Study of song recognition. Perhaps this phenomenoncontributed to an assumed waning of interest in Prince's work after 2000. (I love his later work but am not a Millennial:)

https://phys.org/news/2019-02-previous-musical-era-millennials-recognition.html

Millennials' recognition of songs from the 1960s through the 1990s is relatively stable over this 40-year period, a team of researchers has found. By contrast, their recognition of musical hits from 2000 to 2015, while higher overall than the previous era, diminishes rapidly over time.

"The 1960s to 1990s was a special time in music, reflected by a steady recognition of pieces of that era—even by today's millennials," observes Pascal Wallisch, a clinical assistant professor in New York University's Department of Psychology and the senior author of the study, which appears in the journal PLOS ONE.

and

The results revealed three distinct phases in collective memory.

The first phase showed a steep linear drop-off in recognition for the music from this millennium, steadily declining, year by year, from 2015 to 2000; the second phase was marked by a stable plateau from the 1960s to the 1990s, with no notable decline during this 40-year period; and the third phase, similar to the first phase, was characterized by a more gradual drop-off during the 1940s and 1950s.

deerpath said:

Study of song recognition. Perhaps this phenomenoncontributed to an assumed waning of interest in Prince's work after 2000. (I love his later work but am not a Millennial:)

https://phys.org/news/2019-02-previous-musical-era-millennials-recognition.html

Millennials' recognition of songs from the 1960s through the 1990s is relatively stable over this 40-year period, a team of researchers has found. By contrast, their recognition of musical hits from 2000 to 2015, while higher overall than the previous era, diminishes rapidly over time.

"The 1960s to 1990s was a special time in music, reflected by a steady recognition of pieces of that era—even by today's millennials," observes Pascal Wallisch, a clinical assistant professor in New York University's Department of Psychology and the senior author of the study, which appears in the journal PLOS ONE.

and

The results revealed three distinct phases in collective memory.

The first phase showed a steep linear drop-off in recognition for the music from this millennium, steadily declining, year by year, from 2015 to 2000; the second phase was marked by a stable plateau from the 1960s to the 1990s, with no notable decline during this 40-year period; and the third phase, similar to the first phase, was characterized by a more gradual drop-off during the 1940s and 1950s.

Millennials' recognition of songs from the 1960s through the 1990s is relatively stable over this 40-year period, a team of researchers has found. By contrast, their recognition of musical hits from 2000 to 2015, while higher overall than the previous era, diminishes rapidly over time.

"The 1960s to 1990s was a special time in music, reflected by a steady recognition of pieces of that era—even by today's millennials," observes Pascal Wallisch, a clinical assistant professor in New York University's Department of Psychology and the senior author of the study, which appears in the journal PLOS ONE.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/201...n.html#jCp

Millennials' recognition of songs from the 1960s through the 1990s is relatively stable over this 40-year period, a team of researchers has found. By contrast, their recognition of musical hits from 2000 to 2015, while higher overall than the previous era, diminishes rapidly over time.

"The 1960s to 1990s was a special time in music, reflected by a steady recognition of pieces of that era—even by today's millennials," observes Pascal Wallisch, a clinical assistant professor in New York University's Department of Psychology and the senior author of the study, which appears in the journal PLOS ONE.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/201...n.html#jCp

It's not just millenials. I teach 7th graders. They aren't very passionate about today's music. I mean, they like Taylor Swift and Bruno Mars, but they don't LOVE them the way previous generations of 7th Graders LOVED MJ, Prince, and Madonna.

-

It's interesting. BEcause of youtube etc, kids have INSTANT access to all music from previous decades. They don't really have a perception of "when" a song/sound is from. They just like what they like. And they like music from previous generations, better than what's current. Example: By in large they call today's rap "mumble rap" and wish they had grown up with old school hip hop. It's weird. It's like having of 12/13 year olds with old man complaints. This is why a band like Queen can still be relevant....they connect on a level that "current" bands cannot.

[Edited 2/10/19 8:04am]

thedoorkeeper said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Today's artists know it.

Today's producers know it.

The people who grew up during music's golden era definitely know it.

From the 70s through the mid 80s, that was the golden era.

Anything that sounds good today, or remind people of yestereday, that music is a derivative, an interpolation, or samples of the music from that period of time

Music was at its strongest when culture was at is strongest.

As culture became marginilized and diminished, that decline reflected in the music also.

Until people learn how to make their own music, develop their own sound, there's not gonna be another truly great artist who will rise and stand the test of time, it will only be someone who reminds us of a past great.

Overime, starting in the late 80s, the pracice of samplilng and the overreliance of it has led to the stunting of true artistic growth, which leads to more perpetual cycle of sampling or music with no real structure or substance to it.

but it all started 30 years ago which has led to what we are seeing today.

The cycle will have to be broken when someone with the right support to be authentic

It's gonna be difficult, and in the short run, probably not going to be allot of success per se, but when that moment occurs to when that person knows he/she has discovered another realm, they're gonna feel awesome and elated.

Scorp said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Closes piano top. Unplugs cord from geetar. Leaves mic in stand.

Scorp said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Today's artists know it.

Today's producers know it.

The people who grew up during music's golden era definitely know it.

From the 70s through the mid 80s, that was the golden era.

Anything that sounds good today, or remind people of yestereday, that music is a derivative, an interpolation, or samples of the music from that period of time

Music was at its strongest when culture was at is strongest.

As culture became marginilized and diminished, that decline reflected in the music also.

Until people learn how to make their own music, develop their own sound, there's not gonna be another truly great artist who will rise and stand the test of time, it will only be someone who reminds us of a past great.

Overime, starting in the late 80s, the pracice of samplilng and the overreliance of it has led to the stunting of true artistic growth, which leads to more perpetual cycle of sampling or music with no real structure or substance to it.

but it all started 30 years ago which has led to what we are seeing today.

The cycle will have to be broken when someone with the right support to be authentic

It's gonna be difficult, and in the short run, probably not going to be allot of success per se, but when that moment occurs to when that person knows he/she has discovered another realm, they're gonna feel awesome and elated.

It reminds me of what Fran Lebowitz said: As an old person I'm supposed to be put off by what young people are coming up with, not bored by it.

Have you noticed how the 2000's decades seem to be non-defining? Young people are supposed to be the ones coming up with new, ground breaking ideas. They've seemed to stop doing that after the 90's.

CynicKill said:

Scorp said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Today's artists know it.

Today's producers know it.

The people who grew up during music's golden era definitely know it.

From the 70s through the mid 80s, that was the golden era.

Anything that sounds good today, or remind people of yestereday, that music is a derivative, an interpolation, or samples of the music from that period of time

Music was at its strongest when culture was at is strongest.

As culture became marginilized and diminished, that decline reflected in the music also.

Until people learn how to make their own music, develop their own sound, there's not gonna be another truly great artist who will rise and stand the test of time, it will only be someone who reminds us of a past great.

Overime, starting in the late 80s, the pracice of samplilng and the overreliance of it has led to the stunting of true artistic growth, which leads to more perpetual cycle of sampling or music with no real structure or substance to it.

but it all started 30 years ago which has led to what we are seeing today.

The cycle will have to be broken when someone with the right support to be authentic

It's gonna be difficult, and in the short run, probably not going to be allot of success per se, but when that moment occurs to when that person knows he/she has discovered another realm, they're gonna feel awesome and elated.

It reminds me of what Fran Lebowitz said: As an old person I'm supposed to be put off by what young people are coming up with, not bored by it.

Have you noticed how the 2000's decades seem to be non-defining? Young people are supposed to be the ones coming up with new, ground breaking ideas. They've seemed to stop doing that after the 90's.

exactly, great points

Looking back, i would say 2001, was the last year of good music across the board, and that year marked a resurgence of sorts, it was like one last major push before it all started to give way

and now, it's like artists are freelancing now, searching for anything that sticks.

or if somone reminds people of a great artist from yesterday, that person is deemed great, just for reminding them of past greatness....

rdhull said:

Scorp said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Closes piano top. Unplugs cord from geetar. Leaves mic in stand.

I'm not a millennial, though I'm pretty close to being one (born in 1980). I actually like the 00s more than the 90s, but most of the music I like from the 00s (and 10s) isn't music that has had much chart impact, with a few exceptions.

I think a bigger explanation for this phenomenon is that the internet opened up an entire world of music. Not only was there so much more music to readily access with things like Napster, Limewire, and then YouTube, MySpace, and Spotify, etc., but it was much easier to access as well. You didn't have to wait for a European import anymore - you could just click away. And I think this easy access to everything has made it such that it is far easier than it used to be for people to find their own little silo communities for the music they like. It may be that there aren't any all-encompassing megastars anymore because there isn't a need for there to be one - each person can personalise their Spotify playlists from millions of songs and find their own niche.

I kind of like and dislike this - I've discovered so much music I adore in the past 10-15 years thanks to the internet that I would have had very little chance of encountering if the music industry and distribution means were the same as they were in the 80s and 90s, but the massive, earth-shaking musical moments that everybody at least had an opinion on just aren't there, at least not on the same scale. There are still big moments (like the "This Is America" video, for example), but they seem to be mere flurries of hype rather than cultural landmarks. That's not to criticize modern music, even popular modern music, but it seems unlikely that another seismic event on the scale of the "Thriller" video or Purple Rain album/movie or "Like a Prayer" video controversy.

thedoorkeeper said:

Moonbeam said:

I'm not a millennial, though I'm pretty close to being one (born in 1980). I actually like the 00s more than the 90s, but most of the music I like from the 00s (and 10s) isn't music that has had much chart impact, with a few exceptions.

I think a bigger explanation for this phenomenon is that the internet opened up an entire world of music. Not only was there so much more music to readily access with things like Napster, Limewire, and then YouTube, MySpace, and Spotify, etc., but it was much easier to access as well. You didn't have to wait for a European import anymore - you could just click away. And I think this easy access to everything has made it such that it is far easier than it used to be for people to find their own little silo communities for the music they like. It may be that there aren't any all-encompassing megastars anymore because there isn't a need for there to be one - each person can personalise their Spotify playlists from millions of songs and find their own niche.

I kind of like and dislike this - I've discovered so much music I adore in the past 10-15 years thanks to the internet that I would have had very little chance of encountering if the music industry and distribution means were the same as they were in the 80s and 90s, but the massive, earth-shaking musical moments that everybody at least had an opinion on just aren't there, at least not on the same scale. There are still big moments (like the "This Is America" video, for example), but they seem to be mere flurries of hype rather than cultural landmarks. That's not to criticize modern music, even popular modern music, but it seems unlikely that another seismic event on the scale of the "Thriller" video or Purple Rain album/movie or "Like a Prayer" video controversy.

Yep

This isn't a quality issue, the 60's-90's is a time period where pop people consumed music in the same way, whether it be on radio or television. It was also a time when recorded pop music had become a good way of making money. It was in an artists interest to get people listening and to appease very broad swathes of the public.

Nowadays music is made directly for fans with little in the way of middlemen, which also takes away the need for someone to continue to write widely appealing "hit" songs once established. Good for some, less so for others who can pass off half-written garbage as "experimental". Also there's little money in recording music if you're not Max Martin or Ed Sheeran.

Both methods have up and downsides but it explains the lack of memorable hits these days -> there's no need for them.

It is increasingly difficult to differentiate between music made as a feeling and music made as a means for promotion/profit. Sure they can intersect but, to this music fan, the joy of the muse is lost when that muse is obviously dollars.

CynicKill said:

Have you noticed how the 2000's decades seem to be non-defining? Young people are supposed to be the ones coming up with new, ground breaking ideas. They've seemed to stop doing that after the 90's.

Actually they have, but in the video game field. If you look at what sells a lot today, it's video games, not music as much. Popular games sell millions of copies like albums did in the 1970s-1990s. GTA 5 has sold more than any other entertainment item in history. including the Thriller album. It also has made more money than any movie ever released. Younger folks buy the game discs, but stream music instead of buying it. Another thing popular now is superheroes and there's video games for them too. Comic book movies are the biggest box office draws today. I think another thing that has made buying music less important is that social media has made the idea of "us and them" almost obsolete. Social media also makes stars of people for not really doing anything like reality TV people such as the different Real Housewives shows &The Bachelor. Notice the main MTV channel is mostly reality shows today and the Kardashians are talked about all the time. MTV sort of started the reality trend with The Real World in the 1990s. People in the past didn't know that much about the people on the radio. There regular news didn't really talk much about entertainment. There was only 3 major networks and a few local channels on UHF. No cable, VCRs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, internet, so fewer choices for entertainment. Walter Cronkite didn't talk about about the stars of his day. Today if somebody says or does something people doesn't like, then people protest it to get it banned or at least stop listening to it or watching it. There was some of this in the past like John Lennon's Jesus comment and the disco sucks riot. Music is also more private now, people listen to it through earbuds or Beats headphones. Decades ago, people walked around with transistor radios and later boomboxes. So music was kind of shared with others around them. They had stereo systems in their homes and loud sound systems in their cars with big bass speakers, which in some cases made the car rattle with the boom of the 808 drum machine. They don't even put CD or cassette players in cars as a default now

Music today is a side dish basically, its now the "do you want fries with that" where it used to be the actual MEAL. Its a combination of things, people dont like to come real with it, but bot too long ago you actually had to go to a store and stand on line and buy a cd record whatever. Now there is no anticipation of a record, you almost dont have to do anything and the music is on your device. And a FUN FACT for yall, 89% of music streamers dont know the contents of what they actually have. Not that they dont know the artists, they dont know if a song is on their device or not, etc... And that even goes for buyers too, I recently heard an interview with Richard Marx and as always the safe question to ask a musician is the "state of music" question, and he said, "It is a different world, its a new business, i still love getting a new album by an artist I like, but will I listen to it right away? Probably not, the current way of consumption has taken that away" That really sums it up, music is not what it was in value and meaning, its become a faceless industry. Back in the 70's they used to call bands like YES and STYX and some others "Faceless bands" because they used art work not photos on their covers, now no one even knows who wrote or played on albums, and as DJ Eddie Trunk says, "most people dont give a shit".

lastdecember said:

but not too long ago you actually had to go to a store and stand on line and buy a cd record whatever. Now there is no anticipation of a record, you almost dont have to do anything and the music is on your device.

Gaming has taken the place of that too. Every so often I see a report on local TV about people camping out overnight at GameStop or Best Buy for a hot new new game or a new version of a console like Playstation (or the new Air Jordans ). There's even video game rehab that people pay to go to. I've never heard of record or cassette rehab.

Here's a report about people trying to get gaming into the 2024 Olympics.

It's not all that unusual for a critical mass of any given generation to pick up and appreciate music from 1-2 generations ago.

By the end of the 80s (my late teens), kids were gravitating back to 60s rock, fueled by the boomer nostalgia of their parents. 50s culture had a "moment" during that time as well. In the early 90s, the funk and soul of the 70's was picked up (in some cases, picked up again) by GenX'ers.

The music of the 60s-90s is to millenials is what the music of the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s was to my generation. Some of it we grew up with, and some of it had to be discovered. For Xers, that meant exploring everything from Duke Ellington to, say, Pink Floyd. For millenials, it could mean exploring everything from The Doors to A Tribe Called Quest. The distinction in any generation will be casual music fans and devoted music fans. The former will dabble in eras past, the latter will often dive head on into exploring them.

Still, it's good to see millenials picking up the older sounds, which will keep those sounds alive.

MickyDolenz said:

CynicKill said:

Have you noticed how the 2000's decades seem to be non-defining? Young people are supposed to be the ones coming up with new, ground breaking ideas. They've seemed to stop doing that after the 90's.

Actually they have, but in the video game field. If you look at what sells a lot today, it's video games, not music as much. Popular games sell millions of copies like albums did in the 1970s-1990s. GTA 5 has sold more than any other entertainment item in history. including the Thriller album. It also has made more money than any movie ever released. Younger folks buy the game discs, but stream music instead of buying it. Another thing popular now is superheroes and there's video games for them too. Comic book movies are the biggest box office draws today. I think another thing that has made buying music less important is that social media has made the idea of "us and them" almost obsolete. Social media also makes stars of people for not really doing anything like reality TV people such as the different Real Housewives shows &The Bachelor. Notice the main MTV channel is mostly reality shows today and the Kardashians are talked about all the time. MTV sort of started the reality trend with The Real World in the 1990s. People in the past didn't know that much about the people on the radio. There regular news didn't really talk much about entertainment. There was only 3 major networks and a few local channels on UHF. No cable, VCRs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, internet, so fewer choices for entertainment. Walter Cronkite didn't talk about about the stars of his day. Today if somebody says or does something people doesn't like, then people protest it to get it banned or at least stop listening to it or watching it. There was some of this in the past like John Lennon's Jesus comment and the disco sucks riot. Music is also more private now, people listen to it through earbuds or Beats headphones. Decades ago, people walked around with transistor radios and later boomboxes. So music was kind of shared with others around them. They had stereo systems in their homes and loud sound systems in their cars with big bass speakers, which in some cases made the car rattle with the boom of the 808 drum machine. They don't even put CD or cassette players in cars as a default now

I agree much of this. However, the video game market (especially GTA) isn't exclusively youth driven. Is it's core audience millenials? Video games appeal to a WIDE demographic of gamers. It is much like Superhero films.

-

That said, even though GTA has sold more than any other entertainment item in history, it has not had nearly the cultural impact of something like Thriller, or Saturday Night Live, or Star Wars.

-

For all those sales numbers (which are impressive) GTA has remained in the niche realm of gamers and not permeated culture as much as say, Pac-Man, or Super Mario.

-

That may be because GTA is not "for kids," but I DO NOT think it has impacted/influenced culture as much as some ultra violent stuff like Rambo, Freddy Krueger, or even some of Quentin Tarantino's films.

[Edited 2/14/19 19:41pm]

jaawwnn said:

Oh god I hate that term of division: Millennials.

I'll completely ignore that studies like this can go either way depending on exactly the methodology used. More interesting to me than all the stupid debates about which era of music is better is:

1) who funded this study and why?

To me, the funding source should be first, before all the other questions and discussions. I want to know why this study paid-for and who paid for it. 99.99% of what goes on in the world can be explained (or at least better understood) by money flows...the will and energy flows of those in charge to make it happen. Yet this is rarely discussed, which is a major reason why we are fed so many conflicting 'results' from various vested interests in various industries in countless 'studies'.

Who paid for it and why did they pay for it? That question gives us more clues to the really intedesting stuff. Who benefits and profits from the 'knowledge'? Which often leads us to the manipulators, advertisers, controllers, profilers..

[Edited 2/15/19 13:45pm]

Scorp said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Today's artists know it.

Today's producers know it.

The people who grew up during music's golden era definitely know it.

From the 70s through the mid 80s, that was the golden era.

Anything that sounds good today, or remind people of yestereday, that music is a derivative, an interpolation, or samples of the music from that period of time

Music was at its strongest when culture was at is strongest.

As culture became marginilized and diminished, that decline reflected in the music also.

Until people learn how to make their own music, develop their own sound, there's not gonna be another truly great artist who will rise and stand the test of time, it will only be someone who reminds us of a past great.

Overime, starting in the late 80s, the pracice of samplilng and the overreliance of it has led to the stunting of true artistic growth, which leads to more perpetual cycle of sampling or music with no real structure or substance to it.

but it all started 30 years ago which has led to what we are seeing today.

The cycle will have to be broken when someone with the right support to be authentic

It's gonna be difficult, and in the short run, probably not going to be allot of success per se, but when that moment occurs to when that person knows he/she has discovered another realm, they're gonna feel awesome and elated.

I listened to 80smusic and my parents hated it.

Doesn't every generation think their music was the best?

When I listened to Prince my grandfather used to say: thats not real music.

so....its like going in a circle...we are all so convinced our own generation made the best music LOL

its all relative anyway....

nextedition said:

nextedition said:

nextedition said:

Scorp said:

The music was simply better back then, everyone knows this.

Today's artists know it.

Today's producers know it.

The people who grew up during music's golden era definitely know it.

From the 70s through the mid 80s, that was the golden era.

Anything that sounds good today, or remind people of yestereday, that music is a derivative, an interpolation, or samples of the music from that period of time

Music was at its strongest when culture was at is strongest.

As culture became marginilized and diminished, that decline reflected in the music also.

Until people learn how to make their own music, develop their own sound, there's not gonna be another truly great artist who will rise and stand the test of time, it will only be someone who reminds us of a past great.

Overime, starting in the late 80s, the pracice of samplilng and the overreliance of it has led to the stunting of true artistic growth, which leads to more perpetual cycle of sampling or music with no real structure or substance to it.

but it all started 30 years ago which has led to what we are seeing today.

The cycle will have to be broken when someone with the right support to be authentic

It's gonna be difficult, and in the short run, probably not going to be allot of success per se, but when that moment occurs to when that person knows he/she has discovered another realm, they're gonna feel awesome and elated.

I listened to 80smusic and my parents hated it.

Doesn't every generation think their music was the best?

When I listened to Prince my grandfather used to say: thats not real music.

so....its like going in a circle...we are all so convinced our own generation made the best music LOL

its all relative anyway....

when people go to the supermarket or department store, when music is played, the majority of the songs played are primarily from two decades...the 70s and 80s.....

for me it's not a generational thing, it's a system thing......

if I felt the 2010s produced the greatest music ever as a whole, I would say it

most of the music that has been sampled over time, that music being sampled is from the 70s up until the mid 80s.......these are facts......

George Clinton/Parliament Funkadelic was sampled ad nauseum in the late 80s, sampling was already getting outta hand then....

the era of music being sampled the most, that's the music that has proven to stand the test of time, especially when it comes to what rap producers have sampled, that music being sampled was from the 70s to mid 80s.....those fifteen years cranked out the golden era of music

Especially when it comes to R&B and it's richness during those years.....those 15 years of R&B glory has been sampled, interpolated by artists and producers from all the genres in some form or fashion......Contemporary/new age R&B artists have sampled it, Pop artists have sampled it, Rap artists have sampled it, Gospel artists have done it such as Kirk Franklin and others, Jazz artists of the modern era have done it, even Country music arstist has borrower elements of that R&B influence to boost their overall appeal....everyone's done it

here's a perfect example of how real R&B was as good as it got, then it was reduced to a formula driven means to try and appeal to a targeted audience at the expense of the genre itself

where the very artists who stood at the forefront was reduced to background duty

skywalker said:

I agree much of this. However, the video game market (especially GTA) isn't exclusively youth driven. Is it's core audience millenials? Video games appeal to a WIDE demographic of gamers. It is much like Superhero films.

-

That said, even though GTA has sold more than any other entertainment item in history, it has not had nearly the cultural impact of something like Thriller, or Saturday Night Live, or Star Wars.

-

For all those sales numbers (which are impressive) GTA has remained in the niche realm of gamers and not permeated culture as much as say, Pac-Man, or Super Mario.

-

That may be because GTA is not "for kids," but I DO NOT think it has impacted/influenced culture as much as some ultra violent stuff like Rambo, Freddy Krueger, or even some of Quentin Tarantino's films.

Kids play GTA though. Pac Man and other games of that era in a way is kinda simlar to the boombox. A lot of people went to an arcade to play it and some grocery/convenience stores had arcade games, so it was more social than playing at home or online. It's like going to church instead of watching Joel Osteen on TV. Atrai 2600, unlike the pinball machine of the previous era, was small, so more people could have it in their homes. Mario started out in Donkey Kong, which is around the same time as Pac Man.

alphastreet said:

Scorp said:

CynicKill said:

It reminds me of what Fran Lebowitz said: As an old person I'm supposed to be put off by what young people are coming up with, not bored by it.

Have you noticed how the 2000's decades seem to be non-defining? Young people are supposed to be the ones coming up with new, ground breaking ideas. They've seemed to stop doing that after the 90's.

exactly, great points

Looking back, i would say 2001, was the last year of good music across the board, and that year marked a resurgence of sorts, it was like one last major push before it all started to give way

and now, it's like artists are freelancing now, searching for anything that sticks.

or if somone reminds people of a great artist from yesterday, that person is deemed great, just for reminding them of past greatness....

Co-sign on the above two posts, especially Scorp's comment about 2001 being the last year of good music. I'm 58, but I try not to be an old grouch - it's just that modern 'music' doesn't move me at all. It sounds like watered down versions of beats I heard decades ago. Shit, I grew up on Motown, Stax/Atlantic, classic rock/soul/funk, old school hip-hip, WABC, the 'Quiet Storm' on WBLS in NYC, etc. Nothing today comes close to matching that. And don't get me started today's so-called 'R&B'. I'm so glad my brother raised his three kids on the old shit. They'd rather listen to Sly Stone, MJ & Prince than Bruno Mars or Timberfake.

And can someone explain Cardi B to me? They played that shit at my cousin's sweet 16. I had to go outside after 30 seconds......jesus.

uPtoWnNY said:

Scorp said:

exactly, great points

Looking back, i would say 2001, was the last year of good music across the board, and that year marked a resurgence of sorts, it was like one last major push before it all started to give way

and now, it's like artists are freelancing now, searching for anything that sticks.

or if somone reminds people of a great artist from yesterday, that person is deemed great, just for reminding them of past greatness....

Co-sign on the above two posts, especially Scorp's comment about 2001 being the last year of good music. I'm 58, but I try not to be an old grouch - it's just that modern 'music' doesn't move me at all. It sounds like watered down versions of beats I heard decades ago. Shit, I grew up on Motown, Stax/Atlantic, classic rock/soul/funk, old school hip-hip, WABC, the 'Quiet Storm' on WBLS in NYC, etc. Nothing today comes close to matching that. And don't get me started today's so-called 'R&B'. I'm so glad my brother raised his three kids on the old shit. They'd rather listen to Sly Stone, MJ & Prince than Bruno Mars or Timberfake.

And can someone explain Cardi B to me? They played that shit at my cousin's sweet 16. I had to go outside after 30 seconds......jesus.

looooooooooolll........that was funny........amen.....

if our generation, or music fans who are in their 40s, 50s, or older, if we felt today's music is on level, or just as good, or even better than the music of yesteryear, we would give the young generation of music artists their just due.....

it's not like we wanna listen to yestereday's music all the time.....it's not a natural response to always cling onto the past....

but when we see the cultural deterioration, the musical deterioration, and the deterioration of live radio broadcast, we try and cling on to the years where we knew all three realms were at its best

when culture was at its strongest, creativity was in abudance, that produce the greatest era of music that so many acts of today and the past 20 plus years have tried to replicate or sample one way or another......

whichever era of music has been sampled the most, that era of music was the best