Why I Hate Modern Music

[FORTUNATA]

"The good thing about them is that you can look at them with the sound turned down. You know what irritates me about modern music, it's all based on ego.

- the more you jump around, the bigger your hat is, the more people listen to your music.

The only important thing is to sell and make money. It's nothing to do with talent. Today there are groups who sell lots of records and then disappear. Will we remember U2 in 30 years? Or the Spice Girls? I doubt it."
George Harrison

[Athy]

. As to bass, they say McCartney was in his own class as a bass player.

 

 

"They" can't have heard Aston Barrett, Duck Dunn or Carol Kaye then.

Apart from that, much of what you say is valid.

. Will we remember U2 in 30 years? Or the Spice Girls?

 

I don't remember U2 now.

I do admit to owning the first Spice Girls LP - well, I was still doing a lot of mobile disco work at that time so I needed a copy.

[pquinn]

I'm all for technology in audio but there is an equilibrium involved. Are the modern X Factor bands for real or is it commercial? Did the dishy looking singer write or even sing the song people will say is so terrific? I think Elton John recently had a lot to say about that. Old Elton hates auto-tune and lip synching. Even more to the point. Maybe in 100 years from now people will hear about The Stones, The Beatles, Hendrix, Elvis, Michael Jackson even. Will they remember today's mainstream bands, though? I doubt it. That isn't just me saying it either as I think George Harrison made exactly the same point.

So, technology is great is it's not used as an easy ride. Personally, I recommend learning to play actual piano before delving into synth (which is easy to do as my synth has several electric piano settings, from Honky Tonk to Grand). Likewise for guitar - styles like picking and traditional lead. As to bass, they say McCartney was in his own class as a bass player.

Yes, of course, there is plenty of talent about today. What is easy to forget though is for great bands to succeed, there has to connection with the audience. And that's the kicker. I think what Bill Wyman was saying about The Stones not being able to make it today if they were starting out is correct. Hendrix today would probably be an obscure Indie artist with a daytime job in a warehouse. The Beatles might have been buzzed off X Factor with the Stones following.

 

Do not confuse entertainment with musical talent.Any body that knows anything about music is not going to confuse The Beatles with one direction even though they were both heavily marketed poster boys.There is also a difference between a group and a band.I am not defending any of this rubbish but there is a market for it and lots of people choose it as their personal form of entertainment.You cant really compare the reasons for why Hendrix was signed to a label in the 60's to the reasons he might not get signed today.

Fortunata,when you make a sweeping and broad statement like why i hate modern music and then focus on thud thud thud stuff and x factor compared to music of the sixties it makes you sound like a grumpy old man whose only knowledge of the diversity of what is modern music comes from passing cars and karaoke programs on television.You need to broaden your listening scope. Paul

[Athy]

There is also a difference between a group and a band.

Would you care to elaborate? Certainly "band" in the old sense would be a larger unit with a brass and reed section, or a jazz ensemble such as Ken Colyer's Jazz band. But nowadays guitars/drums outfits, always called groups in the '60s, would be referred to as bands.

[pquinn]

I probably did not use the right words and wont get bogged down in pedantry but what i was trying to say was, blur are a band as they play instruments and sing but i would call boyzone a group even a vocal group if you will, because as far as i know they didn't play any instruments. blur could be called a musical group but i would not regard boyzone as a band. Either way it matters not and i am prepared to admit i am wrong in advance. paul

[Kwacker]

"They" can't have heard Aston Barrett, Duck Dunn or Carol Kaye then.

Apart from that, much of what you say is valid.

I don't remember U2 now.

I do admit to owning the first Spice Girls LP - well, I was still doing a lot of mobile disco work at that time so I needed a copy.

I just had to laugh, because my music techie son, who has truly eclectic music tastes was complaining that Apple, as part of the iWatch launch had just given him U2s latest album for free and he doesn't want it.

If you want a bass tutorial try

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp5NCYmmZaQ

[Felshampo]

The idea that the beatles or the stones would not make it today is proposterous. Not to mention the fact that if they had not been around in the sixties the music of today would be so different. I am sure they would find an audience. Many bands now release music on blogs and so unless you are into them you will miss out. Royal Blood are an example of that but there are many more.

Often the bands that influence are not always that well known Joy Division in the late 70's were quite obscure but are often sighted as an influence by bands in the 90's.

I also disagree with the ascertion that young people like music that their parents don't. A couple of years ago I went to a Pendulum gig in Cambridge and the age audience varied from teens through to people older than me in their sixties, with lots of middle aged. A great contrast tto the bands I saw in the sixties and seventies in Brum town hall who seemed to be 90% teenage boys ( from memory)

I have a theory that for most people music is important for only a short time, maybe ten years from 15 to 25 and then other things take over so that you can get stuck with a limited selection of musical taste which you may always refer to as if that was the golden age. Not true for everyone but just a theory. I often put on an old album I thought was great at the time and it now sounds, well crap. Eg a band called Esperanto, occasionally the album still sounds good eg A band called Quiet Sun.

Please keep the suggestions for good music coming....

[The Toad in the Hole]

Go to gigs. Go to festivals. Use social media (!) get to see new bands you haven't come across before. Go to smaller independent festivals. You might not find anything at V, but you might at something like Beautiful Days. Subscribe to music feeds from people you respect with interesting musical tastes. There's lots of excellent new musicians out there doing really exciting things, but you will have to seek it out. There is life in abundance beyond x-factor, but a lot of it doesn't make playlists on national radio (and I have to include 6music there, although there is some exciting music that pops up there from time to time) Internet radio stations are good, but it depends on if you want to step beyond single genres,as they can be over-specialised.

 

But above all go to gigs. See people play.

[YamYam]

The idea that the beatles or the stones would not make it today is proposterous. Not to mention the fact that if they had not been around in the sixties the music of today would be so different. I am sure they would find an audience. Many bands nowinto the venuerelease music on blogs and so unless you are into them you will miss out. Royal Blood are an example of that but there are many more.

Often the bands that influence are not always that well known Joy Division in the late 70's were quite obscure but are often sighted as an influence by bands in the 90's.

I also disagree with the ascertion that young people like music that their parents don't. A couple of years ago I went to a Pendulum gig in Cambridge and the age audience varied from teens through to people older than me in their sixties, with lots of middle aged. A great contrast tto the bands I saw in the sixties and seventies in Brum town hall who seemed to be 90% teenage boys ( from memory)

I have a theory that for most people music is important for only a short time, maybe ten years from 15 to 25 and then other things take over so that you can get stuck with a limited selection of musical taste which you may always refer to as if that was the golden age. Not true for everyone but just a theory. I often put on an old album I thought was great at the time and it now sounds, well crap. Eg a band called Esperanto, occasionally the album still sounds good eg A band called Quiet Sun.

Please keep the suggestions for good music coming....

 

 

Brings back many happy memories hearing the words Birmingham Town Hall. One of my favourite all time venues. So I must have been one of the teenagers. Groundhogs, Taste, Winter, Zappa, Beefheart, Ten Years After, Pink Floyd to name a very few. Great days, esp as there were two ways of getting Into the venue for free as well (wasn't earning alot in those days). However all good things come to an end, and thanks to the IRA blowing up the Tavern in the Town and Mulberry Bush pubs you couldn't get in anywhere after that without being searched several times

[PaulG]

Go to gigs. Go to festivals. Use social media (!) get to see new bands you haven't come across before. Go to smaller independent festivals. You might not find anything at V, but you might at something like Beautiful Days. Subscribe to music feeds from people you respect with interesting musical tastes. There's lots of excellent new musicians out there doing really exciting things, but you will have to seek it out. There is life in abundance beyond x-factor, but a lot of it doesn't make playlists on national radio (and I have to include 6music there, although there is some exciting music that pops up there from time to time) Internet radio stations are good, but it depends on if you want to step beyond single genres,as they can be over-specialised.

 

But above all go to gigs. See people play.

Spot on.

If the Internet has achieved anything, it's getting musicians off their lazy arses and back on stage doing live gigs.

 

Just a few years ago it seemed that all musicians needed to do was to make a couple of reasonably successful CDs, and then move to LA or Monte Carlo (basically anywhere where you don't pay UK tax).

They'd do an occasional "charity" concert to raise their profile when CD sales began to flag, but otherwise they'd hide behind their security fences and count their money. Meanwhile, they were lecturing the rest of us about having a "sustainable" lifestyle while they drove around in their chauffeur-driven limos, and flew around the world in their private jets.

 

IMHO music is about live performance. Recorded stuff is fine to listen to, but nothing matches the excitement and ambiance of a live gig.

[FORTUNATA]

Go to gigs. Go to festivals. Use social media (!) get to see new bands you haven't come across before. Go to smaller independent festivals. You might not find anything at V, but you might at something like Beautiful Days. Subscribe to music feeds from people you respect with interesting musical tastes. There's lots of excellent new musicians out there doing really exciting things, but you will have to seek it out. There is life in abundance beyond x-factor, but a lot of it doesn't make playlists on national radio (and I have to include 6music there, although there is some exciting music that pops up there from time to time) Internet radio stations are good, but it depends on if you want to step beyond single genres,as they can be over-specialised.

 

But above all go to gigs. See people play.

I think the point I've somehow not been able to get across is I never stated there is no talent or good music today. What I did say is not a lot of it is mainstream. For example, ages ago I was recommended some modern psychedelic bands and I checked them out to see if they really did sound like Jefferson Airplane. Well, some of these bands were cool and, sure enough, they would have been liked by sixties fans. Even so the big point is here you're talking about experimental bands who are doing progressive music but they are not mainstream. Neither are they famous and I doubt making much money because the record labels want safe, X Factor groups to pull a mass audience.

Also, the guy who posted to say he thinks the Beatles would make it today, I still disagree. I was at work one afternoon where I was subjected to hours of awful, tinsel music that all sounded the same and was maddeningly boring. Late in the afternoon, some risky radio DJ put on A Day In The Life. About half way into the song, some worker went up to the radio and turned it off. Yes, I was stunned.

My rant isn't finished yet either - there is more:

If you listen to The Beach Boys, you know it's the Beach Boys. Nobody else sounds quite like that. Same goes for The Stones, The Who, Hendrix lead guitar, The Byrds, Early Santana and many of the old Woodstock bands. Also, you notice the material is diverse - compare Blackbird with Helter Skelter, Mothers Little Helper with Paint It Black.

Also, music was at one time hugely powerful. It was more than just a synthetic song but had cultural movements behind it. Even Bob Dylan had followers who were tuned into his message and style.

Sorry folks but today's music bored the pants off me. Yes, I take the point there is still talent to be found but the real talented bands would get buzzed off XFactor in no time.

 

[FORTUNATA]

"They" can't have heard Aston Barrett, Duck Dunn or Carol Kaye then.

Apart from that, much of what you say is valid.

I don't remember U2 now.

I do admit to owning the first Spice Girls LP - well, I was still doing a lot of mobile disco work at that time so I needed a copy.

McCartney is classed as a great bass player due to his style and feel. He doesn't normally do fast runs as such, Actually I feel I learned a bit from Maccas bass and I slowed down my bass and worked on timing as simple is sometimes better..

Years ago I was into Stanley Clark who I think joined Macca on the Tug Of War album. I quite liked Schooldays which maybe came out in the eighties and was geared around bass.

[pquinn]

I think the point I've somehow not been able to get across is I never stated there is no talent or good music today. What I did say is not a lot of it is mainstream. For example, ages ago I was recommended some modern psychedelic bands and I checked them out to see if they really did sound like Jefferson Airplane. Well, some of these bands were cool and, sure enough, they would have been liked by sixties fans. Even so the big point is here you're talking about experimental bands who are doing progressive music but they are not mainstream. Neither are they famous and I doubt making much money because the record labels want safe, X Factor groups to pull a mass audience.

Also, the guy who posted to say he thinks the Beatles would make it today, I still disagree. I was at work one afternoon where I was subjected to hours of awful, tinsel music that all sounded the same and was maddeningly boring. Late in the afternoon, some risky radio DJ put on A Day In The Life. About half way into the song, some worker went up to the radio and turned it off. Yes, I was stunned.

My rant isn't finished yet either - there is more:

If you listen to The Beach Boys, you know it's the Beach Boys. Nobody else sounds quite like that. Same goes for The Stones, The Who, Hendrix lead guitar, The Byrds, Early Santana and many of the old Woodstock bands. Also, you notice the material is diverse - compare Blackbird with Helter Skelter, Mothers Little Helper with Paint It Black.

Also, music was at one time hugely powerful. It was more than just a synthetic song but had cultural movements behind it. Even Bob Dylan had followers who were tuned into his message and style.

Sorry folks but today's music bored the pants off me. Yes, I take the point there is still talent to be found but the real talented bands would get buzzed off XFactor in no time.

 

You are still missing the point.LOOK, if the Beatles came on the scene to day and were as fresh,talented,

good looking,funny,energetic,witty,positive,confident,melodic,powerful,capable,cool,fashionable as they were perceived to be in the early sixties then they probably would be huge but if they turned up looking like they did in 62 and playing ''love me do'' they would not get noticed for reasons that you cant seem to grasp.CONTEXT.

[pquinn]

''real talented bands would get buzzed off XFactor in no time.''

 

X factor is a programme that is designed to attract a demographic,It is like a soap opera.It is light entertainment.It has nothing to do with finding the next Beatles or Stones but by god if they come along somebody is gonna notice.What you are saying is like the producers of Coronation street would not have a clue if the next Laurence Olivier walked in.Even if they did not have a place in that particular show that was suited to him,somebody worth their salt would see some potential.

You have a naive view of the entertainment industry.

Edited September 10, 2014 by pquinn

[Kwacker]

Spot on.

If the Internet has achieved anything, it's getting musicians off their lazy arses and back on stage doing live gigs.

 

Just a few years ago it seemed that all musicians needed to do was to make a couple of reasonably successful CDs, and then move to LA or Monte Carlo (basically anywhere where you don't pay UK tax).

They'd do an occasional "charity" concert to raise their profile when CD sales began to flag, but otherwise they'd hide behind their security fences and count their money. Meanwhile, they were lecturing the rest of us about having a "sustainable" lifestyle while they drove around in their chauffeur-driven limos, and flew around the world in their private jets.

 

IMHO music is about live performance. Recorded stuff is fine to listen to, but nothing matches the excitement and ambiance of a live gig.

Spot on Sir!

[Felshampo]

I think the point I've somehow not been able to get across is I never stated there is no talent or good music today. What I did say is not a lot of it is mainstream. For example, ages ago I was recommended some modern psychedelic bands and I checked them out to see if they really did sound like Jefferson Airplane. Well, some of these bands were cool and, sure enough, they would have been liked by sixties fans. Even so the big point is here you're talking about experimental bands who are doing progressive music but they are not mainstream. Neither are they famous and I doubt making much money because the record labels want safe, X Factor groups to pull a mass audience.

Also, the guy who posted to say he thinks the Beatles would make it today, I still disagree. I was at work one afternoon where I was subjected to hours of awful, tinsel music that all sounded the same and was maddeningly boring. Late in the afternoon, some risky radio DJ put on A Day In The Life. About half way into the song, some worker went up to the radio and turned it off. Yes, I was stunned.

My rant isn't finished yet either - there is more:

If you listen to The Beach Boys, you know it's the Beach Boys. Nobody else sounds quite like that. Same goes for The Stones, The Who, Hendrix lead guitar, The Byrds, Early Santana and many of the old Woodstock bands. Also, you notice the material is diverse - compare Blackbird with Helter Skelter, Mothers Little Helper with Paint It Black.

Also, music was at one time hugely powerful. It was more than just a synthetic song but had cultural movements behind it. Even Bob Dylan had followers who were tuned into his message and style.

Sorry folks but today's music bored the pants off me. Yes, I take the point there is still talent to be found but the real talented bands would get buzzed off XFactor in no time.

 

....and if you try telling that to the young people of today........(alltogether now)...........they don't believe you!

[John V]

There is good music in every genre but 90% of everything is crap (Sturgeons law)

 

My pet hate? seeing a sign saying live music and you walk in and its a vocalist and a computer......

 

My wife says that it's marginally better, than turning up to do a cabaret spot and finding your so called "backing band" can't read and can't busk.

[Zig Zag]

Have a listen to 'Royal Blood', album just released.

 

A young 2 piece that create a genius sound for those that like a slightly heavier guitar sound than the normal indie stuff. Amazing!

 

There is tonnes of brilliant new music. Search it out online............. However, avoid most daytime radio & stick to more specialist shows in the evening or the internet radio stations.

 

I still prefer the sound of vinyl ran through a decent set up with topnotch full scope speakers. I used to own 10,00 vinyl Albums & 12'' singles but sold most. I still have 1000+ CD's but have not got a single MP3 / wav file.

 

 

To nearly spoil my post I used to be a DJ in the summer of love 88 & 89. Got arrested having carried to full record boxes across a field........ Amazing times though.......... I remember playing Carly Simon's 'Why' (93 BPM) infront of 8,000 people in the 'Balearic' part of my set, followed by Soul II Soul's 'Keep on Movin (95bpm). I also went to Caister & prestatyn Soul Weekenders but as a balance mosh pitted to Nine inch Nails...............

 

Music is the Answer in my eyes.........

Good man!

 

Just...... God man cracking post.

[Boat&Bikes]

Have seen many bands live but nothing as good as Springsteen with his band. The best live band by a mile.

 

Ian.

[Felshampo]

Have seen many bands live but nothing as good as Springsteen with his band. The best live band by a mile.

Ian.

The future of rock and roll ....not Sorry but country rock is sooo boring.....thankfully Punk rock came along and the rest is history.

[pquinn]

Have seen many bands live but nothing as good as Springsteen with his band. The best live band by a mile.

 

Ian.

Yeah,Brilliant. Dont much like his voice but Jack White is amazing live also.Major improvisation.

[Felshampo]

Have seen many bands live but nothing as good as Springsteen with his band. The best live band by a mile.

Ian.

The future of rock and roll ....not Sorry but country rock is sooo boring.....thankfully Punk rock came along and the rest is history.

Better live bands.....Clash by a mile. Toots, Man, Stones, Pendulum to name a few Edited September 12, 2014 by Felshampo

[pquinn]

The future of rock and roll ....not Sorry but country rock is sooo boring.....thankfully Punk rock came along and the rest is history.

Punk was history before it even came along.

[Ronniesonic]

Have seen many bands live but nothing as good as Springsteen with his band. The best live band by a mile.

 

Ian.

 

I saw Bruce & the E street boys at Roundhay Park in Leeds summer of 85. Nearly a 3 hour gig............ Thing is, he can still do it today.

RIP Clarence Clemons. Legend!

 

I have still have all their stuff on vinyl.

 

Again, as a contrast, I have all of Luther Vandross' albums on vinyl too. 'The night I fell in love' makes my knees buckle.

 

The point is we all have tastes. I do not like marmite but love doughnuts LOL.

 

 

 

My last input, I promise......... My favourite remixes (stay with me on this) of all time are IMO;

1. Michael Jackson- Rock with you - 'Frankie Knuckles remix' 9mins. Long keyboard led intro & it's so understated it's brilliant- WOW.

2. ZZ Top- Legs- 'Metal Mix' 7mins. Played that at a rave too back in the distant past. Gotta love ZeeZee.

 

Both on Youtube

 

The Sonic

[FORTUNATA]

 

I saw Bruce & the E street boys at Roundhay Park in Leeds summer of 85. Nearly a 3 hour gig............ Thing is, he can still do it today.

RIP Clarence Clemons. Legend!

 

I have still have all their stuff on vinyl.

 

Again, as a contrast, I have all of Luther Vandross' albums on vinyl too. 'The night I fell in love' makes my knees buckle.

 

The point is we all have tastes. I do not like marmite but love doughnuts LOL.

 

 

 

My last input, I promise......... My favourite remixes (stay with me on this) of all time are IMO;

1. Michael Jackson- Rock with you - 'Frankie Knuckles remix' 9mins. Long keyboard led intro & it's so understated it's brilliant- WOW.

2. ZZ Top- Legs- 'Metal Mix' 7mins. Played that at a rave too back in the distant past. Gotta love ZeeZee.

 

Both on Youtube

 

The Sonic

In my opinion (and it's just personal opinion) the best music genre ever was psychedelic. Psychedelic music was explored by all the huge bands such as The Beatles, The Stones, The Beach Boys, Jimmy Hendrix and the pure bands such as Flower Pot Men and (my own favourite The Californians from Birmingham.

 

I do psychedelic music too. There are general practices for this genre such as Indian instruments, whistles, fairground organ, echoes, clavioline and a certain neo heavy lead guitar .Also Hammond Rock Organ. Visual is bright colours like kaleidoscope.

 

I checked out modern psychedelic groups ages ago and some are really good but, as I said before, not rated by mainstream.

There is soft psychedelic so you can make a really nice song without going bananas with the core sound. An example, would be some of the tracks on Pet Sounds such as Good Vibrations or God Only Knows.

What's special about psychedelic is it's deeper than music. It involved some T.M. and also aspects of peace and harmony with the environment. Also the tune in, turn on, drop out culture. By comparison, music today is conformist and just follows safe and tested lines in order not to rock the conservative boat. Someone mentioned Punk and I thought Punk was O.K. but Punk was mainly just raw anti establishment, anarchist sound without the deeper message and counter culture of psychedelic.

I include a segment here where bored office clerk Norman Wisdom is taken to a psych "bash" by hippy female new girlfriend.

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEG-chKawYw

 

 

Edited September 12, 2014 by FORTUNATA