i think is lacking in modern music. Its the vocal element, those two songs above, could be voices some strange guitar god that possesses the players fingers and flows through him/her. I don't hear that vocal guitar god anymore.
#39
jerrykramskoy do u think we have hit a crossroads on the musical front, like old school lots of it based around country/blues kinda beats and feel even the chord progressions right ? all of that is earthy and wholesome and I don't see it anymore really, a few bands jump out to mind like two gallants and a few others but mainstream nah ?
#40
Personal tastes change... unless your taste buds are dead

The aesthetic doesn't do anything for me tbh.
Page 1 of 3