Progarchives.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: The longevity of prog (and rock) music
  FAQ FAQ  Forum SearchSearch  Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

The longevity of prog (and rock) music

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Author
Message
Stool Man View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2087
Post Options Post Options   Quote Stool Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The longevity of prog (and rock) music
    Posted: March 20 2014 at 09:16
Originally posted by Stool Man

For an approximate idea of how today's (or yesterday's) music will be regarded in 100 years time, just consider how we currently regard the music of 100 years ago.
 
 
Here's the wiki page for music in 1914:
It includes a list of 93 popular songs published that year. Only 19 of them have a wiki page of their own.  Let's take that as an indication of the other 74 songs having been forgotten nowadays (I duuno how else to measure such a thing, except if it has its own page then it's remembered)
 
Trying again but with the music of 1913:
73 published popular songs, of which only 12 have their own wiki page. 
 
Once more, with 1915:
84 published popular songs, of which only 10 have their own page.
 
Total for three consecutive years: 250 popular songs published, of which only 41 are suffieciently remembered now to have been given their own wiki pages.  That means 83.6% of those songs have been largely forgotten (there'll always be fans of those old songs, of course, just as there'll always be fans of the more obscure composers.
rotten hound of the burnie crew
Back to Top
Prog 74 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2014
Location: USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 169
Post Options Post Options   Quote Prog 74 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 09:24
Sadly one does not need to be able read, write or play music anymore in order to make it.  As long as you have a microphone, some vulgar lyrics and a turntable you're all set!
Back to Top
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3873
Post Options Post Options   Quote tamijo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 09:25
To make things worse i bet that list only hold a fraction of what was published those years.
Back to Top
silverpot View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 19 2008
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 665
Post Options Post Options   Quote silverpot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 10:44
Out of those 250 songs Irving Berlin has 39 song writing credits. That's pretty amazing for a three year period. His name will probably be remembered for another 100 years.
There's no business like show business. LOL
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 16409
Post Options Post Options   Quote The T Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 11:06
Originally posted by Prog 74

Sadly one does not need to be able read, write or play music anymore in order to make it.  As long as you have a microphone, some vulgar lyrics and a turntable you're all set!
And then for some reason once you make it big and become a start you need 5 people to make your three-minute songs that are even simpler than the ones you made with your mic and turntable Dead
Back to Top
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3873
Post Options Post Options   Quote tamijo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 12:10
Originally posted by The T

Originally posted by Prog 74

Sadly one does not need to be able read, write or play music anymore in order to make it.  As long as you have a microphone, some vulgar lyrics and a turntable you're all set!
And then for some reason once you make it big and become a start you need 5 people to make your three-minute songs that are even simpler than the ones you made with your mic and turntable Dead


You can make music with a stone and a piece of wood, or any kind of tube.
But you need a powerplant to record it.


Edited by tamijo - March 20 2014 at 12:10
Back to Top
TODDLER View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: August 28 2009
Location: Vineland, N.J.
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2562
Post Options Post Options   Quote TODDLER Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 12:43
Originally posted by cstack3

...I tend to think that Prog will likely hold up better than Justin Bieber...

Sorry, just my typical JB slam!  LOL
Maybe if Chris Squire and Keith Emerson threw eggs at people's windows ..they would be remembered in a hundred years.
Back to Top
Prog 74 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2014
Location: USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 169
Post Options Post Options   Quote Prog 74 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 13:24
Originally posted by TODDLER

Originally posted by cstack3

...I tend to think that Prog will likely hold up better than Justin Bieber...

Sorry, just my typical JB slam!  LOL
Maybe if Chris Squire and Keith Emerson threw eggs at people's windows ..they would be remembered in a hundred years.
Nice!  LOL  Or they could get high with their fathers and berate stewardesses.

Edited by Prog 74 - March 20 2014 at 13:24
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
Post Options Post Options   Quote The Dark Elf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 21:23
Originally posted by Atavachron

Originally posted by The Dark Elf

Originally posted by Atavachron

Originally posted by The Dark Elf

In 100 years I doubt very much there will be music as we know it, and that would include classical, prog, rock, bluegrass, etc. Those musical genres of antiquity will be relegated to the few schools of higher learning left that include such studies as art, literature or music (literary works will be written in a variant of Internet shorthand and phonetics, with brightly colored pictures).
I doubt it.
Why doubt it? One thing you should never do is underestimate human greed...or our amazing capacity for stupidity. The arts, already underfunded in many curricula, will eventually be defunded in schools as an unnecessary expense. Rap has all but eliminated blues, jazz and R&B in the black culture, and that trend is spreading. A century from now? No one will be able to write a grammatically correct sentence, let alone attempt a Vivaldi concerto.    

Except I have no doubt a century ago people thought the same thing.   But I'm guessing your response would likely be "And they were right!!"   So I can see this exchange going in circles.   And BTW when has attempting to write a Vivaldi concerto been a benchmark of human culture?; Vivaldi was a benchmark, Vivaldi was a genius.   But there have always been and will always be far more people attempting his accomplishments and falling short.   Therefore what?   Not everyone can be a Vivaldi, sometimes not even a Mozart can be a Vivaldi.
When I said "attempt a Vivaldi concerto" I meant perform one, not compose one. 

As far as people a century ago saying the same thing, I don't believe they had quite the grasp of technology we do, nor did things move at such an accelerated pace. A century ago, many young people listened to what their parents listened to, and their parents before them. 1914 could be seen as an end of an era, though, but no one could really come to grips with the monumental changes that would occur over the next few years, save in hindsight. Some spent their whole lives coming to grips with the Great War.
Please pay a visit to my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music reviews, literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47836
Post Options Post Options   Quote Atavachron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 21:48
^ Bollocks.

They had the same grasp of whatever "technologies" were a part of their lives.

This attitude reflects the absurd notion that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had.   It is utter nonsense and indicates a lack of historical understanding.

Back to Top
Jzrk View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 21 2014
Location: Chicago
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 41
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jzrk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 22:03
There are a lot of good thoughts in this thread.the music will be available because of the digital age.
The question will be will people still find it appealing many many years to come?
I would argue that now most of the younger generation isn't interested in prog.But that doesn't mean it will die off.I see a lot of sub genres being picked up and played by young bands.I still see rock bands,blues,Blues rock,metal,still continuing on.So hip hop didn't kill as much of the past music forms off as much as rock did in the sixties.
I see high school kids wearing Hendrix,Zep ,and Beatles t shirts so some music is still having an impact way past it's inception.Now you never know if a new type of music comes along and renders everything else passť like rock did for popular music for the youth in the sixties and 70s.As far as prog goes I think for the foreseeable future it will still survive .The quality of the music will appeal to many more coming of age .Granted it may be a smaller nitch.
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Mozambique
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1767
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kati Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 22:10
Originally posted by The T


What will happen with the prog rock we hear today in, say, 100 years? Will it still be here? Will it still be known? I ask because as of right now it's difficult to ascertain the longevity of†any†artist or genre in rock music in general. The oldest truly popular rock artist today might be Elvis and he's still not really†that†old or†that†popular anymore.†<span style="line-height: 1.2;">Yes, our bands like Yes, Genesis, KC, etc, are still revered and popular among prog fans but at least a good percentage of the people listening to them are people†</span><i style="line-height: 1.2;">who were fans from the start, in those bands' heyday.<span style="line-height: 1.2;">†</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;"></span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;">I'm talking right now about levels of longevity like the ones that some classical composers (check my avatar). Even if few people will still listen to music composed by them, even in 100 years they will probably still be studied and their music still used, if only in academic settings (I certainly hope not).†</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;"></span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;">But what about rock and prog artists? I think The Beatles might be the ones legitimately aiming for immortality,†</span><i style="line-height: 1.2;">true†<span style="line-height: 1.2;">immortality</span><i style="line-height: 1.2;">†(<span style="line-height: 1.2;">like in "everybody who watched us perform live is dead and their children too" immortality). Opinions?†</span>


The T, hello!

Good question.
The T, hello!
I donít know if any of us can really answer that. The Beatles certainly have stood the test of time so far and so has Elvis, however to me it seems that at first prog artists were let down by the music industry (corporate suits), currently most if not all have a day job to support their family because being prog musicians certainly is not enough to pay their bills, right now techno and rap fans seem to be more united and pro-active. Unless we start to promote and become more welcoming of new comers I really donít see any future in prog and this would be a big shame. Prog music has no comparison to the other ones I mentioned as I donít consider that music really.
Another hug to you
When playing strip poker, make sure you are wearing a lot of clothes! or google will ban you ;)
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
Post Options Post Options   Quote The Dark Elf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 22:24
Originally posted by Atavachron

^ Bollocks.

They had the same grasp of whatever "technologies" were a part of their lives.

This attitude reflects the absurd notion that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had.   It is utter nonsense and indicates a lack of historical understanding.

Double bollocks back at ya, bud.

Where exactly did  I say "that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had"? Don't tell me I lack historical understanding -- your perspective is entirely skewed, and you have an annoying habit of making things up as you go along (wonderful if you are a fantasist, but not so much while attempting sentient dialogue). Like your dim diatribe regarding Vivaldi.

Most of the world's population 100 years ago did not have automobiles, owned horses as a means of conveyance and lived a rural agricultural lifestyle -- without radio, television, and in many instances electricity -- like generation upon generation before them. Hell, serfdom in Russia was officially abolished in 1861, but did not end in some provinces until 1892. It had nothing to do with people's intellectual capacity, but their circumstances and their means of economic survival.

It is inane to think that people pre-WWI had the same outlook, technologically speaking, as anyone living today, because the necessity for such technology was unnecessary for the time. The pace of life has accelerated in lock step with the pace of technological advancement. I remember my grandmother crying as we watched the lunar landing on TV in 1969. She was amazed, and started to recall taking a horse cart with her father to market in downtown Detroit. It really affected her in a bewildering way that I, who grew up watching the space race on TV, could not then comprehend.
Please pay a visit to my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music reviews, literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Mozambique
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1767
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kati Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 22:41
Originally posted by The Dark Elf


Originally posted by Atavachron

^ Bollocks.They had the same grasp of whatever "technologies" were a part of their lives.This attitude reflects the absurd notion that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had.†† It is utter nonsense and indicates a lack of historical understanding.

Double bollocks back at ya, bud.
Where exactly did †I say "<span style="line-height: 1.2;">that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had"?†</span><span style="line-height: 1.2;">Don't tell me I lack historical understanding -- your perspective is entirely skewed, and you have an annoying habit of making things up as you go along (wonderful if you are a fantasist, but not so much while attempting sentient dialogue). Like your dim diatribe regarding Vivaldi.</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;"></span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;">Most of the world's population 100 years ago did not have automobiles, owned horses as a means of conveyance and lived a rural agricultural lifestyle -- without radio, television, and in many instances electricity -- like generation upon generation before them. Hell, serfdom in Russia was officially abolished in 1861, but did not end in some provinces until 1892.†</span><span style="line-height: 1.2;">It had nothing to do with people's intellectual capacity, but their circumstances and their means of economic survival.</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;"></span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;">It is inane to think that people pre-WWI had the same outlook, technologically speaking, as anyone living today, because the necessity for such technology was unnecessary for the time. The pace of life has accelerated in lock step with the pace of technological advancement. I remember my grandmother crying as we watched the lunar landing on TV in 1969. She was amazed, and started to recall taking a horse cart with her father to market in downtown Detroit. It really affected her in a bewildering way that I, who grew up watching the space race on TV, could not then comprehend.</span>


I have to disagree with you both, i.e. it has been proven/well known that people who lived East Germany conformed to their life's, everyday same thing thus no ambition whatsoever however West Germany were focused in progress each individual trying to exceed the other (as stressful as it might seem) they had a goal/purpose. When both sites united one was way more advanced compared to the other.

I truly believe that the brain needs to be challenged and conquer to become more creative.

Edited by Kati - March 20 2014 at 22:43
When playing strip poker, make sure you are wearing a lot of clothes! or google will ban you ;)
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Mozambique
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1767
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kati Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 23:01
Originally posted by Kati

Originally posted by The Dark Elf


Originally posted by Atavachron

^ Bollocks.They had the same grasp of whatever "technologies" were a part of their lives.This attitude reflects the absurd notion that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had.†† It is utter nonsense and indicates a lack of historical understanding.

Double bollocks back at ya, bud.
Where exactly did †I say "<span style="line-height: 1.2;">that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had"?†</span><span style="line-height: 1.2;">Don't tell me I lack historical understanding -- your perspective is entirely skewed, and you have an annoying habit of making things up as you go along (wonderful if you are a fantasist, but not so much while attempting sentient dialogue). Like your dim diatribe regarding Vivaldi.</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;"></span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;">Most of the world's population 100 years ago did not have automobiles, owned horses as a means of conveyance and lived a rural agricultural lifestyle -- without radio, television, and in many instances electricity -- like generation upon generation before them. Hell, serfdom in Russia was officially abolished in 1861, but did not end in some provinces until 1892.†</span><span style="line-height: 1.2;">It had nothing to do with people's intellectual capacity, but their circumstances and their means of economic survival.</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;"></span>
<span style="line-height: 1.2;">It is inane to think that people pre-WWI had the same outlook, technologically speaking, as anyone living today, because the necessity for such technology was unnecessary for the time. The pace of life has accelerated in lock step with the pace of technological advancement. I remember my grandmother crying as we watched the lunar landing on TV in 1969. She was amazed, and started to recall taking a horse cart with her father to market in downtown Detroit. It really affected her in a bewildering way that I, who grew up watching the space race on TV, could not then comprehend.</span>


I have to disagree with you both, i.e. it has been proven/well known that people who lived East Germany conformed to their life's, everyday same thing thus no ambition whatsoever however West Germany were focused in progress each individual trying to exceed the other (as stressful as it might seem) they had a goal/purpose. When both sites united one was way more advanced compared to the other.

I truly believe that the brain needs to be challenged and conquer to become more creative.


Anyway this is so obvious also in terms of Darwin's natural selection, if your life is consistent and easy there's no need to change/evolve. In the West is very much Darwinism too, it's the survival of the fittest, those who can succeed above others in a certain sense, all being a stressful competition.
When playing strip poker, make sure you are wearing a lot of clothes! or google will ban you ;)
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47836
Post Options Post Options   Quote Atavachron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 23:24
Originally posted by The Dark Elf

Originally posted by Atavachron

^ Bollocks.

They had the same grasp of whatever "technologies" were a part of their lives.

This attitude reflects the absurd notion that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had.   It is utter nonsense and indicates a lack of historical understanding.
Double bollocks back at ya, bud.

Where exactly did  I say "that humans who lived in the past or during deprived times somehow didn't have the same intellectual or creative potential that people who came later had"? Don't tell me I lack historical understanding -- your perspective is entirely skewed, and you have an annoying habit of making things up as you go along (wonderful if you are a fantasist, but not so much while attempting sentient dialogue). Like your dim diatribe regarding Vivaldi.

Most of the world's population 100 years ago did not have automobiles, owned horses as a means of conveyance and lived a rural agricultural lifestyle -- without radio, television, and in many instances electricity -- like generation upon generation before them. Hell, serfdom in Russia was officially abolished in 1861, but did not end in some provinces until 1892. It had nothing to do with people's intellectual capacity, but their circumstances and their means of economic survival.

It is inane to think that people pre-WWI had the same outlook, technologically speaking, as anyone living today, because the necessity for such technology was unnecessary for the time. The pace of life has accelerated in lock step with the pace of technological advancement. I remember my grandmother crying as we watched the lunar landing on TV in 1969. She was amazed, and started to recall taking a horse cart with her father to market in downtown Detroit. It really affected her in a bewildering way that I, who grew up watching the space race on TV, could not then comprehend.

Hit a nerve, did I.   Well that's life on the streets, buddy.


Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: September 03 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5493
Post Options Post Options   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 23:25
Very good points by The Dark Elf.  I think we greatly underestimate the effect of technology on our lives, the ways in which it has transformed the world. In my opinion, without technology, pop/rock music could have never supplanted classical music in popular culture.  Not only recorded music but the means to transport record units quicker than before, whether by road or air, the swift dissemination of information through mass media, especially television, all played an important part in allowing pop/rock to overthrow conventional ideas about musical hierarchy and capture the imagination of listeners in numbers that classical no longer could.  And the lesson to be learnt from jazz's subsequent 'relegation' to a form of serious music with relatively fewer, if more 'elite', followers is also that the pop music business by its nature favours some measure of dumbing down.  It just has to be concise and 'with it' to give record labels the best chance of securing a hit.  There is no point in bringing bands like Magma into the argument here.  They may be non classical for the purposes of categorisation but they are way too complicated to satisfy the need to be entertained of most rock/pop listeners. Note that there is still great jazz music, for instance, for those who want to look for it. But it's no longer something the media would decorate as an 'event, as something people in general need to know about.  That is a crucial difference between pre-20th century or the first half of the 20th century and the subsequent period.     

So, our best hope to reverse this process of dumbing down, ASSUMING that is what is desired, is that the music business itself collapses on its head.  That will probably also mean music becomes drastically less global in nature and has to depend much more heavily  on patronage of live performances within the neighbourhood, i.e., as it did before the recording era.  I don't know that that is desirable or at least is something people who have grown up in the recorded music era would relate to.

The recorded music era as such is very distinct from previous eras in that sense.  It is the most organised, most business-like that music has probably ever been.   


Edited by rogerthat - March 20 2014 at 23:26
Back to Top
Kati View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 10 2010
Location: Mozambique
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1767
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kati Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2014 at 23:50
Originally posted by rogerthat


Very good points by The Dark Elf. †I think we greatly underestimate the effect of technology on our lives, the ways in which it has transformed the world. In my opinion, without technology, pop/rock music could have never supplanted classical music in popular culture. †Not only recorded music but the means to transport record units quicker than before, whether by road or air, the swift dissemination of information through mass media, especially television, all played an important part in allowing pop/rock to overthrow conventional ideas about musical hierarchy and capture the imagination of listeners in numbers that classical no longer could. †And the lesson to be learnt from jazz's subsequent 'relegation' to a form of serious music with relatively fewer, if more 'elite', followers is also that the pop music business by its nature favours some measure of dumbing down. †It just has to be concise and 'with it' to give record labels the best chance of securing a hit. †There is no point in bringing bands like Magma into the argument here. †They may be non classical for the purposes of categorisation but they are way too complicated to satisfy the need to be entertained of most rock/pop listeners. Note that there is still great jazz music, for instance, for those who want to look for it. But it's no longer something the media would decorate as an 'event, as something people in general need to know about. †That is a crucial difference between pre-20th century or the first half of the 20th century and the subsequent period. † ††
So, our best hope to reverse this process of dumbing down, ASSUMING that is what is desired, is that the music business itself collapses on its head. †That will probably also mean music becomes drastically less global in nature and has to depend much more heavily †on patronage of live performances within the neighbourhood, i.e., as it did before the recording era. †I don't know that that is desirable or at least is something people who have grown up in the recorded music era would relate to.
The recorded music era as such is very distinct from previous eras in that sense. †It is the most organised, most business-like that music has probably ever been. ††



Awww Rogerthat

I donít think recorded music is most organized compared to previous eras and certainly not compared to classic music which all music notes were written on paper in contrast to most current music releases namely pop and hip hop which are based on heavy bass sound and fake ezdrummer sounds all manipulated by software inc. vocals. I must add that many current prog bands are the real deal.   
A big hug to you,
When playing strip poker, make sure you are wearing a lot of clothes! or google will ban you ;)
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: September 03 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5493
Post Options Post Options   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2014 at 00:05
Sorry, I should have been clearer.  I meant that it is more organised in the commercial sense.  For the first time, you had whole corporations, some with interests (again, used in the financial sense of the term) in film/television, employing an army of executives to decide which albums would be made, which artists would get a chance to record.  The activity of promoting an album or selling it say in record stores or online also became highly professional.  Substitute all music or music related terms here with a word like cars or cosmetics and the above sentences would probably still make sense.  And that is what I am getting at.  Even if the music business in some sort of sense may have been centuries old, it was the quantum leap in technology in the 20th century that allowed music to be sold worldwide as a PRODUCT that fulfilled a NEED.  And that has a very significant impact on the kind of music that gets pushed to the forefront of culture.  The industry will make every effort to get you to listen to what THEY want you to listen to.  Because they are just like any competitive organisation being run for money.  We are still reluctant to acknowledge this even as the music business marks a decade of a steep decline in album sales (i.e. lurching perhaps towards it demise at least in its present form) because we do not like to believe our tastes could be manipulated by invisible corporations.  But it is undeniable, just as in any other walk of life today.  We have corporations competing to fulfill our needs and purporting to offer readymade products to satisfy those.  It takes a conscious assertion of our ability to make our own choices to step back from the marketplace and decide that we will only pay for albums we want to listen to and not necessarily the ones the industry wants us to listen to.  But they obviously bank on the fact that such people are bound to be in a minority and there will be enough listeners who are casual enough to be content with what is advertised in the billboards and on the TV channels as 'good music'.

Edited by rogerthat - March 21 2014 at 00:08
Back to Top
jude111 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 20 2009
Location: China
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1230
Post Options Post Options   Quote jude111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2014 at 00:14
Originally posted by lazland

Interesting question I have thought about a fair but myself.

My take is that the way that music is not only recorded, but, crucially, retained now in digital format, makes it far more likely that digital age music will last a lot longer than much of the analogue age.

Having said that, there is a truism. Classic culture, be it poetry, prose, music, art, whatever, always stands the test of time, and will always be enjoyed.

Therefore, I truly believe that in some 200 years time The Beatles, Floyd, and other massively influential artists will still be listened to and discussed and played.

It's enjoyed by specialists; the general population moves on.

Sad to say, but much of the music we enjoy is temporal and fleeting; if a few people are still listening to it in 50 years, that itself is amazing. To ask for more than that is wishful thinking...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.69
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.