Back in 2009 some guy named Jason Flom (Lava Records) said:

“Where have all the musical geniuses gone? Why has this generation not produced even one musical genius on the level of Dylan or Sly Stone, or John Lennon, or Prince?”

This statement was addressed in Eric Beall's Talkin' Loud and Sayin' N... blog post, but another article was suggesting an alternative take on the issue of a lack of musical geniuses this era.

http://www.musicthinktank.com/blog/where-have-all-the-musical-geniuses-gone.html:

The ‘geniuses’ still exist, but ‘genius’ can no longer be manufactured.

I admit to somewhat agreeing with the bolded quote. Anytime someone is quoted to being some sort of 'musical genius' it's usually someone who was very, very popular in a particular era. Bob Dylan? Stevie Wonder? James Brown? The Beatles? Michael Jackson? (Never really seen any females listed on these things maybe except for Madonna and Aretha...) None of these gentlemen (or select women) were obscure names during their time, at all. They were all very popular musicians who sold very, very well. As someone pointed out, no one called The Beatles or Prince a 'genius' when they first came out. It was a name that was achieved throughout time as their labels took the time to cultivate them and let them grow.

It's been said before that it's really easy to make music now and that the internet makes it even easier to acquire it. We've hit a time when music isn't at the forefront of culture anymore and musical tastes seem to become more and more niche. Also, the music industry has seem to have lost a lot of control in terms of controlling what people want or should listen to. If history has told us how we classify 'musical genius, then that would include such artists as Beyonce, Lady Gaga, Eminem, Britney Spears, & Lil' Wayne, right?

So, in reality, there could be just as many 'musical geniuses' today as they were in the past. But then how can that be, especially when 'musical genius' seems to be determined by popularity and sales? Or is there something more?

I don't recall Kanye being called all these things in the beginning of his career. He just did his thing and then started getting credit, as the music spoke for itself and there was high anticipation for albums after the second one did awesome.

alphastreet said:

I don't recall Kanye being called all these things in the beginning of his career. He just did his thing and then started getting credit, as the music spoke for itself and there was high anticipation for albums after the second one did awesome.

I thought that he was, often, referred to as the 'voice of a generation.'

I don't remember it, maybe I was out of it. Maybe I remember him getting complimented for not doig what other mainstream hip hop artists were doing that time at most.

the short answer is NO of course not, with the current state of the industry and the complaints about quality. if they COULD be manufactured, its WAY past time to flood the market with them.

kanye is quirky, diverse, and pioneering in some ways but NOT a genius.

my loose definition of musical genius is: timeless music, groundbreaking music (this is harder to accomplish now as EVERYONE is always compared to SOMEONE) content wise or sonically, relevant music (speaks to or reflects the time in which its created) a great voice (IF the "genius" actually sings) that is used in different ways, great musician (multi-instrumentalist even), great arrangements and great LIVE performer. person should do at least ONE of these EXCEEDINGLY well. popularity does NOT equate to genius. Ex; Tupac was WAY more popular than say Nas, but I think Nas did more for hip hop as far as raising the bar as a lyrical innovator.

I think the word 'genius' is used way too quickly in popular music.

In the past:

Prince was labeled as the new 'Stevie Wonder' and a musical wonderchild when For You came out. It was impressive to realise a 20 year 'kid' played and produced the album itself, but in terms of compositions and having a dinstinctive style it was a very generic and mediocre album IMO.

In reality he 'deserved' the genious tag throughout his career, and i think you could say it did take him to release Sign of the Times to really justify that label.

In the present:

Lady Gaga is seen by many as some 'genius' allready, but based on what? I guess it's something new (not for me personally, but for others probably) to see a mainstream artist play with image / fashion / clothes. But isn't that what Madonna and Bjork did before also?

Based on her music? the occasional 'underground' dance-beat or quasi-provocative lyric here and there, doesnt hide the fact that her music is really not that different from that of Britney Spears and Katy Perry: hitparade-pop.

I hold my reserves for the next 6 or 7 albums by her (if she reaches that number).

[Edited 10/5/11 9:53am]

[Edited 10/5/11 9:54am]

No.

I understand the part about 'timeless music, but how can you know that a piece music is really timeless until 20+ years have passed?

I think a lot of people have a difficult time distinguishing between an above average talent and a genius.

Dylan, The Beatles, Springsteen, Sly, James Brown, Michael Jackson, Frank Zappa, etc. are all above average talents.

Mozart was a genius. I'd even put Prince himself in the genius category.

guitarslinger44 said:

I think a lot of people have a difficult time distinguishing between an above average talent and a genius.

Dylan, The Beatles, Springsteen, Sly, James Brown, Michael Jackson, Frank Zappa, etc. are all above average talents.

Mozart was a genius. I'd even put Prince himself in the genius category.

He's one of few artists in the industry that can read and write music.

According to Eric Leeds, Prince can neither read nor write music.

angel345 said:

He's one of few artists in the industry that can read and write music.

I'm gonna need your source on that.

[Edited 10/5/11 11:09am]

I think a lot of people have a difficult time distinguishing between an above average talent and a genius.

Dylan, The Beatles, Springsteen, Sly, James Brown, Michael Jackson, Frank Zappa, etc. are all above average talents.

Mozart was a genius. I'd even put Prince himself in the genius category.

What distinguishes an above average talent from a genius in your opinion?

And is it me or are you 'trolling' a bit here?

I would consider Dylan a genius: many people complain about his voice, but it suits his type of music very well (the same goes with Tom Waits for example) and as a songwriter he certainly is a genius. Just check at the site allmusic.com who and many people have covered his songs.

The Beatles? comeone, you call Prince a genius but not the most influential popband ever?

Springsteen? you have a point there, great singer-songwriter and bandleader, but maybe not as distinctive and defining as someone like Dylan or Chuck Berry.

James Brown? get the funk out: he practically invented funk-music and deserves the credit.

Michael Jackson? Maybe not genius in terms of being musically inventive and 'deep', but definitely genius in defining the phenomenon 'popstar'.

Frank Zappa? One of the most free spirits in 20th century music: not caring about 'borders' between popular music, classical and jazz. An inspiration for many, if only in spirit.

To put Prince above all these people is a stretch for me: as much as i love him as an artist, he owes a lot to his influences, he did peak with mixing these influences with his own visions for a very respectable period of time (1981 - 1987 when i am honest, 1981 - 1995 when i am in a mild mood) but he is also underachieving for quite some time now.

Isn't it a characteristic of people who are labeled as 'genius' that they KEEP developing and challenging themselves and their creativity over time? I mean: people like Picasso and Monet delivered some of their best and most defining works when they were 'grandpa's'. Or does that work differently within the realms of (popular) music?

I think musical genius used to mean something but now it floats between being a marketing term and being a pop culture label.

The word "genius" means nothing now. It's passed around like porn in a prison.

TheDigitalGardener said:

The word "genius" means nothing now. It's passed around like porn in a prison.

There is no such thing as "Musical Genius"

Only an assessment of musical talents

I think the problem is people want these legends and geniuses so they throw these labels all over the place when labels really mean nothing. Everyone is not going to be genius it doesnt mean their not talented. Geniuses are very rare and are not talents that come in every generation or has to.

The term began to lose its meaning, at least to me, when it started being applied to entertainers the likes of Kanye the Sampling King.

Identity said:

The term began to lose its meaning, at least to me, when it started being applied to entertainers the likes of Kanye the Sampling King.

Exactly!!! and thats not to say that Kanye is not talented even though I wouldnt call myself a fan but I wouldnt call him a musical genius either. Its seems popularity and artists who hold selective talent like singing, dancing etc seperately are labeled as these things because the industry is so bad now but I dont see why the standard on who we label as musical genius should drop to the best of the bland industry and even what we call the best today are still bland.

Identity said:

The term began to lose its meaning, at least to me, when it started being applied to entertainers the likes of Kanye the Sampling King.

Yeah in my opinion Danger Mouse is the Sampling King...

And he still knows how to play Piano/synths, guitar, bass, and drums,

No. But the infrastructure that nutured and promoted them has disappeared.

Unholyalliance said:

angel345 said:

He's one of few artists in the industry that can read and write music.

I'm gonna need your source on that.

[Edited 10/5/11 11:09am]

A very old one. It's probably an defunct magazine called "Right On". Another magazine of which I cannot remember in the day. If Leeds made that statement, then someone is making it up. Could it be his PR? Besides, why is Prince compared to Mozart and why in the movie "Purple Rain", which is supposed to be an semi-autobiography, he asked to see his father's sheet music before he shot himself. Many of us know that Prince is the son of two musicians. His father wrote "Computer Blue".

angel345 said:

Unholyalliance said:

I'm gonna need your source on that.

[Edited 10/5/11 11:09am]

A very old one. It's probably an defunct magazine called "Right On". Another magazine of which I cannot remember in the day. If Leeds made that statement, then someone is making it up. Could it be his PR? Besides, why is Prince compared to Mozart and why in the movie "Purple Rain", which is supposed to be an semi-autobiography, he asked to see his father's sheet music before he shot himself. Many of us know that Prince is the son of two musicians. His father wrote "Computer Blue".

Prince CAN NOT read music

Purple Rain is only partially if anything is partially biographical.

Key word PARTIALLY.

Not Gospel.

Prince has said in interviews, that he can't.

He like most musicians, in the pop rock world, learned by ear.

In that world you don't need to know how to read music.

A multitrack recorder, replaced pen and paper.

And even if he does, it would probably be at a fake sheet level.

I'm sure he knows tablature though.

HermesReborn said:

angel345 said:

A very old one. It's probably an defunct magazine called "Right On". Another magazine of which I cannot remember in the day. If Leeds made that statement, then someone is making it up. Could it be his PR? Besides, why is Prince compared to Mozart and why in the movie "Purple Rain", which is supposed to be an semi-autobiography, he asked to see his father's sheet music before he shot himself. Many of us know that Prince is the son of two musicians. His father wrote "Computer Blue".

Prince CAN NOT read music

Purple Rain is only partially if anything is partially biographical.

Key word PARTIALLY.

Not Gospel.

Prince has said in interviews, that he can't.

He like most musicians, in the pop rock world, learned by ear.

In that world you don't need to know how to read music.

A multitrack recorder, replaced pen and paper.

And even if he does, it would probably be at a fake sheet level.

I'm sure he knows tablature though.

Sorry, but I cannot assume that a semi-autobiography includes not being able to read music. Where's the interview to this? Otherwise, your word is not gospel.

[Edited 10/7/11 0:28am]

angel345 said:

HermesReborn said:

Prince CAN NOT read music

Purple Rain is only partially if anything is partially biographical.

Key word PARTIALLY.

Not Gospel.

Prince has said in interviews, that he can't.

He like most musicians, in the pop rock world, learned by ear.

In that world you don't need to know how to read music.

A multitrack recorder, replaced pen and paper.

And even if he does, it would probably be at a fake sheet level.

I'm sure he knows tablature though.

Sorry, but I cannot assume that a semi-autobiography includes not being able to read music. Where's the interview to this? Otherwise, your word is not gospel.

[Edited 10/7/11 0:28am]

angel345 said:

HermesReborn said:

Prince CAN NOT read music

Purple Rain is only partially if anything is partially biographical.

Key word PARTIALLY.

Not Gospel.

Prince has said in interviews, that he can't.

He like most musicians, in the pop rock world, learned by ear.

In that world you don't need to know how to read music.

A multitrack recorder, replaced pen and paper.

And even if he does, it would probably be at a fake sheet level.

I'm sure he knows tablature though.

Sorry, but I cannot assume that a semi-autobiography includes not being able to read music. Where's the interview to this? Otherwise, your word is not gospel.

[Edited 10/7/11 0:28am]

I'm amused you believed PR stories of Prince. Prince said himself he doesn't read or write music lol and Purple Rain ain't biographical by any means lol it's loosely based but not biographical.

HermesReborn said:

angel345 said:

Sorry, but I cannot assume that a semi-autobiography includes not being able to read music. Where's the interview to this? Otherwise, your word is not gospel.

[Edited 10/7/11 0:28am]

This term is so misused until it has no TRUE meaning anymore.

[img:$uid]http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q267/markedhoosier/GameBlouses.jpg[/img:$uid]

It never gets old.