Is Old Music Killing New Music?

Remove this Banner Ad

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
12,516
17,836
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
Found an awesome article by Ted Gioia from the Atlantic about how old music is currently killing new music in all aspects sales, streaming, popularity.. But its more than just that, the direction the music industry is or has moved in is making it virtually impossible for new music to make any traction. I found it very interesting. Instead of just brushing it off by making the claim that new music just plan sucks (which imo mainstream music does) Ted dismisses that and makes some astonishing and good points, that the industry doesn't create or look for new musical artists anymore but rather be more interested in buying old artists catalogues. Also raises the question how did the industry get here? and how does the music industry get out of it's current trajectory? Anyway I thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss, would love to know what you guys think, can the music industry be revived to what it once was.. creative, innovative and trend leaders? Or will it continue to head in its current path of soulless greedy corporate money making ventures.

Is Old Music Killing New Music?​

Old songs now represent 70 percent of the U.S. music market. Even worse: The new-music market is actually shrinking.
By Ted Gioia

January 23, 2022
Share
About the author: Ted Gioia writes the music and popular-culture newsletter The Honest Broker on Substack. He is also the author of 11 books, including, most recently, Music: A Subversive History.

Old songs now represent 70 percent of the U.S. music market, according to the latest numbers from MRC Data, a music-analytics firm. Those who make a living from new music—especially that endangered species known as the working musician—should look at these figures with fear and trembling. But the news gets worse: The new-music market is actually shrinking. All the growth in the market is coming from old songs.

U.S Catalog vs. Current Consumption
Source: MRC Data
The 200 most popular new tracks now regularly account for less than 5 percent of total streams. That rate was twice as high just three years ago. The mix of songs actually purchased by consumers is even more tilted toward older music. The current list of most-downloaded tracks on iTunes is filled with the names of bands from the previous century, such as Creedence Clearwater Revival and The Police.

I encountered this phenomenon myself recently at a retail store, where the youngster at the cash register was singing along with Sting on “Message in a Bottle” (a hit from 1979) as it blasted on the radio. A few days earlier, I had a similar experience at a local diner, where the entire staff was under 30 but every song was more than 40 years old. I asked my server: “Why are you playing this old music?” She looked at me in surprise before answering: “Oh, I like these songs.”

Never before in history have new tracks attained hit status while generating so little cultural impact. In fact, the audience seems to be embracing the hits of decades past instead. Success was always short-lived in the music business, but now even new songs that become bona fide hits can pass unnoticed by much of the population.

Only songs released in the past 18 months get classified as “new” in the MRC database, so people could conceivably be listening to a lot of two-year-old songs, rather than 60-year-old ones. But I doubt these old playlists consist of songs from the year before last. Even if they did, that fact would still represent a repudiation of the pop-culture industry, which is almost entirely focused on what’s happening right now.

Every week I hear from hundreds of publicists, record labels, band managers, and other professionals who want to hype the newest new thing. Their livelihoods depend on it. The entire business model of the music industry is built on promoting new songs. As a music writer, I’m expected to do the same, as are radio stations, retailers, DJs, nightclub owners, editors, playlist curators, and everyone else with skin in the game. Yet all the evidence indicates that few listeners are paying attention.

Consider the recent reaction when the Grammy Awards were postponed. Perhaps I should say the lack of reaction, because the cultural response was little more than a yawn. I follow thousands of music professionals on social media, and I didn’t encounter a single expression of annoyance or regret that the biggest annual event in new music had been put on hold. That’s ominous.

Can you imagine how angry fans would be if the Super Bowl or NBA Finals were delayed? People would riot in the streets. But the Grammy Awards go missing in action, and hardly anyone notices.

The declining TV audience for the Grammy show underscores this shift. In 2021, viewership for the ceremony collapsed 53 percent from the previous year—from 18.7 million to 8.8 million. It was the least-watched Grammy broadcast of all time. Even the core audience for new music couldn’t be bothered—about 98 percent of people ages 18 to 49 had something better to do than watch the biggest music celebration of the year.

A decade ago, 40 million people watched the Grammy Awards. That’s a meaningful audience, but now the devoted fans of this event are starting to resemble a tiny subculture. More people pay attention to streams of video games on Twitch (which now gets 30 million daily visitors) or the latest reality-TV show. In fact, musicians would probably do better getting placement in Fortnite than signing a record deal in 2022. At least they would have access to a growing demographic.

More people watch the Great British Bake Off than the Grammy Awards
Source: Nielsen/Media Reports
Some would like to believe that this trend is just a short-term blip, perhaps caused by the pandemic. When clubs open up again, and DJs start spinning new records at parties, the world will return to normal, or so we’re told. The hottest songs will again be the newest songs. I’m not so optimistic.

A series of unfortunate events are conspiring to marginalize new music. The pandemic is one of these ugly facts, but hardly the only contributor to the growing crisis.

Consider these other trends:

  • The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
  • The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
  • Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
  • The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
  • In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
  • Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
  • Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
  • When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
  • Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace.
As record labels lose interest in new music, emerging performers desperately search for other ways to get exposure. They hope to place their self-produced tracks on a curated streaming playlist, or license their songs for use in advertising or the closing credits of a TV show. Those options might generate some royalty income, but they do little to build name recognition. You might hear a cool song on a TV commercial, but do you even know the name of the artist? You love your workout playlist at the health club, but how many song titles and band names do you remember? You stream a Spotify new-music playlist in the background while you work, but did you bother to learn who’s singing the songs?

Decades ago, the composer Erik Satie warned of the arrival of “furniture music,” a kind of song that would blend seamlessly into the background of our lives. His vision seems closer to reality than ever.

Some people—especially Baby Boomers—tell me that this decline in the popularity of new music is simply the result of lousy new songs. Music used to be better, or so they say. The old songs had better melodies, more interesting harmonies, and demonstrated genuine musicianship, not just software loops, Auto-Tuned vocals, and regurgitated samples.

There will never be another Sondheim, they tell me. Or Joni Mitchell. Or Bob Dylan. Or Cole Porter. Or Brian Wilson. I almost expect these doomsayers to break out in a stirring rendition of “Old Time Rock and Roll,” much like Tom Cruise in his underpants.

Just take those old records off the shelf

I’ll sit and listen to ’em by myself …


I can understand the frustrations of music lovers who get no satisfaction from current mainstream songs, though they try and they try. I also lament the lack of imagination on many modern hits. But I disagree with my Boomer friends’ larger verdict. I listen to two to three hours of new music every day, and I know that plenty of exceptional young musicians are out there trying to make it. They exist. But the music industry has lost its ability to discover and nurture their talents.

List of Song or Recording Rights Sold Since 2019

Music-industry bigwigs have plenty of excuses for their inability to discover and adequately promote great new artists. The fear of copyright lawsuits has made many in the industry deathly afraid of listening to unsolicited demo recordings. If you hear a demo today, you might get sued for stealing its melody—or maybe just its rhythmic groove—five years from now. Try mailing a demo to a label or producer, and watch it return unopened.

The people whose livelihood depends on discovering new musical talent face legal risks if they take their job seriously. That’s only one of the deleterious results of the music industry’s overreliance on lawyers and litigation, a hard-ass approach they once hoped would cure all their problems, but now does more harm than good. Everybody suffers in this litigious environment except for the partners at the entertainment-law firms, who enjoy the abundant fruits of all these lawsuits and legal threats.

The problem goes deeper than just copyright concerns. The people running the music industry have lost confidence in new music. They won’t admit it publicly—that would be like the priests of Jupiter and Apollo in ancient Rome admitting that their gods are dead. Even if they know it’s true, their job titles won’t allow such a humble and abject confession. Yet that is exactly what’s happening. The moguls have lost their faith in the redemptive and life-changing power of new music. How sad is that? Of course, the decision makers need to pretend that they still believe in the future of their business, and want to discover the next revolutionary talent. But that’s not what they really think. Their actions speak much louder than their empty words.

In fact, nothing is less interesting to music executives than a completely radical new kind of music. Who can blame them for feeling this way? The radio stations will play only songs that fit the dominant formulas, which haven’t changed much in decades. The algorithms curating so much of our new music are even worse. Music algorithms are designed to be feedback loops, ensuring that the promoted new songs are virtually identical to your favorite old songs. Anything that genuinely breaks the mold is excluded from consideration almost as a rule. That’s actually how the current system has been designed to work.

Even the music genres famous for shaking up the world—rock or jazz or hip-hop—face this same deadening industry mindset. I love jazz, but many of the radio stations focused on that genre play songs that sound almost the same as what they featured 10 or 20 years ago. In many instances, they actually are the same songs.

This state of affairs is not inevitable. A lot of musicians around the world—especially in Los Angeles and London—are conducting a bold dialogue between jazz and other contemporary styles. They are even bringing jazz back as dance music. But the songs they release sound dangerously different from older jazz, and are thus excluded from many radio stations for that same reason. The very boldness with which they embrace the future becomes the reason they get rejected by the gatekeepers.

A country record needs to sound a certain way to get played on most country radio stations or playlists, and the sound those DJs and algorithms are looking for dates back to the prior century. And don’t even get me started on the classical-music industry, which works hard to avoid showcasing the creativity of the current generation. We are living in an amazing era of classical composition, with one tiny problem: The institutions controlling the genre don’t want you to hear it.

The problem isn’t a lack of good new music. It’s an institutional failure to discover and nurture it.

I learned the danger of excessive caution long ago, when I consulted for huge Fortune 500 companies. The single biggest problem I encountered—shared by virtually every large company I analyzed—was investing too much of their time and money into defending old ways of doing business, rather than building new ones. We even had a proprietary tool for quantifying this misallocation of resources that spelled out the mistakes in precise dollars and cents.

Senior management hated hearing this, and always insisted that defending the old business units was their safest bet. After I encountered this embedded mindset again and again and saw its consequences, I reached the painful conclusion that the safest path is usually the most dangerous. If you pursue a strategy—whether in business or your personal life—that avoids all risk, you might flourish in the short run, but you flounder over the long term. That’s what is now happening in the music business.

Even so, I refuse to accept that we are in some grim endgame, witnessing the death throes of new music. And I say that because I know how much people crave something that sounds fresh and exciting and different. If they don’t find it from a major record label or algorithm-driven playlist, they will find it somewhere else. Songs can go viral nowadays without the entertainment industry even noticing until it has already happened. That will be how this story ends: not with the marginalization of new music, but with something radical emerging from an unexpected place.

The apparent dead ends of the past were circumvented the same way. Music-company execs in 1955 had no idea that rock and roll would soon sweep away everything in its path. When Elvis took over the culture—coming from the poorest state in America, lowly Mississippi—they were more shocked than anybody. It happened again the following decade, with the arrival of the British Invasion from lowly Liverpool (again, a working-class place, unnoticed by the entertainment industry). And it happened again when hip-hop, a true grassroots movement that didn’t give a damn how the close-minded CEOs of Sony or Universal viewed the marketplace, emerged from the Bronx and South Central and other impoverished neighborhoods.

If we had the time, I would tell you more about how the same thing has always happened. The troubadours of the 11th century, Sappho, the lyric singers of ancient Greece, and the artisan performers of the Middle Kingdom in ancient Egypt transformed their own cultures in a similar way. Musical revolutions come from the bottom up, not the top down. The CEOs are the last to know. That’s what gives me solace. New music always arises in the least expected place, and when the power brokers aren’t even paying attention. It will happen again. It certainly needs to. The decision makers controlling our music institutions have lost the thread. We’re lucky that the music is too powerful for them to kill.

 
Last edited:

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
12,516
17,836
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2
Couple of videos that breaks down Teds articles by Rick Beato and Rhett Shull




 

JackFlash

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 28, 2012
9,439
8,227
Docklands
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
QPR, Buffalo Bills, McLaren F1
New music is shit and the kids don’t want it. There will be no huge music collections in the future for older kids to listen to - it’s all been erased or on Spotify if you can be bothered. Music is dead it’s only the glorious past that lives. Records today are wildly overproduced and sound like music in a bowl of porridge.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

WireHawk

Team Captain
Aug 16, 2009
440
1,349
Glenferrie Oval
AFL Club
Hawthorn
It's hard nowadays to find a genre that hasn't already been explored. A heavily truncated timeline goes superficially like this. The 50's created
rock n'roll(Bill Haley/Buddy Holly/Little Richard/Jerry Lee Lewis) which lead to the 60's and The Beatles/Rolling Stones/The Who and the rest of
the British invasion. Then psychedelic drugs pushed bands like that from 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' to 'Strawberry Fields' and 'Eight Miles High".
Jimi Hendrix and Cream blew the world's collective minds ,then the long haired metal of Black Sabbath et al fired up a generation of headbangers.
Frank Zappa & The Mothers Of Invention were way ahead of their time and were producing trenchant original music from the mid sixties

The Velvet Underground introduced sado-masochism and heroin chic and inspired a slew of art school non-musicians: Brian Eno numbered chiefly
amongst them. David Bowie was a talisman for a new breed of rock fan with his androgynous theatrics, which brought Roxy Music, the Eno version, and
The New York Dolls into the fray. Of course along the way the influence of Mississippi Delta blues and the experimental work of Karl Heinz Stockhausen
and LaMonte Young influenced many, notably John Cale who is a towering figure in the history of modern music. The German electronic world produced great bands like Kraftwerk, Tangerine Dream and Neu who were very influential on Afrika Bambatta and the nascent hip hop scene. Public Enemy and Eric B &
Rakim explored new realms within the genre producing ground breaking work in the late 80's and early 90's.

Jazz fusion with Miles Davis, Weather Report and Mahavishnu Orchestra came up with some brilliant jazz rock hybrid music in the 70's. Phenomenal stuff!
Punk blew the cobwebs out of the prog scene, and post punk: Wire/The Fall/ PIL/Magazine were inspirational to a new generation. Grunge ruled the world for a period in the late 80's into the 90's with Nirvana and ,arguably,Mudhoney the best of the crop. Metal, Nu Metal, Death Metal and the like proliferated and still have a huge following. Hybrid punk/metal bands like Metallica, Ministry & Jane's Addiction ruled the rock world for a time. This is just of the top of my head with no referencing anything so forgive me for any glaring omissions.

Now it seems to me that it has all been discovered. Variations on a theme seems to be the only way to produce something interesting. A somewhat banal
analogy would be hair styles. First it was short back and sides. Then longish hair and sideburns. The hair got longer and longer. Punk exploded and hair was cut into all manner of strange configuration. Then very short hair. Then very long hair(grunge) & subsequently shaved heads. Now anything goes. There is nowhere else to go with hair styles. There really is nowhere new to go with music.

I listen mostly to Wire(1977-1996), Brian Eno(1973-present), Kraftwerk(1974-1982) and a mixture of music from the past from Jimi Hendrix to Ministry.
There really is nothing from the last decade or so that interests me. I read Mojo & Uncut every month but it's the re-release section that I look forward to
more than the new releases. I was lucky to grow up at roughly the same time that music evolved through the 60's and 70's. An accident of birth.
 
Last edited:

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,880
3,601
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
U.S Catalog vs. Current Consumption
Source: MRC Data
can't draw a meaningful trend from a two year sample size in the middle of a pandemic.
The 200 most popular new tracks now regularly account for less than 5 percent of total streams. That rate was twice as high just three years ago.
the link explains why (it's to do with older demographics increasingly adopting streaming - not because "old music is killing new music"):

Krien points to a few potential causes for the underlying trend. For starters, the demographics of streaming music consumption are broadening. When streaming took off in the early 2010s, younger generations were the first adopters of on-demand platforms. More than a decade later in the U.S., Gen Xers and Baby Boomers have begun to catch up. In 2021, 96% of Gen X and 89% of Boomer music listeners reported currently using a streaming service to listen to music. “With these new listeners comes an influx of brand new musical tastes, preferences, and behaviors,” Krien writes. “This has a huge impact on general consumption trends from both a genre perspective and a release age perspective, effectively diluting the impact of each year’s biggest hits.”

The trend will likely only grow as these two generations transition from free streamers to paid streamers as younger listeners have.


The mix of songs actually purchased by consumers is even more tilted toward older music. The current list of most-downloaded tracks on iTunes is filled with the names of bands from the previous century, such as Creedence Clearwater Revival and The Police.
only boomers buy mp3s.
Consider the recent reaction when the Grammy Awards were postponed. Perhaps I should say the lack of reaction, because the cultural response was little more than a yawn. I follow thousands of music professionals on social media, and I didn’t encounter a single expression of annoyance or regret that the biggest annual event in new music had been put on hold. That’s ominous.

Can you imagine how angry fans would be if the Super Bowl or NBA Finals were delayed? People would riot in the streets. But the Grammy Awards go missing in action, and hardly anyone notices.

The declining TV audience for the Grammy show underscores this shift. In 2021, viewership for the ceremony collapsed 53 percent from the previous year—from 18.7 million to 8.8 million. It was the least-watched Grammy broadcast of all time. Even the core audience for new music couldn’t be bothered—about 98 percent of people ages 18 to 49 had something better to do than watch the biggest music celebration of the year.

A decade ago, 40 million people watched the Grammy Awards. That’s a meaningful audience, but now the devoted fans of this event are starting to resemble a tiny subculture. More people pay attention to streams of video games on Twitch (which now gets 30 million daily visitors) or the latest reality-TV show. In fact, musicians would probably do better getting placement in Fortnite than signing a record deal in 2022. At least they would have access to a growing demographic.

More people watch the Great British Bake Off than the Grammy Awards
Source: Nielsen/Media Reports
the popularity of the grammys has no connection to the popularity of new music. if zoomers have shunned the grammys, that is a sign of good taste.
  • The leading area of investment in the music business is old songs. Investment firms are getting into bidding wars to buy publishing catalogs from aging rock and pop stars.
  • The song catalogs in most demand are by musicians who are in their 70s or 80s (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen) or already dead (David Bowie, James Brown).
  • Even major record labels are participating in the rush to old music: Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, and others are buying up publishing catalogs and investing huge sums in old tunes. In a previous time, that money would have been used to launch new artists.
this is basic economics. dylan, springsteen - these are known quantities with proven musical, longstanding musical relevance from a pre-internet era. as
these are much better investments than buying the catalog of an lesser known modern artist in a post-internet era. i don't think it relates to age - rather long-term relevance. surely Frank Ocean's catalog would be worth more than Mick Softley's catalog?

as music has become easier to access in the streaming era, the relative-value of these older artists has increased as younger people are more likely to stream them (as opposed to buy CDs/boxsets - in the pre streaming era).
  • The best-selling physical format in music is the vinyl LP, which is more than 70 years old. I’ve seen no signs that the record labels are investing in a newer, better alternative—because, here too, old is viewed as superior to new.
because CD sales have fallen off a cliff - so all that remains are vinyl music fans (of which new records are also released on vinyl). "best selling physical format" means nothing when physical is effectively dead.
  • In fact, record labels—once a source of innovation in consumer products—don’t spend any money on research and development to revitalize their business, although every other industry looks to innovation for growth and consumer excitement.
  • Record stores are caught up in the same time warp. In an earlier era, they aggressively marketed new music, but now they make more money from vinyl reissues and used LPs.
of course - boomers buying physical.
  • Radio stations are contributing to the stagnation, putting fewer new songs into their rotation, or—judging by the offerings on my satellite-radio lineup—completely ignoring new music in favor of old hits.
much of radio is geared towards older generations - many of whom have already decided that there has been no good music since whitlam's dismissal. of those that cater to younger generations, music curation is driven by internet trends and popularity. not to say that studios don't have any sway, but nowhere near the amount that they used to have.
  • When a new song overcomes these obstacles and actually becomes a hit, the risk of copyright lawsuits is greater than ever before. The risks have increased enormously since the “Blurred Lines” jury decision of 2015, and the result is that additional cash gets transferred from today’s musicians to old (or deceased) artists.
  • Adding to the nightmare, dead musicians are now coming back to life in virtual form—via holograms and “deepfake” music—making it all the harder for young, living artists to compete in the marketplace.
yes - no one will listen new music when you can listen a holographic Lonnie Donegan deepfake. :think:
As record labels lose interest in new music, emerging performers desperately search for other ways to get exposure. They hope to place their self-produced tracks on a curated streaming playlist, or license their songs for use in advertising or the closing credits of a TV show. Those options might generate some royalty income, but they do little to build name recognition. You might hear a cool song on a TV commercial, but do you even know the name of the artist? You love your workout playlist at the health club, but how many song titles and band names do you remember? You stream a Spotify new-music playlist in the background while you work, but did you bother to learn who’s singing the songs?
if i hear something I like, yes.
Even so, I refuse to accept that we are in some grim endgame, witnessing the death throes of new music. And I say that because I know how much people crave something that sounds fresh and exciting and different. If they don’t find it from a major record label or algorithm-driven playlist, they will find it somewhere else. Songs can go viral nowadays without the entertainment industry even noticing until it has already happened. That will be how this story ends: not with the marginalization of new music, but with something radical emerging from an unexpected place.
yes - its not the endgame for "new music" - its the disintegration of the old system of music curation. there's no putting the genie back in the bottle, so there's really little value in mourning its loss.


the rest of the article is pretty valid. the biggest issues with new music relate to funding/remuneration (particularly in the midst of a pandemic when artists are not able to tour/sell as much merch) and curation in the streaming era.
 
Last edited:

mr bagcroft

Norm Smith Medallist
May 19, 2017
6,426
7,345
AFL Club
St Kilda
Knowledge need to make music today of the pop kind...
Exactly ZERO.
Thats your answer there.
Unless your involved in music production, you really are under estimating the effect of technology enabling people to make "music" that would have never gotten off the ground years ago.
 

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
12,516
17,836
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #7
oh... I didn't realise when I started the thread there was already another thread discussing this topic..(I should have looked first) board mods Strapping Young Lad can merge this thread with the other one if you like.
 

stax on the mull

Premiership Player
Dec 26, 2010
4,238
5,579
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Matildas
There's always going to be an interest in the past because listeners want to put what they've heard for the first time into some kind of context in formulating their own history of music whether they listen to a wide range of genres or just one genre.

The volume of old music that's available keeps increasing...i.e. there's 42 more years of old music to access in 2022 for a music fan starting out now than there was for me when I started buying cassettes and vinyl in 1980 - and the different information sources now mean the contexts with which fans access the past can be very unusual. One listener investigating the bands of the 1980's might come to the conclusion that the best groups were The Minutemen and Raincoats just as easily as another might conclude that the best groups were The Police and Dire Straits. In the 80's you had to rely on what you heard on radio/tv, what you read in 'zines and what your local records store could stock.

One thing that's hurting new bands now that want to put their music out on vinyl is that record companies have realised that they can market vinyl to younger generations that want to have something tangible to collect. Pressing plants now are clogged up with a backlog of unnecessary box set reissues, and coloured vinyl record store day reissues of previous popular artists that can still be found in second hand stores for a few bucks while it can take a smaller record label 18months to get a "new" release out.
 

Mootsy

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2015
7,160
6,292
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
I think it's as simple as, older music was memorable, timeless and had a magical quality and new music sort of has to rise to that standard to be competitive.

This will show my naivety and cluelessness, but here it goes..

I don't even know how to put it into words, but the way i see it at the moment is..
Older music seems to have a timeless quality, often magical quality about it, and that's not to say that new music doesn't either, sometimes. Same can be said for some older movies as well. Back when Hollywood had new, original ideas and weren't trying to reboot everything. Back when films were more organic before CGI took over everything and films lost their heart and soul, their magic to cringy over the top, sterile, storyboarding etc.

Regards new music?? There is great music out there of course.
The new album by Beach House is a gem and there is great guitar music out there still. Electronic, Hip-Hop, Pop, Indie, Dubstep and on it goes.

I think it's as simple as older music felt a bit more organic, relatable and exciting and was promoted more by big record labels. It wasn't necessarily hiding behind layers of image first, over the top fashion or crossovers of genres per se. Some faucets of newer music just try too hard to look cool without a great song or depth behind the facade of the presentation of said music. Older music was a cool down to earth band that just showed up with their bass, guitars, drums, keys, mic's and gave you good songs, straight up.

I can use the argument, what about King Gizzard?? Kanye?? etc..

To be honest I wish King Gizzard would just focus on making one classic, timeless album rather than just releasing project after project in such fast turnarounds, anyway that's another topic i guess.

I don't think it's an age thing either. Music definitely doesn't have the same exciting aura and atmosphere it had in past decades. But i think another problem is that so much music has been made since the 20th century that it has sort of maxed out to a degree..

Maybe gaming is the new music??

I wonder how many artists have truly explored guitar, synth effects. It's interesting how there are literally infinite phaser effects and synth effects that sound cool, and yet so many artists just choose such straight forward instrumentals for their studio mixes and masters. Even big bands, big pop acts, they have all that money and equipment and their final mixes are so runoff the mill sounding. Even the last albums by bands like Radiohead and Tool and a host of other groups, they are ok records, but some of their choices for mixes and instrumentation are so, just, dull considering what options for sound and effects exist in 2022.

Like, rather than a standard piano or keys, Dust off an old Moog or a Yamaha CS-70M and go wild! We want to hear the songs be as cool as possible. Layers of sound and effects. Also, I've seen these bands pedal set-ups, they are incredible, why hide them away for the studio mixes?? WHAT ARE YOU THINKING, LOL!! Unless the mixes just plain suck, and unless i'm missing something here.

I'd love to see music evolve with bands using more and more awesome distortion, phaser, pedals, synth effects. Imagine if your favourite band actually did that, it'd be so cool. Bands don't do this anywhere near enough.

Where is that super-futuristic, aesthetically-cool, modern day Dinosaur Jr-esque band that crams each song with amazing phaser effects that i imagined would have existed by now, lol...Lightning bolt guitar sounds etc...

Anyway...Rant over.
 
Last edited:

ibd77

Premiership Player
Apr 2, 2014
3,490
5,194
Adelaide, South Australia
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Not going to go into to too much detail but a lot of the old songs are being remixed reproduced to modern standards which is giving the music a fresh sound. Notice how great older music sounds in modern movie and TV productions. Currently watching Yellowjackets and music reproduction is awesome.
 

Osho

By God and the mauser.
Jul 9, 2021
1,572
1,396
AFL Club
GWS
there has been no good music since whitlam's dismissal
I really appreciated the fact at the time that both Led Zep and Black Sabbath, in protest at the dismissal and to generate rage, stopped making masterpieces and started making rubbish.

It's Time!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Osho

By God and the mauser.
Jul 9, 2021
1,572
1,396
AFL Club
GWS
I think it's as simple as, older music was memorable, timeless and had a magical quality and new music sort of has to rise to that standard to be competitive.

This will show my naivety and cluelessness, but here it goes..

I don't even know how to put it into words, but the way i see it at the moment is..
Older music seems to have a timeless quality, often magical quality about it, and that's not to say that new music doesn't either, sometimes. Same can be said for some older movies as well. Back when Hollywood had new, original ideas and weren't trying to reboot everything. Back when films were more organic before CGI took over everything and films lost their heart and soul, their magic to cringy over the top, sterile, storyboarding etc.

Regards new music?? There is great music out there of course.
The new album by Beach House is a gem and there is great guitar music out there still. Electronic, Hip-Hop, Pop, Indie, Dubstep and on it goes.

I think it's as simple as older music felt a bit more organic, relatable and exciting and was promoted more by big record labels. It wasn't necessarily hiding behind layers of image first, over the top fashion or crossovers of genres per se. Some faucets of newer music just try too hard to look cool without a great song or depth behind the facade of the presentation of said music. Older music was a cool down to earth band that just showed up with their bass, guitars, drums, keys, mic's and gave you good songs, straight up.

I can use the argument, what about King Gizzard?? Kanye?? etc..

To be honest I wish King Gizzard would just focus on making one classic, timeless album rather than just releasing project after project in such fast turnarounds, anyway that's another topic i guess.

I don't think it's an age thing either. Music definitely doesn't have the same exciting aura and atmosphere it had in past decades. But i think another problem is that so much music has been made since the 20th century that it has sort of maxed out to a degree..

Maybe gaming is the new music??

I wonder how many artists have truly explored guitar, synth effects. It's interesting how there are literally infinite phaser effects and synth effects that sound cool, and yet so many artists just choose such straight forward instrumentals for their studio mixes and masters. Even big bands, big pop acts, they have all that money and equipment and their final mixes are so runoff the mill sounding. Even the last albums by bands like Radiohead and Tool and a host of other groups, they are ok records, but some of their choices for mixes and instrumentation are so, just, dull considering what options for sound and effects exist in 2022.

Like, rather than a standard piano or keys, Dust off an old Moog or a Yamaha CS-70M and go wild! We want to hear the songs be as cool as possible. Layers of sound and effects. Also, I've seen these bands pedal set-ups, they are incredible, why hide them away for the studio mixes?? WHAT ARE YOU THINKING, LOL!! Unless the mixes just plain suck, and unless i'm missing something here.

I'd love to see music evolve with bands using more and more awesome distortion, phaser, pedals, synth effects. Imagine if your favourite band actually did that, it'd be so cool. Bands don't do this anywhere near enough.

Where is that super-futuristic, aesthetically-cool, modern day Dinosaur Jr-esque band that crams each song with amazing phaser effects that i imagined would have existed by now, lol...Lightning bolt guitar sounds etc...

Anyway...Rant over.
I fully agree wrt your comments on gizzard wizard, and the mighty Dino Jr.
 

Bostonian

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 9, 2015
18,214
18,366
AFL Club
Carlton
Well Boomers and Gen X would have been exposed to and grew up listening to a lot of rock.

A genre that has died off a lot.

Naturally they will buy less of today's music because RnB used to be The Yardbirds now it's something completely different and castrated.

Added Gen X love their pop culture and are quite sentimental about it so more likely to go with I like the old stuff better than the new stuff.
 

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
12,516
17,836
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #16
Well Boomers and Gen X would have been exposed to and grew up listening to a lot of rock.

A genre that has died off a lot.

Naturally they will buy less of today's music because RnB used to be The Yardbirds now it's something completely different and castrated.

Added Gen X love their pop culture and are quite sentimental about it so more likely to go with I like the old stuff better than the new stuff.

I wouldn't say Rock has died off if you want to find some good Rock music its out there you will find it! That goes with old school rap RNB too.
Don't let anyone tell you that todays RNB is classical RNB because its not its all just 'house' junk!
If your looking for these gene's in the mainstream or on commercial radio though (other than some Alternative stuff) than yeah its pretty much non existent.

There are plenty of Rock websites that are up to date with todays Rock/metal music across the world here is one I regularly visit there are plenty more.

 
Last edited:

Bostonian

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 9, 2015
18,214
18,366
AFL Club
Carlton
I wouldn't say Rock has died off if you want to find some good Rock music its out there you will find it! That goes with old school rap RNB too.
Don't let anyone tell you that todays RNB is classical RNB because its not its all just 'house' junk!
If your looking for these gene's in the mainstream or on commercial radio though (other than some Alternative stuff) than yeah its pretty much non existent.

There are plenty of Rock websites that are up to date with todays Rock/metal music across the world here is one I regularly visit there are plenty more.


You identified the problem.

Most of those generations won't go deep diving for it.

They want it easily accessible and being conditioned to their exposer to songs through mostly radio and shows like count down, smash hits or the original MTV they won't spend a lot of time looking for the new stuff.
 

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
12,516
17,836
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #18
You identified the problem.

Most of those generations won't go deep diving for it.

They want it easily accessible and being conditioned to their exposer to songs through mostly radio and shows like count down, smash hits or the original MTV they won't spend a lot of time looking for the new stuff.

Suppose so.. But who's fault is that? I mean if we want to see good TV shows we don't watch commercial TV anymore we go to Netflix, Stand, Disney plus etc... Why than don't the current gen look for new Rock music instead of wanting to listen to old rock music? plenty of applications to do so with Apple Music, Spotify etc.. even YouTube. Or is it that because the mainstream music is so dull and soulless that 'Gen Z' think that's all it is?

I guess that is what the article is trying to say.. From my understanding that record company's and radio stations don't allow these Rock bands to shine anymore like the old days e.g promotion especially. I mean is their even a show anymore TV or Radio where bands can even play and show there music off? To the record company It's just not profitable to do so these days. To the radio and TV stations it's just not worth the time and effort! that's whats missing and unfortunately its all deliberate because kids these days have an attention span of probably less than a minute before they turn off or go do something else.
 

No eye deer

Club Legend
Feb 11, 2012
2,229
5,336
The Top End
AFL Club
Fremantle
Well Boomers and Gen X would have been exposed to and grew up listening to a lot of rock.

A genre that has died off a lot.

Naturally they will buy less of today's music because RnB used to be The Yardbirds now it's something completely different and castrated.

Added Gen X love their pop culture and are quite sentimental about it so more likely to go with I like the old stuff better than the new stuff.

Somebody enlighten me, why is todays so called R&B (my most hated genre) labeled as so?
To me R&B is Rhythm and Blues, not that soft electronic crap with the obligatory rap refrain that hurts my ears so much!
 

Ocha905

Club Legend
Mar 19, 2014
1,384
2,043
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Dallas teams, Liverpool
For an opinion outside the downer echo chamber- I listened to every 7+ rated album by Pitchfork last year and it was my favourite year of music.

There's plenty of awesome new music but it's drowned out by oversupply and easy consumption.

In terms of oversupply more music was released this year than others and it's only going to increase in the future. Now everyone can create and produce (I've done 4 crappy songs myself) which, although better than the infamous record company exploitation method of yesteryear, dilutes the overall quality of music. To overcome this I use the aforementioned review site as well as recommendations from friends.

Like with films, books, tv shows etc. It's never been easier to listen to music. Most songs you'd ever want to hear are available to you at all times on streaming apps. And I think people are now choosing to listen to playlists and music they've already heard before hurting new music. Also people listen to radio much less (and radio also plays much less new music) lessening exposure to new music. Whilst streaming apps are great in general, it detracts from the experience.

Older people I know speak of the glory days of looking for records, listening parties when something came out, playing the same stuff over and over again due to it being relatively more expensive to obtain more music as well as less options available. There was a shared experience that largely doesn't exist now. Tastes are more varied now and there are too many genres to have the same mass interest like previous generations had for the Beatles, Michael Jackson, Madonna etc.

I'd always choose the modern day to listen to music as I get the biggest selection possible (well until tomorrow).

For those particularly uninspired below are some of my favourite albums released last year-

Floating Points/Pharoah Sanders/The London Symphony Orchestra: Promises
Low: HEY WHAT
Turnstile: Glow On
The Weather Station: Ignorance
Mdou Moctar: Afrique Victime
Playboi Carti: Whole Lotta Red
Nala Sinephro: Space 1.8
The War on Drugs: I Don’t Live Here Anymore
Magdalena Bay: Mercurial World
Yasmin Williams: Urban Driftwood
Mega Bog: Life, and Another
Helado Negro: Far In
Erika de Casier:
Sensational
Black Midi: Cavalcade
Lana Del Rey: Blue Banisters
 

mr bagcroft

Norm Smith Medallist
May 19, 2017
6,426
7,345
AFL Club
St Kilda
Well Boomers and Gen X would have been exposed to and grew up listening to a lot of rock.

A genre that has died off a lot.

Naturally they will buy less of today's music because RnB used to be The Yardbirds now it's something completely different and castrated.

Added Gen X love their pop culture and are quite sentimental about it so more likely to go with I like the old stuff better than the new stuff.
Except, it was actually better in the 70's 80's and 90's! :) And its not even close.
Gen X'er here, guilty as charged.
 

GhostofJimJess

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 14, 2002
10,566
8,807
...
AFL Club
Richmond
Well Boomers and Gen X would have been exposed to and grew up listening to a lot of rock.

A genre that has died off a lot.

Naturally they will buy less of today's music because RnB used to be The Yardbirds now it's something completely different and castrated.

Added Gen X love their pop culture and are quite sentimental about it so more likely to go with I like the old stuff better than the new stuff.
You're right to a certain extent - I treasure the music that shaped my teens in the 80's and my twenty-somethings in the 90's - aren't we all at our most impressionable during these critical decades?

But even though I'm prototype Gen X, I find there's so much great rock coming out nowadays that I simply can't keep up with it. I actually think I need two of me - one to listen to all the new stuff through for the first time, and a second me to repeat-listen and properly absorb all of the new stuff that still gets my spine tingling.

And probably even throw in a third retro me just to bathe sentimentally in the Husker Du, Died Pretty, Soundgarden, Porcupine Tree etc that shaped my younger years.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad