Take a gander over to Rick Beato's channel on youtube. He's a musician/producer and spends a lot of time talking about the craft of making and recording music. He's done a number of video's talking about "today's" music (autotune, music industry, drum machines, etc.).
He's really broadened my understanding of "rock" music.
Sorry, here's the link to his channel:
I gather from my kids and their friends that most kids high school age and younger will state that the music of the 60's, 70's ,or 80's, or all three decades, was better than anything since and especially current music.
I don't know about the 20 and 30 year olds . They probably agree.
I liked the pop music of the 90's too . Spanish and English language. There is always good new stuff. My kids had some skrillex and imagine dragons that I like, especially if I try to put myself in their shoes. Who did that "I don't wanna die song"? not bad. I am sure there is a lot as I am not "tuned" in. Don't be too cranky boomers.
Yes, most modern music is junk food. But there is quality music being made all the time if you look for it.
As someone who probably enjoys most of the music the old-timers in this thread like, let me give you 3 artists to consider:
Temper Trap
Glass Animals
James Bay
Howie Gordy wrote:
I have a sick weird feeling that Lil Nas X is the next Milli Vanilli
The big thing about Milli Vanilli was that they couldn't sing and they were lip sinc. Now everyone does that. There are plenty of Milli Vanillis out there now. Yes it may technically be their voice in the song but it's just so autotuned you can't hear it.
sefgs wrote:
I watched the Grammys tonight. What I noticed, and this is true for most music the last two decades at least, is that the music seems like junk food. It sounds good with soaring vocals and such but there's no substance there like it was in the 80's, 70's 60's and before for that matter. I think the technology of today allows music to be created so easily that it's produced for quick listening. It doesn't stand the test of time like earlier music. Prior music had to be recorded in a studio and was very expensive so it had to be great. Right? Technology has done good things but it's also ruined music, as a whole. Does anyone else feel this way?
I so miss songs like "Build me up Buttercup" and "The Monster Mash", and who can not love "Young Girl"?
Facts are worthless wrote:
Howie Gordy wrote:
I have a sick weird feeling that Lil Nas X is the next Milli Vanilli
The big thing about Milli Vanilli was that they couldn't sing and they were lip sinc. Now everyone does that. There are plenty of Milli Vanillis out there now. Yes it may technically be their voice in the song but it's just so autotuned you can't hear it.
The real story behind Mill Vanilli is a bit different. The producers had the "real" singers first. But they thought those singers were visually unappealing. So they went out to search for better looking guys. I don't know whether the "front men" could sing or not, but that was irrelevant to the producers. They insisted on singing live, but the producers rejected it, because people would notice that their voices were different from the recording.
I know their story. Ugly people sang their songs and they just lip sinc. Someone pressed them to sing live and they couldn't. It's the same thing that would happen to a variety of artists today if you tried to make them sing without autotune or music.
Pop music has horrible mixing that exists to make the entire song's dynamic range near the top end o you'll hear it over other noise. The only hope of avoiding this is to listen to indie bands you don't rely on radio play.