independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > What has happened to music ?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 5 <12345>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 12/10/20 9:04pm

purplethunder3
121

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

^^I'm more surprised that Mick Jagger & Ronnie Wood are still having children in their 70s razz

They've gotta keep their tribes going... lol

"Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything." --Plato

https://youtu.be/CVwv9LZMah0
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 12/10/20 10:02pm

TrivialPursuit

avatar

MickyDolenz said:

TrivialPursuit said:

and most of the Rolling Stones are dead anyway.

They're all alive except Brian Jones and he passed in the 1960s.



:::LE SIGH:::

I REALIZE THIS. It's a joke because most of them look like they've been dead at least 15 years.

Sorry, it's the Hodgkin's talking.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 12/11/20 1:53am

JayCrawford

MickyDolenz said:

^^I'm more surprised that Mick Jagger & Ronnie Wood are still having children in their 70s razz



He doesn't look bad for someone in their 70s though.

Also, question. Am I allowed to post links?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 12/11/20 4:45am

jaawwnn

Loads of great music out there, I won't name names because what I think is good is neither here nor there at the end of the day, but I think the major issue is that pop music (in a very broad sense) is not the dominant central cultural force it was from the 1950s to 1980s. I suppose it's like a poetry circle lamenting that there's no Byron or Shelley anymore.


[Edited 12/11/20 4:47am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 12/11/20 6:52am

domainator2010

TrivialPursuit said:

Soul II Soul? Hell, even those boy girl acts like Boy Meets Girl ("Waiting For A Star To Fall")

YEAH! SOUL II SOUL!! BOY MEETS GIRL!! NOW YOU'RE TALKING!!! biggrin When when when when when??

What's a "yacht rock station"?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 12/11/20 6:55am

domainator2010

JayCrawford said:


Who actually thinks artists like Maxwell, Jill Scott, Erykah Nadu Soul II Soul Tony Rich product are even great?


ME! biggrin ('cept Rich - I have no idea who that is).

Those guys you mentioned are way before my time.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 12/11/20 7:06am

domainator2010

EmmaMcG said:

The charts are predominantly filled with crap, manufactured pop acts. But great music still exists and just like most other decades, you have to look outside the charts to find it. Acts like Mayer Hawthorne, Ekkah, Tuxedo, Chromeo, Niki & The Dove, Boulevards, Chromatics, Gaslight Anthem, Harts etc are all relatively new and all put out quality music.


Well, I say we LISTEN to them and put them ON the damn charts! What say?

I'd really wish you'd start separate threads for each of those acts you mentioned above here. With like, links to songs n stuff, separately.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 12/11/20 7:27am

purplethunder3
121

avatar

domainator2010 said:

EmmaMcG said:

The charts are predominantly filled with crap, manufactured pop acts. But great music still exists and just like most other decades, you have to look outside the charts to find it. Acts like Mayer Hawthorne, Ekkah, Tuxedo, Chromeo, Niki & The Dove, Boulevards, Chromatics, Gaslight Anthem, Harts etc are all relatively new and all put out quality music.


Well, I say we LISTEN to them and put them ON the damn charts! What say?

I'd really wish you'd start separate threads for each of those acts you mentioned above here. With like, links to songs n stuff, separately.

Why don't you just look them up? lol

"Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything." --Plato

https://youtu.be/CVwv9LZMah0
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 12/11/20 9:03am

EmmaMcG

purplethunder3121 said:



domainator2010 said:




EmmaMcG said:


The charts are predominantly filled with crap, manufactured pop acts. But great music still exists and just like most other decades, you have to look outside the charts to find it. Acts like Mayer Hawthorne, Ekkah, Tuxedo, Chromeo, Niki & The Dove, Boulevards, Chromatics, Gaslight Anthem, Harts etc are all relatively new and all put out quality music.


Well, I say we LISTEN to them and put them ON the damn charts! What say?

I'd really wish you'd start separate threads for each of those acts you mentioned above here. With like, links to songs n stuff, separately.



Why don't you just look them up? lol



Exactly
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 12/11/20 10:50am

Phase3

Here is a good current song
https://youtu.be/1Wl1B7DPegc
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 12/11/20 11:31am

SantanaMaitrey
a

MickyDolenz said:

^^I'm more surprised that Mick Jagger & Ronnie Wood are still having children in their 70s razz


Yeah, imagine that, having a father who is as old as other children's grandfathers... grandpa tonk confused
If you take any of this seriously, you're a bigger fool than I am.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 12/11/20 11:37am

SantanaMaitrey
a

TrivialPursuit said:



MickyDolenz said:




TrivialPursuit said:


and most of the Rolling Stones are dead anyway.



They're all alive except Brian Jones and he passed in the 1960s.





:::LE SIGH:::

I REALIZE THIS. It's a joke because most of them look like they've been dead at least 15 years.


Oh god, that joke has been going around since 1978 when the Stones played on Saturday Night Live and cast member Laraine Newland said about Keith Richards: "It's interesting to be standing there working with someone who's dead."
If you take any of this seriously, you're a bigger fool than I am.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 12/11/20 11:38am

MotownSubdivis
ion

looby said:



EmmaMcG said:


So called "popular" music has always been very much a mixed bag. A lot of those artists mentioned in the OP were never big commercial acts. Even Prince had relatively little chart success. Shakin' Stevens had more UK top 10 hits in the 80s than Prince did. So even during his heyday, Prince was never in the same category as the likes of Michael Jackson and Madonna. Now, I think his music is miles ahead of pretty much any 80s act but talent has never been equal to chart success. And it's the same now. The charts are predominantly filled with crap, manufactured pop acts. But great music still exists and just like most other decades, you have to look outside the charts to find it. Acts like Mayer Hawthorne, Ekkah, Tuxedo, Chromeo, Niki & The Dove, Boulevards, Chromatics, Gaslight Anthem, Harts etc are all relatively new and all put out quality music.

Uh, excuse you! To Prince fans, Michael Jackson and Madonna were "never in the same category" as Prince! All Michael could do better than Prince, was dance, but Prince wrote his own songs, played his own instruments, and could sing his ass off, in both low and high pitch. He wasn't some one note, commercialized puppet, who only thought that "making the charts and having chart success" was his end all and be all.

[Edited 12/10/20 11:44am]

Mike was the better singer to, let's not pretend he wasn't.

...nor was he some "one note, commercialized puppet" nor was P not concerned at all with commercial success. It's sad that you have to undermine the extraordinary talents of Mike to prop up those of Prince; we should be above this biased willful ignorance by now.
[Edited 12/11/20 11:45am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 12/12/20 1:31am

JayCrawford

looby said:



EmmaMcG said:


So called "popular" music has always been very much a mixed bag. A lot of those artists mentioned in the OP were never big commercial acts. Even Prince had relatively little chart success. Shakin' Stevens had more UK top 10 hits in the 80s than Prince did. So even during his heyday, Prince was never in the same category as the likes of Michael Jackson and Madonna. Now, I think his music is miles ahead of pretty much any 80s act but talent has never been equal to chart success. And it's the same now. The charts are predominantly filled with crap, manufactured pop acts. But great music still exists and just like most other decades, you have to look outside the charts to find it. Acts like Mayer Hawthorne, Ekkah, Tuxedo, Chromeo, Niki & The Dove, Boulevards, Chromatics, Gaslight Anthem, Harts etc are all relatively new and all put out quality music.

Uh, excuse you! To Prince fans, Michael Jackson and Madonna were "never in the same category" as Prince! All Michael could do better than Prince, was dance, but Prince wrote his own songs, played his own instruments, and could sing his ass off, in both low and high pitch. He wasn't some one note, commercialized puppet, who only thought that "making the charts and having chart success" was his end all and be all.

[Edited 12/10/20 11:44am]



As much as I like Michaels stuff and I grew up with the man's career from the beginning to the end. Quincy was the mastermind behind his 3 big albums
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 12/12/20 1:32am

JayCrawford

Phase3 said:

JayCrawford said:



I always thought Paul was better than Prince at that. There are certain Prince fans who do act like the man couldn't do no wrong

Paul mccartney? He's ok I guess.Compared to prince,his music is kinda boring
[Edited 12/10/20 16:02pm]


Lol! His music isn't for everyone, so I can see why you said that
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 12/12/20 8:09am

uPtoWnNY

SoulAlive said:

I mostly listen to 70s music.That’s my favorite musical decade.I also love the 80s of course. I just can’t tolerate today’s whack music.

nod

70s through the early 00s for me.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 12/12/20 8:49am

gandorb

I think there is good music out there to be found, but it is rarely on the radio. Most of the biggest acts the past 20 years are in the rap category, some talented and some are crap. Rap is not the musical genre that I typically listen to, so it is hard for me to really assess how good or bad the main ones are. It is like someone who grew up loving the music of the 40s and 50s who couldn't stand the rock music of the 60s. My parents nor their friends listened to contemporary music in the 60s and 70s unless it was Babara Steisand. Liza Minnilli, etc.

I think top 40 music has always had more crap than good songs, though the ratio might have been better in the 60s. I remember in the 70s m would look ay friends and I would look at the top 40 charts and typically identify just a couple of song we liked. Fortunately, there was better music available on AOR (mostly rock) and R&B radio. Even when we think of all the singles we liked from certain years, we are remembering the cream of the crop.

Today it takes a lot of effort to find good music unless you really like rap. For me, it is worth the effort because I have always preferred to play more current music than oldies. I think IFor instance, you would see many middle aged people at Prince concerts in then 80s but would see many of them in the 2000s. I was a 26 year old who saw the Purple Rain tour at the Superdome, and I wasa among the oldest group. People in their 40s were not embracing Prince or other musical acts of the era for the most part.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 12/12/20 10:40am

MotownSubdivis
ion

gandorb said:

I think there is good music out there to be found, but it is rarely on the radio. Most of the biggest acts the past 20 years are in the rap category, some talented and some are crap. Rap is not the musical genre that I typically listen to, so it is hard for me to really assess how good or bad the main ones are. It is like someone who grew up loving the music of the 40s and 50s who couldn't stand the rock music of the 60s. My parents nor their friends listened to contemporary music in the 60s and 70s unless it was Babara Steisand. Liza Minnilli, etc.


I think top 40 music has always had more crap than good songs, though the ratio might have been better in the 60s. I remember in the 70s m would look ay friends and I would look at the top 40 charts and typically identify just a couple of song we liked. Fortunately, there was better music available on AOR (mostly rock) and R&B radio. Even when we think of all the singles we liked from certain years, we are remembering the cream of the crop.


Today it takes a lot of effort to find good music unless you really like rap. For me, it is worth the effort because I have always preferred to play more current music than oldies. I think IFor instance, you would see many middle aged people at Prince concerts in then 80s but would see many of them in the 2000s. I was a 26 year old who saw the Purple Rain tour at the Superdome, and I wasa among the oldest group. People in their 40s were not embracing Prince or other musical acts of the era for the most part.

It's interesting you mention that you were 26 at the time of attending the PR Tour as I'm 26 myself now and am currently trying to broaden my horizons in terms of enjoying more modern music.

I don't like how the charts are set up now. I feel like more than ever before they feature the least amount of quality or interesting music and it irks me that across the board, you have to look in the lower rungs or off the charts sompletely to hear the most intriguing things offered today. On the flip side, it's easier to do now than when the charts were more concise. I like hip hop but was opposed to trap until I bumped Travis Scott's Rodeo and subsequently bought
ASTROWORLD, his 3rd album which is also hot.

I'm always gonna love 60s to 90s music more but I'm glad to see I'm becoming more willing to give some newer stuff a shot.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 12/12/20 11:04am

lastdecember

avatar

Well that is a lot to discuss here. I think the first thing you have to look at is the way it is made and also consumed and then also look at the vehicles that "play the music". Every era is different and has an identity but i think we can agree that the last two decades have no real "sound" or indentity. Eras that I lived through I feel I can discuss fairly and eras that i didnt like the 50's and 60's I can only comment on all that I have heard. First thing 50's- 90's all have a sound and can be identified pretty much. Having lived through the 70's that era clearly has a production sound to it, and also some of the greatest artists i feel ever. The 80's was the era where I started cultivating my own tastes because i was now buying music too, and because i was young i had to save each week and be sure what i wanted and it allowed me to delve into artists, also this era besides many things to identify it was the birth of visuals, MTV is in the picture and videos so now, artists were getting radio and video to help push them. 90's were also production and new things like Grunge and rap becoming huge and country too, but it also was the soundscan era where it was all about WEEK 1 what do i have to do to get to number one. As you move on you take the selling out of music it becomes about taking it, not wanting to pay for it, and then digital and then streaming etc.... I feel as the music has become easier to produce and get its lost something to it, theres great stuff out there as always but there is a huge production issue even with the big artists of today, but also i feel the absence of ALLOWING artists to grow is gone, if you are with a label and new you better sell right now or have something that can get us clicks, the rise of social media to todays artists i think helps in. a way but also its a huge issue when you are in everyones face for EVERYTHING. I do feel there is some kind of shift coming, this VINYL movement now is bringing something back, dont get me wrong alot of this sales are nostalgia and for collecting but also there is new albums selling and thats big because an album forces the buyer to LISTEN. If you go back to VINYL in the day you have this huge thing you bought well then we shrink it to a tape and a cd, but then now you have this untouchable product that gets added to your library that you dont even own if you stream you are RENTING you dont own anything so there is a disconnect despite this being a technological era that connects so many, does it really?


"We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 12/12/20 11:12am

JayCrawford

gandorb said:

I think there is good music out there to be found, but it is rarely on the radio. Most of the biggest acts the past 20 years are in the rap category, some talented and some are crap. Rap is not the musical genre that I typically listen to, so it is hard for me to really assess how good or bad the main ones are. It is like someone who grew up loving the music of the 40s and 50s who couldn't stand the rock music of the 60s. My parents nor their friends listened to contemporary music in the 60s and 70s unless it was Babara Steisand. Liza Minnilli, etc.


I think top 40 music has always had more crap than good songs, though the ratio might have been better in the 60s. I remember in the 70s m would look ay friends and I would look at the top 40 charts and typically identify just a couple of song we liked. Fortunately, there was better music available on AOR (mostly rock) and R&B radio. Even when we think of all the singles we liked from certain years, we are remembering the cream of the crop.


Today it takes a lot of effort to find good music unless you really like rap. For me, it is worth the effort because I have always preferred to play more current music than oldies. I think IFor instance, you would see many middle aged people at Prince concerts in then 80s but would see many of them in the 2000s. I was a 26 year old who saw the Purple Rain tour at the Superdome, and I wasa among the oldest group. People in their 40s were not embracing Prince or other musical acts of the era for the most part.




Good stuff for seeing Prince live during his peak, I didn't see him live until 1988 Lovesexy tour August 88. Ah the 80s the last great decade for music.

But I see what you're saying and you sound like my age so you'll understand this better. Throughout the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s we had so many legends who were dominating their era's with timeless albums and singles, they broke barriers like racial barriers, records etc etc, they made a cultural impact, so many historical moments happened then, so many innovative moments too. 50s-80s was the golden age of many genre's rock, soul, funk, pop, reggae, jazz and I'd even throw in disco (I loved disco back then lol but I had many white folks trying to beat me up for it 🤣). You and me saw most of it, I'm sure there are dozens of posters who are OUR ages too who can relate. If the person is younger than us, let's say the millennial generation then they wouldn't understand.

The 90s, 00s and 10s didn't have this, it just went downhill and never
recovered. RIP to music 50s-80s.

Thanks for your input though 👍
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 12/12/20 11:37am

JayCrawford

lastdecember said:

Well that is a lot to discuss here. I think the first thing you have to look at is the way it is made and also consumed and then also look at the vehicles that "play the music". Every era is different and has an identity but i think we can agree that the last two decades have no real "sound" or indentity. Eras that I lived through I feel I can discuss fairly and eras that i didnt like the 50's and 60's I can only comment on all that I have heard. First thing 50's- 90's all have a sound and can be identified pretty much. Having lived through the 70's that era clearly has a production sound to it, and also some of the greatest artists i feel ever. The 80's was the era where I started cultivating my own tastes because i was now buying music too, and because i was young i had to save each week and be sure what i wanted and it allowed me to delve into artists, also this era besides many things to identify it was the birth of visuals, MTV is in the picture and videos so now, artists were getting radio and video to help push them. 90's were also production and new things like Grunge and rap becoming huge and country too, but it also was the soundscan era where it was all about WEEK 1 what do i have to do to get to number one. As you move on you take the selling out of music it becomes about taking it, not wanting to pay for it, and then digital and then streaming etc.... I feel as the music has become easier to produce and get its lost something to it, theres great stuff out there as always but there is a huge production issue even with the big artists of today, but also i feel the absence of ALLOWING artists to grow is gone, if you are with a label and new you better sell right now or have something that can get us clicks, the rise of social media to todays artists i think helps in. a way but also its a huge issue when you are in everyones face for EVERYTHING. I do feel there is some kind of shift coming, this VINYL movement now is bringing something back, dont get me wrong alot of this sales are nostalgia and for collecting but also there is new albums selling and thats big because an album forces the buyer to LISTEN. If you go back to VINYL in the day you have this huge thing you bought well then we shrink it to a tape and a cd, but then now you have this untouchable product that gets added to your library that you dont even own if you stream you are RENTING you dont own anything so there is a disconnect despite this being a technological era that connects so many, does it really?



The 90s had a sound? The 90s was nothing but rehash of previous decades and sampling 90% of hits in many departments, R&B, rap and even rock. Rap was becoming huge in the 80s around RUN DMC and Rakim era. The 90s was a decade that didn't have anything that was innovating, culturally impactful, historical and eventful. The talent then was lackluster.

The 50s-80s was the golden ages of many genre's 50s-60s was the golden age of country, 60s-80s was the golden age of rock music, late 60s-70s the golden age of reggae, 60s - early 80s (80-84) was the golden age of soul, 70s golden age of funk. Those 4 decades had legend's, it was innovative, culturally impactful in popular music of all genres, changed the face of music, that had eventful moments and will forever be remembered.

The 90s, even the 00s didn't have anything that comes close to what the 50s-80s had.

The 50s had the country sound, the early stages of rock n roll sound, early rises of blue.

60s had the Motown sound, rock sound blues rock, garage rock, pop rock and early funk sound in the late 60s

70s disco, rock sounds like punk rock, new wave, glam rock, hard rock, soul, reggae, funk

80s Minneapolis sound, post disco sound, SAW sound of the late 80s, those horrible synthesizer sounds lol, Thrash metal rock sound.

What characteristic sounds did the 90s have? "R&B" of that decade was just constant samples of 70s and 60s soul, rap music was the same thing samples of many artists like Prince, James Brown, Earth Wind and Fire, Donna Summer, Barry White and loads more, teen pop explosion I suppose you can say that 🤣

But overall I do get what you're saying and you know what? You gave me a new topic to post
[Edited 12/12/20 11:44am]
[Edited 12/12/20 12:04pm]
[Edited 12/12/20 12:21pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #51 posted 12/12/20 11:57am

Margot

JayCrawford said:

gandorb said:

I think there is good music out there to be found, but it is rarely on the radio. Most of the biggest acts the past 20 years are in the rap category, some talented and some are crap. Rap is not the musical genre that I typically listen to, so it is hard for me to really assess how good or bad the main ones are. It is like someone who grew up loving the music of the 40s and 50s who couldn't stand the rock music of the 60s. My parents nor their friends listened to contemporary music in the 60s and 70s unless it was Babara Steisand. Liza Minnilli, etc.

I think top 40 music has always had more crap than good songs, though the ratio might have been better in the 60s. I remember in the 70s m would look ay friends and I would look at the top 40 charts and typically identify just a couple of song we liked. Fortunately, there was better music available on AOR (mostly rock) and R&B radio. Even when we think of all the singles we liked from certain years, we are remembering the cream of the crop.

Today it takes a lot of effort to find good music unless you really like rap. For me, it is worth the effort because I have always preferred to play more current music than oldies. I think IFor instance, you would see many middle aged people at Prince concerts in then 80s but would see many of them in the 2000s. I was a 26 year old who saw the Purple Rain tour at the Superdome, and I wasa among the oldest group. People in their 40s were not embracing Prince or other musical acts of the era for the most part.

Good stuff for seeing Prince live during his peak, I didn't see him live until 1988 Lovesexy tour August 88. Ah the 80s the last great decade for music. But I see what you're saying and you sound like my age so you'll understand this better. Throughout the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s we had so many legends who were dominating their era's with timeless albums and singles, they broke barriers like racial barriers, records etc etc, they made a cultural impact, so many historical moments happened then, so many innovative moments too. 50s-80s was the golden age of many genre's rock, soul, funk, pop, reggae, jazz and I'd even throw in disco (I loved disco back then lol but I had many white folks trying to beat me up for it 🤣). You and me saw most of it, I'm sure there are dozens of posters who are OUR ages too who can relate. If the person is younger than us, let's say the millennial generation then they wouldn't understand. The 90s, 00s and 10s didn't have this, it just went downhill and never recovered. RIP to music 50s-80s. Thanks for your input though 👍

Enjoyed both of your posts. I took the incredible music of the 60'-80's for granted, never thinking

it could become endangered.

Re: Millennials. I would imagine if they grew up with sophisticated musical parents who played quality, diverse music

on a frequent basis would likely have an understanding/appreciation of the 'older stuff.'

I am also not drawn to rap/hip hop but the other day while listening to a college radio station, the DJ played Queen Latifa's 'Ladies First," which I really dug; maybe it was the focus on lyrics/enunciation as well as beat.

Perhaps this is why I love The Black-Eyed Peas and Prince's 'rap'; Sexy MF, Face Down, Pussy Control (I know), Gett Off, etc.

[Edited 12/12/20 11:59am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #52 posted 12/12/20 12:06pm

fortuneandsere
ndipity

OP - you are partly right. The 60s were somewhat overrated if comparing to the 70s and 80s. Many solo artists whom you mention reached their peak in the 70s. But some continued on strong into the 80s as well, Bowie and Rundgren most notably, for me. The 70s', often revered and known for bands like The Rolling Stone, Pink Floyd, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Fleetwood Mac and others, is a period where the real quality comes from SOLO artists.

I think BAND music from the 80s and the 90s comfortably surpasses the 70s stuff. So you really need to dig deeper if you believe the 90s was a poor decade for music. And probably the most consistent of all the prolific bands - if not the best - were making music up until 2009.

The world's problems like climate change can only be solved through strategic long-term thinking, not expediency. In other words all the govts. need sacking!

If you can add value to someone's life then why not. Especially if it colors their days...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #53 posted 12/12/20 12:08pm

JayCrawford

Margot said:



JayCrawford said:


gandorb said:

I think there is good music out there to be found, but it is rarely on the radio. Most of the biggest acts the past 20 years are in the rap category, some talented and some are crap. Rap is not the musical genre that I typically listen to, so it is hard for me to really assess how good or bad the main ones are. It is like someone who grew up loving the music of the 40s and 50s who couldn't stand the rock music of the 60s. My parents nor their friends listened to contemporary music in the 60s and 70s unless it was Babara Steisand. Liza Minnilli, etc.


I think top 40 music has always had more crap than good songs, though the ratio might have been better in the 60s. I remember in the 70s m would look ay friends and I would look at the top 40 charts and typically identify just a couple of song we liked. Fortunately, there was better music available on AOR (mostly rock) and R&B radio. Even when we think of all the singles we liked from certain years, we are remembering the cream of the crop.


Today it takes a lot of effort to find good music unless you really like rap. For me, it is worth the effort because I have always preferred to play more current music than oldies. I think IFor instance, you would see many middle aged people at Prince concerts in then 80s but would see many of them in the 2000s. I was a 26 year old who saw the Purple Rain tour at the Superdome, and I wasa among the oldest group. People in their 40s were not embracing Prince or other musical acts of the era for the most part.



Good stuff for seeing Prince live during his peak, I didn't see him live until 1988 Lovesexy tour August 88. Ah the 80s the last great decade for music. But I see what you're saying and you sound like my age so you'll understand this better. Throughout the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s we had so many legends who were dominating their era's with timeless albums and singles, they broke barriers like racial barriers, records etc etc, they made a cultural impact, so many historical moments happened then, so many innovative moments too. 50s-80s was the golden age of many genre's rock, soul, funk, pop, reggae, jazz and I'd even throw in disco (I loved disco back then lol but I had many white folks trying to beat me up for it 🤣). You and me saw most of it, I'm sure there are dozens of posters who are OUR ages too who can relate. If the person is younger than us, let's say the millennial generation then they wouldn't understand. The 90s, 00s and 10s didn't have this, it just went downhill and never recovered. RIP to music 50s-80s. Thanks for your input though 👍




Enjoyed both of your posts. I took the incredible music of the 60'-80's for granted, never thinking


it could become endangered.


Re: Millennials. I would imagine if they grew up with sophisticated musical parents who played quality, diverse music


on a frequent basis would likely have an understanding/appreciation of the 'older stuff.'


I am also not drawn to rap/hip hop but the other day while listening to a college radio station, the DJ played Queen Latifa's 'Ladies First," which I really dug; maybe it was the focus on lyrics/enunciation as well as beat.


Perhaps this is why I love The Black-Eyed Peas and Prince's 'rap'; Sexy MF, Face Down, Pussy Control (I know), Gett Off, etc.




[Edited 12/12/20 11:59am]




Yeah, we sure did take it for granted. I'm glad to have brought as much records as I can and see many of my favourites even though the traveling was a pain in the ass, it was 100% worth it.

Is like we saw the birth, peak and death of every genres.

Amazing how hard life hits you sometimes 🤣


Take care and stay safe👍
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #54 posted 12/12/20 2:49pm

MotownSubdivis
ion

JayCrawford said:

looby said:



EmmaMcG said:


So called "popular" music has always been very much a mixed bag. A lot of those artists mentioned in the OP were never big commercial acts. Even Prince had relatively little chart success. Shakin' Stevens had more UK top 10 hits in the 80s than Prince did. So even during his heyday, Prince was never in the same category as the likes of Michael Jackson and Madonna. Now, I think his music is miles ahead of pretty much any 80s act but talent has never been equal to chart success. And it's the same now. The charts are predominantly filled with crap, manufactured pop acts. But great music still exists and just like most other decades, you have to look outside the charts to find it. Acts like Mayer Hawthorne, Ekkah, Tuxedo, Chromeo, Niki & The Dove, Boulevards, Chromatics, Gaslight Anthem, Harts etc are all relatively new and all put out quality music.

Uh, excuse you! To Prince fans, Michael Jackson and Madonna were "never in the same category" as Prince! All Michael could do better than Prince, was dance, but Prince wrote his own songs, played his own instruments, and could sing his ass off, in both low and high pitch. He wasn't some one note, commercialized puppet, who only thought that "making the charts and having chart success" was his end all and be all.

[Edited 12/10/20 11:44am]



As much as I like Michaels stuff and I grew up with the man's career from the beginning to the end. Quincy was the mastermind behind his 3 big albums
https://giphy.com/gifs/mo...OCKkvwCIqX
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #55 posted 12/12/20 3:48pm

alphastreet

Mj and Quincy were something special and the short lengths of their albums was perfect, but in my opinion, mj was still putting out great albums after Quincy
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #56 posted 12/12/20 4:23pm

JayCrawford

MotownSubdivision said:

JayCrawford said:



As much as I like Michaels stuff and I grew up with the man's career from the beginning to the end. Quincy was the mastermind behind his 3 big albums
https://giphy.com/gifs/mo...OCKkvwCIqX



Is fine if you disagree... Why did Michael Jackson request to work with Quincy if you don't mind answering?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #57 posted 12/12/20 4:57pm

alphastreet

JayCrawford said:

MotownSubdivision said:




Is fine if you disagree... Why did Michael Jackson request to work with Quincy if you don't mind answering?


He liked the work done on the wiz soundtrack, told Quincy he’s looking for someone to produce his solo album and he offered to do it
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #58 posted 12/12/20 5:04pm

MotownSubdivis
ion

JayCrawford said:

MotownSubdivision said:




Is fine if you disagree... Why did Michael Jackson request to work with Quincy if you don't mind answering?
He needed someone to help bring out his vision as is the job of a producer. Also, it was actually Quincy who volunteered his services to Michael. The latter was looking for a producer and approached Q to ask his opinion only for Q to take on the job himself.

Q drfinitely played his part and was a seminal piece of the puzzle but in giving him credit for his contributions, many tend to overlook Mike's talents and contributions in the studio. MJ already had composed the beats to some of his songs and simply needed Q to help fine-tune them and lend his expertise in fleshing them out and adding seasoning to the meat, if you will. It's not as though Mike just chilled while Quincy took over the operation; he was involved every step of the way.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #59 posted 12/12/20 6:17pm

Margot

MotownSubdivision said:

JayCrawford said:
Is fine if you disagree... Why did Michael Jackson request to work with Quincy if you don't mind answering?
He needed someone to help bring out his vision as is the job of a producer. Also, it was actually Quincy who volunteered his services to Michael. The latter was looking for a producer and approached Q to ask his opinion only for Q to take on the job himself. Q drfinitely played his part and was a seminal piece of the puzzle but in giving him credit for his contributions, many tend to overlook Mike's talents and contributions in the studio. MJ already had composed the beats to some of his songs and simply needed Q to help fine-tune them and lend his expertise in fleshing them out and adding seasoning to the meat, if you will. It's not as though Mike just chilled while Quincy took over the operation; he was involved every step of the way.

Very interesting, thanks.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 5 <12345>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > What has happened to music ?