I don't think so but you never know. I think the closest comparisons we have to the artists you mentioned, are Alicia Keys, Van Hunt and some might say Kanye West, which is joke in my opinion.

I love Alicia keys and Van Hunt! I think they are really talented artists but even they are throw backs to the 70's. I don't know if someone will come out with something completely original. In a way I think everything has pretty much already been done.

Music is a reflection of life, and life right now is FUCKED UP more than ever!

But I hope to see the day when they're greater than ever.

There are artist out there with the talent (like Lewis Taylor and Frank McComb, for example), but you're not gonna hear most of 'em in today's Music Biz...

I think Prince was lucky, in that he came along at the last possible time that you could have that kind of freedom, and still get support and promotion from a Major Label, and Warner Brothers of the Late 70's early 80's was probably the last place that that kind of thing could have happened...

a jazz artist recently remarked that, actually, there's more great music being played today than ever before ...But You're NOT going to hear it on the radio , or on major labels, and certainly not on MTV or BET....You have to actively search for it...you actually have to chase it down, nowadays...and most people don't want to be bothered with that...


...
[Edited 3/23/05 12:42pm]

How to restore talent to music:

1. Put an end to modern gangsta rap.

2. Blow up ClearChannel transmitters.

3. Shut down MTV.

4. Prohibit "it" girls from making records until at least 5 years after they break out.

5. Educate people about the history of music (course would be called, "Everything You Like Is A Sample 101")
[Edited 3/23/05 12:08pm]

There is all kinds of amazing music and artists out there. You just gotta search high and low. But when you find em, it's worth it. The 60s and 70s were a unique time in music. A period where so much creativity happened and where so many things were being done for the first time. Lots of groundbreaking going on. I still have hope for the future of music and it won't come from the mainstream. Little by little the music industry is changing and I believe we will one day get back to the point where it's about talent and not about making $$$.

VoicesCarry said:

Excellent ideas. I agree with you whole-heartedly.

paligap said:

I nominate this for the post of the day.

And here are a few albums made over the last few years alone that bolster the point:

VoicesCarry said:

I was thinking similar thoughts just the other day - where are all the heirs to Bowie, Prince, James Brown, Miles Davis, Frank Zappa and so on? Is it really only the 'music industry' getting ever more cowardly and money-centred and not chancing on artists who could be great but don't fit this year's manufactured fashion? Or is it true that 'real music', for want of a better term, is dying, at least in the popular mind?

I love a lot of the music of the '60s and '70s, but I don't think that it's good or healthy overall, for music now and in future to sound overly similar to stuff from that period. For a start, that's already been done.

In some ways, I think that 'rock' (by which I mean mostly electric guitar-led music) basically had its time from the mid-'60s to the early '80s and died naturally around 1990-ish. Virtually everything I've heard since sounds like warmed over versions of Pink Floyd, the Who, Led Zeppelin, the Beatles, etc, and I include the likes of Nirvana and Radiohead in there too, who IMO brought nothing new to the table, other than yet more depressing lyrics and sounds.

The same goes for Jazz, which sort of died by the late '60s (certainly 'tradional acoustic jazz', anyway). Miles Davis' 'Bitches Brew' era music seemed to lead nowhere other than a load of imitators, and watered down jazz rock/ progressive rock bands. Other than Miles, virtually nobody seemed to get where Jimi Hendrix was coming from. Calling him the 'greatest rock guitarist ever' (which is true IMO), and yet denying him the true understanding and dignity a true sonic visionary like him truly deserved. Almost no-one could see the true possibilities.

'Soul' similarly gave way to that terrible so-called 'R n'B in the late '80s (IMO bland soul pop, too many poor Marvin Gaye impersonators), and don't get me started on Hip-hop, which to me is electro-funk with fast rhythmic talking over it - 'talkin' loud and sayin' nothin',as James Brown would say. JB's influence may actually be part of the problem. Much as I love JB's music, the funk that he and his great bands created led to the 'mechanised pop-funk' of disco, which in turn led to an over-reliance on the 4/4 rhythm and the accent on 'the one' beat, and the tyranny of unoriginal use of drum machines, and so on. A major downside to JB's legacy. If you look at pop in teh '60s, a lot of the tunes were in 3/4 waltz time (like somne records by the Beach Boys and Beatles, and not to mention John Lennon's wayward sense of time on some of his great Beatle tracks), which would sound quaint now, but these different forms of music time gave more variety to things.

There no longer seems to be room for any unique, individual artists in the popular scene. Kids seem more interested in the videos to the songs than the quality of the song itself. I guess all the new Princes, Bowies, Zappa, etc (or even something completely new) are out there, but either performing to near empty houses and/ or recording on small independent labels. The music industry has taken the guitar out of the hands of black artists (generally the most innovative users of the instrument), they've taken any last vestiges of the jazz spirit out, and they've certainly taken the soul out of pop/ rock, in all meanings of the word. And the worst thing is, hardly anybody seems to know the difference, let alone cares.

There's still Prince and Bowie when on good form, and IMO the glorious return of Brian Wilson, and there's Bjork and the odd other one, but not much doing in the mainstream.

Sorry if this sounds depressing. Good music is still happening, just don't look at the pop singles and albums charts. That's almost the last place I'd look.

namepeace said:

Music education is important. Sometimes it takes a class like that to spark an interest. Leaving it for people to learn on their own isn't gonna help. Most kids wouldn't know where to start.

Exactly. Nothing is going to change as long as they completely control what is being played, which is stripped down "cheap" music. Even if there is good music out there, it will never make a change if it gets no airplay and people don't know it exists.

VoicesCarry said:

YES!

namepeace said:

I'm sorry, but how does the small minority who turn off the radio and let it accumulate dust ever accomplish anything? It doesn't when the moron majority keeps listening to 50 Cent and Usher.

And kids definitely aren't taking the initiative to learn about music. Many suffer from thesexofit syndrome, which means they have absolutely no idea what came before 1990.

Harlepolis said:

Not sure it's because of the world situation (the 60's were fucked up too), but I think it's more that the media is more controlled by corporations who don't know shit about art, just selling. I think the artists are potentially there, they're just not the ones given the chance. Imagine, Frank Zappa probably couldn't get signed nowadays. I remember Elvis Costello said he started hating his record company because they dropped Johnny Cash.

Well, maybe that qualifies as life being fucked up after all...
[Edited 3/23/05 14:58pm]

Harlepolis said:

I think that would just mean there'd be a lot more depressing music out today.

When it comes to Clear Channel though, what hope is there that they'll ever go anywhere? They're a huge corporate giant.

Popular music might be doomed.

VoicesCarry said:

I share your frustration, but musical taste is a personal thing. I guess my point was as long as you and other like-minded listeners appreciate the good stuff, and SUPPORT so as to keep a market alive for it, what is it to you what the "majority" plays on its CD players, TVs, and radios?

I mean, we could have had this conversation in any decade of the 20th century. Bad music is always made and it always sells. Good music endures.

Actually I feel like music is starting to get better. Especially with the Alternative and Indie bands like Interpol, Franz Ferdinand and Bloc Party.

BUT WE WANT THE FUNK!!!!!

NWF said:

http://www.prince.org/msg/8/138623

[check out other peoples comments from a duplicate thread on this subject- sos]

VoicesCarry said:

Can I press the button?

namepeace said:

Good album, but Blueprint shits all over it, not to mention Reasonable Doubt (is that considered old school now )

The Danger Mouse remix is awesome though.

It matters to me what the majority listens to because that also includes clubs. I can pull out the old records and CDs and throws parties at home but that means never meeting new people except for the ones that came with someone else (which never stopped me from making a move either ).

I used to go to clubs to party and have a good time. If I got lucky, fine and if I didn't get lucky, that was fine too. Nowadays, I only go to clubs to try to get lucky because the music is too horrible to party and have a good time.

Please.. music is as good as its ever been. Your just listening to the wrong things.. or perhaps stuck in the past?


Open your ears.. and eye's,

Nope!

lilgish said:

I love Blueprint, and I disagree. Black is superior. Many Jigga fans would argue for RD.

Have you heard the Purple Album, w/the Prince beats? Thug nasty.

the problem with the majority is, is that they are being fed what record companies and radio stations/mtv present you.

what you dont see.. is that people make great music, and as great as its ever been.. its just between the lines.. and most dont look there.

its such a cliche to say that music was only great during a certian time.. there are so many innovated musicians out there..

"It's just so depressing that the last strands of brilliance left are guys like Prince and Stevie, who are well past their prime as recording artists anyway"

This is what im talking about.. yes, their brilliant, but there are so many that are as brilliant, or perhaps innovating in a new light..


Remember what big bird said.. Different is our friend.

vainandy said:

I understand not being able to vibe fully with the music in the club, but that's ALWAYS been the case. Hell, 15 years ago they were playing BBD and Hammer in some clubs when I wanted to hear some Tribe and Ice Cube and Prince extended mixes. Ya gotta make do sometimes.

But the issue is whether music today is still great. I say some if not much of it is great or will be considered great in time.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s (my old skating rink days), I enjoyed basically everything that was played. In the late 1980s (when I was old enough to get into clubs), those were kinda depressing days because everything was weaker, less funky, and geared towards crossover success. From 1990 until around 1994, things got better. I went to clubs that played strictly house music and enjoyed basically everything. From 1994 until the present, techno has taken over the clubs. A lot of it sounds good but it all sounds alike.



Now that's easy. As far as mainstream goes, it's absolutely horrible. There's been no real change in music since the early 1990s, which has been 15 years. This is the longest stretch of one style of music dominating in my lifetime because, previously, musical styles had always changed within a five year period. People always moved on to something else. Nothing has changed since the early 1990s and I don't see a change coming any time soon because people that were first being born 15 years ago, when this first started, are now listening to music and that's all they know.

you know, i once had a theory that the worse life and politics and general policies are the country and in the world, the better the music would be because most good music comes from pain. i guess i was wrong.