Kids Listening To Older Generation Music

[Jebus]

This makes me wonder something: Did some kids in the 70s listen to 40s music and thought that was better? That may or may not be ironic..

Rarely as there was so little recorded music pre 1950s and the sound quality was quite iffy. There were perhaps a few young jazz and ragtime aficionados who would listen to 1940s music but they were probably not considered the "coolest" kids on the block.

[Jebus]

2. There were more undiscovered melodies. These days it's hard to come up with a good melody that someone else has not already written.

We're just 30 years later, though; music is thousands of years old. I'm not sure; it's plausible, but I wonder if there's anything new under the sun, or we just forget stuff people already came up with, making it seem new.

The limitation there may be more our knowledge and access to older music, thus biasing our perceptions of what is original rather than the quality of the music itself

Here are a couple of excellent videos related to this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOlDewpCfZQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAcjV60RnRw

[Red]

I forgot to mention that I like some music of today. Every now and again, there's a needle in the haystack of awful, ear bleed inducing, kick to the testicles kind of music that we see all the time. And another question: I saw that you guys said that there was a lot of shitty music 40 years ago. Do you think there is more bad music now than ever?

[Dream Sphere]

We're just 30 years later, though; music is thousands of years old. I'm not sure; it's plausible, but I wonder if there's anything new under the sun, or we just forget stuff people already came up with, making it seem new.

The limitation there may be more our knowledge and access to older music, thus biasing our perceptions of what is original rather than the quality of the music itself

Here are a couple of excellent videos related to this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOlDewpCfZQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAcjV60RnRw

The video on those songs which all use the same four chords in succession was interesting and fun in their demonstration of the similarity, though it wasn't something I was unaware of. My knowledge of music theory isn't very good, but from listening to all of what I've listened to, I've found even when songs do use the same chords (as well as melodies and other aspects) that they can sound very different if an adequate amount of the other arrangements are different. There's also that most of those songs are Pop songs, or songs which are the popular forefront for the genre, which generally are the most derivative (or likewise unwilling to experiment) representations of the genres, in how they try to appeal to the lowest common denominator so that the song is easy to appreciate in its familiarity, consonance and therefore accessibility, which tends to result in more especially generic melodies/arrangements to accompany those familiar chords.

Basically, that's because there's a much narrower amount of musical ideas which appeal to broad audiences than all the possible musical ideas out there, so that restricts experimentation since, the more composers move out of those easy going streams, the fewer people they'll be able to reach, which makes them reluctant to do so if they happen to value significant popularity. There's also that some stuff just happens to sound good or rather consonant to people automatically, so they focus on that, ("why listen to what sounds off when I can have immediate and easy gratification?") and if they don't branch out and slowly wade into what could be considered dissonant by many, then they'll limit themselves even if they could eventually find the "dissonant" melodies pleasing. I'm personally quite glad that I happened to let some dissonant melodies become enjoyable to me, because they make up a good portion of what I really like about the music I enjoy, however I don't think anyone should force themselves into it for the sake of trying to like more music, but rather if there's stuff which you're partially familiar with and enjoy enough to tolerate the dissonance of the song that comes with it, then maybe that will help you branch out ever further.

So, I'm going to share about a dozen songs from the past ten years, and while I know they're derivative, I pose the question of; are these really that similar to what came before, three decades prior or further into the past, and does the music having similarities between each other really invalidate them even though they bring something new to the table on the whole side?


Thy Catafalque - "Alföldi Kozmosz" -- (You know folk, classical, likely ambient too, but has anyone heard something that's really sounded like this before structurally?) -- http://thycatafalqueuk.bandcamp.com/tra ... di-kozmosz

Cor Scorpii - "Our Fate, Our Curse" -- (There's apparent folk and classical influence. Yet, the arrangements of instruments and melodies, plus the overall production make this apparently different, too. -- http://corscorpii.bandcamp.com/track/our-fate-our-curse

Sigh - "A Messenger from Tomorrow" -- (This is an amalgamation of quite a number of preexisting styles, but is there a single song you've heard which shares 25% of the same melodies/arrangements?) -- http://candlelightrecordsusa.bandcamp.c ... m-tomorrow

Absu - "Earth Ripper" -- (This has jazz, psychedelic, and progressive influences on an extreme metal base. Yet, does it sound so similar to the three most formerly adjectives as to be considered an unworthy rehash?) -- http://candlelightrecordsusa.bandcamp.c ... rth-ripper

Blind Guardian - "Twilight of the Gods" -- https://soundcloud.com/nuclearblastreco ... f-the-gods

In Vain - "Hymne Til Havet" -- http://invainband.bandcamp.com/track/hymne-til-havet

Gire - "A Teremtés és a Tisztaság -- (By the same guy behind Thy Catafalque. Yet, there are clear differences despite their similarities to each other.) -- http://blood-music.bandcamp.com/track/a ... onus-track

Inquisition - "Joined by Dark Matter Repelled by Dark Energy" -- http://inquisitionbm.bandcamp.com/track ... ark-energy

Lethian Dreams - "White Gold" -- (Some familiar stuff, but doesn't the mix of melodies/arrangements and production bring this into something unique as a whole? This'll be the last time I'll reiterate that sentiment here, 'cause I'm starting to sound like a broken record ) -- http://lethiandreams.bandcamp.com/track/white-gold

Akphaezya - "The Great Vortex of Kaltaz" -- http://akphaezya.bandcamp.com/track/the ... -of-kaltaz

StarGazer - "The Grand Equalizer" -- http://nuclearwarnowproductions.bandcam ... -equalizer

Midnight Odyssey - "Hunter of the Celestial Sea" -- http://i-voidhangerrecords.bandcamp.com ... estial-sea

[Mateo3112]

I listened the Beatles when i was 10 and i did say "I was born in the wrong era" but as an expression.
Something i noticed is that it is sorta becoming a trend, people nowadays tend to listen to old music just for the sake of bragging, at least where i live. I had an old friend who said if one day old music became a trend she'd kill herself (Not because she didn't like it, but because she liked it and if it became a tren she'd not be as "unique" as before (Hipster detected xD)), obviously as a joke, but still, it's happening. I see more and more people listening to older music, that doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that they brag about it. "I listen to Bohemian Rhapsody, look how cool i am", that grinds my gears ¬¬ But i can't stop them so i'll just ignore them, eventually that trend will pass away as every trend does and they'll go back to listening shitty music xD
I despise teenagers (I probably shouldn't say that, i'm one after all xD).

[Red]

Trust me, if you were around during the 1950s-60s, you would have HATED the Beatles. Just think of The Beatles as the One Direction of the mid 20th century.

[Dream Sphere]

I listened the Beatles when i was 10 and i did say "I was born in the wrong era" but as an expression.
Something i noticed is that it is sorta becoming a trend, people nowadays tend to listen to old music just for the sake of bragging, at least where i live. I had an old friend who said if one day old music became a trend she'd kill herself (Not because she didn't like it, but because she liked it and if it became a tren she'd not be as "unique" as before (Hipster detected xD)), obviously as a joke, but still, it's happening. I see more and more people listening to older music, that doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that they brag about it. "I listen to Bohemian Rhapsody, look how cool i am", that grinds my gears ¬¬ But i can't stop them so i'll just ignore them, eventually that trend will pass away as every trend does and they'll go back to listening shitty music xD
I despise teenagers (I probably shouldn't say that, i'm one after all xD).

Yeah, I'm likewise fine with people only liking and preferring music from a specific time period or style, but I just find it kinda annoying when they act "holier-than-thou" for liking it in opposition to whatever styles or periods they have some distaste for. Kinda as you mentioned, I've found it somewhat odd how "hipsters" seemingly often latch onto stuff which really isn't giving them "hipster cred" even though they seem to think it does. Like, "Bohemian Rhapsody" is one of the most popular songs, by one of the most popular bands of the 1970's, and still has remained very popular to this day. Unless I've misunderstood what a "hipster" is (and granted, there does seem to be contention around what the word really means,) but I figure it's a person who purposely tries to find stuff before it gets "hip" or popular for the sake of the social "cred" in having been "hip" to it, or "being in the know" before others, for the sake of that, however trivial it is. Though, sometimes I feel that people do get wrongly labelled hipsters for liking stuff that just isn't popular. On the other hand, I think the bad connotations of the word are really only deserving of the people who intentionally try to find obscure music for the sake of bragging about liking obscure/anti-mainstream stuff.

Anyways, I'm not sure if this trend will pass, at least for the next long while. I'm curious of how long it's really gone on, because I can remember the trend in kids bragging about liking 60's, 70's, and 80's music being the case more than ten years ago. I've wondered if bragging about liking 80's music wasn't cool for some time, because I remember for some time that expressing a liking of music from the 90's would be met with criticism, however more recently it seems that the 90's are becoming a bit more accepted as being a "quality music decade," among those similar groups of people.

Also, about your dislike for teens. Well, I think you might be surprised of just how many silly and ridiculously behaving adults in their 20's, 30's, 40's, and onward there are around, who say stuff that's very similarly ridiculous to what you seem to be bothered by by your peers. There have been plenty of times on forums where I've thought a poster must be in their early teens, based on their behavior (no offense intended, young teens ) but, unless they were lying, which I guess they could be, they had later stated themselves to be in their 30's, or older. I guess the point, which I don't feel I've done a great job arguing, is that some people regardless of their age may act pretty poorly at times, though you could always look for yourself and see, I don't think it would be hard at all to find examples, and I could even find some particularly poignant examples too if you actually wanted me to after this. However, I doubt there's been any serious study on the topic of "general frequency of ridiculous statements among age groups" and I'm doubtful how it could reasonably even be put together, but if there is something similar, then I think it would be worth a look out of curiosity. So, my examples would be just anecdotal, however it's worth noting that yours of teens are too, and so they likely aren't accurately indicative of any extrapolated amount of teens, and mine aren't of other age groups either.

Trust me, if you were around during the 1950s-60s, you would have HATED the Beatles. Just think of The Beatles as the One Direction of the mid 20th century.

If someone actually likes One Direction's sound, but actively denounces them for their recent emergence into popularity, then maybe they would've acted similarly towards The Beatles. I personally don't find much that's particularly bad about One Direction, they're really accessible, easy going modern pop music, which is decent. However, their music is bland and boring to me, even though it doesn't actively offend me, so I never intentionally listen to them, because I get nothing out of it. Whereas, while I also find some of The Beatles early stuff to be somewhat bland, I like their later stuff and some of their earlier stuff a fair bit, actually. Correct me if I'm skimming over something 1D has done, but I just find that The Beatles typically have more going on in their music, and just created stuff with generally more interesting substance, however easy to digest it was, though they also did quite a bit of somewhat more out-there/relatively experimental stuff too, as I figure many people know. If we're talking about The Beatles stuff which is near equally pop-y to 1D, well people could have a general liking of one over the other, despite their similarities, since they do still have their differences, and that would be that. They wouldn't need to like both or have to choose between liking either the "more current one" or the "historical, critically acclaimed one," they could just like what they happen to like in this case.



On another note, I do find the comments around "all musical ideas have been exhausted" quite grating. So, I would just like to remind anyone who holds that view, of my previous post in this thread, and I ask for them to argue their stance against what I've said, and maybe give some of those songs a try, to see if you may be surprised and want to reevaluate your stance, or hear them and argue how I may be wrong in my assertion that the differences that these songs have to ones from prior decades makes them unique and interesting enough to be considered fresh. Though, I think I understand how music is subjective in how people's hearing faculties/tone perception and music speakers can affect the experience, so maybe I couldn't just ever get on the same page as some people with this. Though, maybe people could challenge the parts of my argument around my wording and my seeming understanding of it, however it may be that if they can't hear what I hear, or I can't hear what they hear, that the base of our conclusions may not be able to effectively come across to one another? I guess that there are general statements which could be undeniably correct, but it wouldn't be nuanced, kind of like "There is new music that as a whole has differences to each individual whole song that has come before." but claims like "this is as fresh and innovative as what came before" doesn't seem to be a clear argument. Though, I do just find getting others' viewpoints interesting and seeing if we could have our minds changed on stuff for the sake of interesting discussion. Though, the discussion I'm wanting to have isn't a particularly important one. So, I would understand if people here would rather focus their energies on ones which could result in great, positive change for sentient beings. Rather than having this conversation, which may only be something to do out of personal/social interest for some.

[Mateo3112]

Trust me, if you were around during the 1950s-60s, you would have HATED the Beatles. Just think of The Beatles as the One Direction of the mid 20th century.

HELL NO! I would've loved them, you can't compare The Beatles and One Direction just because they are both famous. The Beatles had songs with MEANING, something i doubt 1D will ever have. The reason i like The Beatles is songs like "A day in the life" and "The fool on the hill", they have meaning, 1D only has love songs, and those which are not love songs are covers of other songs, like "Wonderwall" and "Total eclypse of the heart" for example. The Beatles also had like 2 songs of every genre, that is one of the many reasons people like them so much. 1D only has love and happy songs. If 1D had deep songs, i would listen to them too, but nope, they know what their audience wants, so they try to only make them happy, unlike The Beatles, who experimented with their songs and came out of their comfort zone very frequently.
I may sound butthurt, but i swear i'm not, i'm just bad at writing in english xD

[miniboes]

if you were around during the 1950s-60s, you would have HATED the Beatles. Just think of The Beatles as the One Direction of the mid 20th century.

Where in the world do you base this on?

Trust me,

no

[Red]

Well.most likely the fact that they were a popular boy band, which is usually despised by the male crowd. Sure things change over time, but the fact that it was about love, it didn't really gel with them. They were also very repetitive, just listen to yellow submarine.