The appeal of older music

[jar546]

When I say older, I mean 60's through 80's.

 

I have been noticing something lately that I have probably been blind to.

 

I went to a festival and one of the bands playing was young kids from ages 14-16 all playing older rock such as ACDC, GNR, etc.

 

During another local event there was another group of young musicians in the 18-19 range playing all classic rock.

 

Last night I went out to see one of the top/hottest bands in our area. I was on a mission to see what all of the fuss was about. I get there and the place was packed with young women and I mean packed. I stayed for the first set. They are younger musicians all under 30 and were playing all 80's dance music.

 

What I am noticing is that this younger generation seems to be drawn to the music that I grew up on and I am wondering why.

 

My college sophmore stepdaughter who plays piano, viola and guitar tells me that all of the new stuff sucks for the most part because no one knows how to make music anymore.

 

This is not the first time that I heard this and I am curious if anyone else has noticed this.

 

There are some newer songs that I like but they are few and far between. A lot of it sounds the same to me.

 

Thoughts?

[EddiePlaysBass]

Being in the under-thirty age category myself, I can only agree with what your stepdaughter said For me, there is not a whole lot of exciting music being made at this moment. Sure there's bands coming out and doing new stuff (like Vampyre Weekend) but for me personally, it's not interesting new stuff.

 

I've got a rehearsal planned with my second band this Friday and the closest we have come to contemporary music in terms of a set list, is Alanis Morissette's Ironic ... which is probably more ironic than anything mentioned in the lyrics. I like bands such as The Kooks and am dying to check out The Zutons (can't find their albums everywhere) but for the most part I either buy old stuff or new stuff that sounds like old stuff

 

Oh and my other band is a '60s rock'n'roll band :grin:

[Rocky McDougall]

1960's to 1980's ???I think of that as the new music. I won't say what I think of current rock and rap.

Rocky

 

PS I think that dancing, (two people actually holding onto each other), is gaining in popularity and the 60's and 70's music was apprpriate for dancing.

[kenfxj]

My 14-year-old boy's favorite bands are AC/DC and Motorhead. A lot of his friends as well.

 

One reason may be that much of this music is used as the soundtrack for video games.

[jeremy c]

I have been playing 60's music since the sixties.

 

Sometimes that is sad. I know there must be someone writing songs that you can walk around humming. I know that there must be some hot players out there who are or will be influential.

 

There is so much stuff out there that it's hard to find.

 

The bands I play with used to get requests for songs. Now we get requests for styles. "Play some reggae", "Play some rap", "Play some salsa".

 

I think at the next gig, I'll just bring my drum machine and press the appropriate button and the band will all leave the stage.

 

I need my second cup of coffee.

[rizzo9247]

I like listening to/playing good music. If that music happens to be 10, 20, or 50 years old so be it.

 

What about orchestras that are playing songs written over 200 years ago?

 

Some things just transcend time, like toothpaste.

[davio]

I think it's been discussed on this forum before, but it seems to me that every generation goes through these sorts of cycles. Accepted new music comes in waves for the most part. New music is being written, recorded and premiered every day out there but most of us have to wait for something to actually make it through the crap on the radio before we become conscious of it.

 

The longevity of older (or "classic") music is unavoidable when you consider what we remember is a tiny fraction of what actually came out during the era. 20 years from now are people going to associate the '00s with great cover/classic rock bands? No. Just as we don't associate the 70s and 80s with the local bands that played for their high school prom regardless of how good they were. Are people even going to remember Solange Knowles and her childlike antics in interviews? I can only hope not. But they will probably remember Tool, System of a Down and 50 Cent regardless of our preferences.

 

As far as your stepdaughter, jar, it's a common theme among classically trained musicians (especially collegiate, career and at times even high school ones) to shun newer music styles because it helps validate (in their minds) what they're studying and devoting their lives to. I know...I've been there and there's nothing wrong with it. It aids in the furtherance of the art.

 

As far as us old farts - and I'm starting to think of myself that way because I find myself starting to think like you at times even though I'm 24...and talking to people like Maisie doesn't help - it's also natural for us to start discounting new music that appeals to the current batch of youth. Think of your parents when you started turning up the radio too loud ("Turn that garbage down! They just don't make music like they used to...").

 

As far as the youth liking older music, it's all part of the bigger cycle that eventually leads to more new music. More and better new music is made when the musicians are familiar with the source material. But as I said, don't think that new music isn't coming out of the woodwork just because the flavor of the week in your hometown is older stuff.

 

It's also becoming increasingly difficult for original bands to get their music heard...especially if their music is completely different from the norm. It's easy to blame big entertainment corporations like Clear Channel, etc, but when it comes down to it it's really a lot more than that. Whatever the reasons, I know many good and creative musicians who are (in my opinion) wasting their talents playing in cover bands rather than using their exceptional creative gifts because nobody wants to book original music because: 1) people don't like it because they can't sing along when they're drunk, and 2) people won't buy drinks if they're coming to listen to interesting music that they haven't heard before. I'm realllllly oversimplifying here but I hope you get the gist of it.

 

What I'm getting at is that "good" new music is being presented every day out there whether we hear it or not. Furthermore, if we do, it doesn't matter what us fogies or the kids listening exclusively to their parents music think because we won't be the ones making history or setting the next trend (I doubt very highly that Ozzy was a big Elvis fan growing up). It will be the kids making the new music and the ones going to the shows that will think back on it fondly in 20 years and write articles and blogs and holo-casts about defining a generation.

[picker]

Somebody posted the other day about kids liking Hendrix and saying they didn't understand it. Why wouldn't they like it if the heard it? It's great music! It appealed to me when I was that age, it shouldn't be surprizing that, in the absence of any really decent music for kids nowadays, they would gravitate to good stuff, especially if it has a reasonably "wave my freak flag high" attitude.

And, you have to remember that it wasn't really their parent's music. It was a generation back from that. FOlks my age a grand parents now, with kids old enough to like Hendrix, Clapton, Beck, all the really great stuff that outlasted the crap that was around then, too. Their parents were into grunge and hair bands and thrash. 1970 was THIRTY EIGHT YEARS AGO, man, and that's when Hendrix died. It's really about time that the wheel turned again, and it's landed on AOR artists this time. Don't worry, it will turn again, and who knows where it will land?

[davio]

The wheel's been turning this whole time, it just becomes harder for us to see it move and to appreciate the movement the older we get.

[Bottom End]

My 2nd favorite soapbox issue.

 

"My college sophmore stepdaughter who plays piano, viola and guitar tells me that all of the new stuff sucks for the most part because no one knows how to make music anymore."

 

Thank your stepdaughter for letting me know that my judgement of new muisc wasn't just the onset of Cranky Old Man syndrome.

 

I'm 43, so "classic" rock to me is just the soundtrack to my life, not some weird museum piece. I can see the appeal of a lot of that era's music for younger folks; 80's "new wave" synth-pop is infectiously danceable, i.e. girls like to dance to it and boys like to be where girls are dancing, and often has some witty lyrics, and often an original sound distinguishable from other bands, at least a little. Along with hair metal and real metal and guitar based pop, it's about fun and good times, unlike far too much of the music made public by "the industry".

 

Having a lot of "classic" rock form the basis of Guitar Hero and Rock Band surely has brought these songs to a new generation. The music is also fun to learn and play, the kids at my daughters middle school talent show were all playing old rock songs, and playing them well.

 

There are new bands/artists I like, in fact most of my music purchases in the last two years were by new artists: KT Tunstall, Kaiser Chiefs, Robert Randolph, to name a few without opening up my iTunes library, so I am not stuck in the past.

 

I do agree that there is a dearth of live venues for original music performance, at least there is the internet to get the songs out beyond the limits of your garage.

 

[Phil W]

I'm open to new music. And there are some great artists out there but, to me, the issue is that pretty much every genre was invented before about 1979. Nothing since then has really been new. The developments have been in terms of musical technology: house, drum and bass, modern hip-hop and fusions of different styles as opposed to developments of new musics.

 

The more interesting developments (to me) have come from outside America and Europe.

 

The cover band I play with rarely plays anything from beyond 1979, and I'm happy for that. There are some decent melodies in the 'pop' music of the past few years but it seems sometimes they are swamped by 'production' and style over substance - and so many tunes develop so little over the course of the tune, basically repeating the same (sometimes sampled lines) throughout all the verses and choruses with little harmonic development.

 

It is noticeable when I go to LAMA or somewhere and get to hang with the young guys, they're all still into Zep and the like. Most my young cousins in the US have gone through a major Beatles phase too.

 

[davio]

Thank your stepdaughter for letting me know that my judgement of new muisc wasn't just the onset of Cranky Old Man syndrome.

 

See my comments on classical musicians. We all suffer from the onset of COMS.

 

Along with hair metal and real metal and guitar based pop, it's about fun and good times, unlike far too much of the music made public by "the industry".

 

That's the subject matter for a great deal of the music on the radio. Most popular lyrical themes: fun and good times, romance, anger, self promotion.

 

Having a lot of "classic" rock form the basis of Guitar Hero and Rock Band surely has brought these songs to a new generation.

 

Too true. While I grew up liking some classic rock, many of the songs in those games were unknown to me but being the nerd that I am, I'm quite familiar with them now and they have even prompted some new cd (or old depending on how you look at it) purchases.

 

There are new bands/artists I like, in fact most of my music purchases in the last two years were by new artists: KT Tunstall, Kaiser Chiefs, Robert Randolph, to name a few...

 

My case in point. As with every generation, a lot of the good music isn't being heard in the main stream.

[Phil W]

That's a good point, Davio. The mainstream in any generation often did not include the best music. It's quite enlightening to look at the list of grammy nominations in years where we consider the classic records were made.

[Bottom End]

Good point about the Grammy nominations, considering the infamous Jethro Tull award for best metal the same year "Appetite for Destruction" was released.

 

Popularity and awards do not necessarily mean musically great, obviously.

 

the issue is that pretty much every genre was invented before about 1979.

That is the source of one of my biggest dislikes for newer bands; often they are only being heralded for playing a style that some lesser known band had originated 20 or 30 years ago. Electronica is very noticeable in that respect as well as rock.

IT's not that I was some import-only hipster back in the day, but I did have the good fortune of living outside of Boston back when both commercial and college stations were playing all sorts of music, in fact, they tried to play new and offbeat alongside the popular songs to appeal to a wider audience. IT's hard to find that now, though I do have at least 3 stations here that do a good job of introducing me to lots of artists I want to hear more from. Sirius is another boon to finding great music in many genres as well.

[b5pilot]

Well, to me a lot of current music I hear sounds like a lot of rehashed 70's music anyway. Just the lyrics sound like they have a different mindset to them. Also, Guitar Hero has a heapin' helpin' of classic guitar rock so a new generation of kids are being exposed to it. Yeah it is a very narrow range of exposure because there is 40+ years of great music out there. Hopefully though this all means that they are finally getting tired of the Britney Spears Brand of pop. All choreography and very little musical substance.

[jeremy c]

I'm sitting here working at my computer with tv sports on.

 

A large majority of commercials are using "classic rock" (or something that was composed to sound just like it) as theme music.

 

I just heard "Back in Black" or something pretty close. I just heard it again. It was not the original song, but it was carefully designed to evoke the song without paying a copyright.

 

CSI uses a song by the Who as a theme song.

 

I guess it's easier to pay for a song than to have one written for you, although these days some of the shows seem to be using new artists (who I'm betting getting paid very little for the "privilege" of having their songs on tv).

 

Like Phil, I listen to music from a lot of countries, but I'm hearing a lot of good music but I'm not hearing a lot of memorable songs except a rare few like Ivan Lins. And he keeps recording his best songs over and over.

 

I was driving one of my 13 year old relatives around last weekend and she changed the station on the radio to the Disney channel. Every song sounded like it was recorded in the same studio with the same musicians, the same arrangers, and the same non-writers. It was hard to tell the songs from the commercials and my young relative was already bored with songs that were more than a few months old.

 

I'm betting that in a few years, she discovers classic rock (for her that would probably be Alanis Morissette ) and wondering why there is nothing current that sounds like that.

[Cthulhu Fhtagn]

My college sophmore stepdaughter who plays piano, viola and guitar tells me that all of the new stuff sucks for the most part because no one knows how to make music anymore.

 

+1

 

Anyway, this subject has been hashed a couple of times in other threads. Ozzy's new band and Disturbed are covering anything pre-1980 Sabbath. RATM covering MC5. Everyone's covering Cream.

 

I think it's simple. "My" music is better than my "son's" music (and he would largely agree to that). I have a job and money so I will go to a club and pay a cover and by microbrews on tap (as I did last night) to hear AC/DC, LZ, and Bad Company covers done well by guys I know by name. As opposed to being surrounded by 22 y.o. nursing a Bud Lite all night (most of the cash went to cover), festooned with hardware in their faces and high dollar tats all over their bodies listening to some Prog/Punk/HateMetal/GoofCore band from Seattle with complicated hair scream into a mic until blood issues from their throats.

 

You play what brings in the crowd (and the bucks). Covering late 70's through late 90's metal brings in a crowd.

[Griffinator]

You play what brings in the crowd (and the bucks). Covering late 70's through late 90's metal brings in a crowd.

 

Hell, even Dream Theater does a lot of this in their live shows. Of course, for them, something like Pantera's "Cemetary Gates" or Kansas' "Carry On Wayward Son" is kinda, well, relaxing, compared to their original material.

[davio]

You play what brings in the crowd (and the bucks). Covering late 70's through late 90's metal brings in a crowd.

 

I think this can be summerized by saying that the public does not feel a need for anything new at this point in time. Again, this is cyclical. but then, change rarely happens when one is ready for it.

[Slinky P]

I'm 16 and I like older music late 60's 70's and 80's.

I also like new music from the 90's and 2000's. Most of the older music i listen to my parents reconize. Most of the newer music I listen to few people reconize but the few that do are into the same underground scene. Take the 90's ska revival. It's still going on. Is it popular NO. Do a bunch of kids (like myself) still go to shows YES. Anyway my friends who are play an instrument and are actually serious about it also listen to no mainstream artists or older music. My theory: Good music is as good now as when it came out.

[Mr. Bizarro]

I think a lot of what people think of when they talk about "new music" is Britney Spears-style pop. I haven't known a single person in years who liked that stuff, and even then it was nobody I took seriously. I have no idea how to account for the apparent popularity of that genre. I think there must be some kind of secret hidden city of contemporary pop fans somewhere.

 

But I think that in any time period, the less widespread music will end up being what stands the test of time. In fact, judging by the people I've talked to, the less popular bands are really the ones that the most people like and listen to. (Does that make any sense at all?)

 

I guess I am a bit of a hipster, but still. My hypothesis is, all that old music has had time to filter itself out. I'm sure there is some awful music from the 60s-80s, but the good stuff is what we remember and listen to now. And today, for every artist who's stagnating and not being creative, there's one who's revisiting the old musical styles and breathing new life into them, and another who's innovating and taking modern music in a whole new direction. Maybe not always a good direction, but any kind of progress beats the repetition that's been going on lately. (And that repetition has probably been going on forever, and it's one of the things that's filtered out.)

 

There's my opinion, I want to know yours. So my question is, what do you think of the people reviving old music (either through covers or by writing original music that evokes similar ideas and sounds)? How about the ones pushing the envelope and doing totally new things? Do either of these even exist at all, or are they figments of my imagination?

[slowfinger]

My mind goes back to the '60s ... we liked dancing to Glen Miller just as much as to the Beatles and Stones. Good dance music is good dance music.

[jeremy c]

If the sixties were so great, how come no one is playing songs by:

Melanie

The Dave Clark Five

Freddie and the Dreamers

The Singing Nun

Bobby Goldsboro

Hugo and Luigi

Moby Grape

The Seekers

Petula Clark

etc.

?

[Cthulhu Fhtagn]

I'm 16 and I... My theory: Good music is as good now as when it came out.

 

Sixteen, literate and deep. Maybe there's hope for our species yet!

[jeremy c]

Sometimes music is a good as when it came out.

Sometimes it's better and sometimes it's worse.

 

Bela Bartok died in poverty. His music was not very well liked.

 

Various albums recorded by Miles Davis were not well received.

"On the Corner" was generally considered to be a mistake.

Now it's considered to be very good and there's an $80 reissue of the whole recording session and at least one tribute band (Children on the Corner).

 

I sometimes go back and listen to my old albums and go, "what we were thinking?" Try listening to Quicksilver Messenger Service or Ten Years After, just to name a few bands from the sixties that have dropped off the planet.

[King Kamehameha]

i like old music. but it's not all i like. i like new music too, in fact now it's mostly newer music that i listen to.

 

but not necessarily hip hop or pop, that's only for guilty pleasures.

 

i think some of you guys should try out some of the newer stuff, you might like it.

 

here are some of the newer musicians i like. check them out if you're interested. i know some of them are pretty well known and you might already know them.

 

sujan stevens

wilco

bright eyes

sigur ros

explosions in the sky

the arcade fire

the decemberists

modest mouse

spoon

circa survive

muse

the shins

 

those are just some that i like, just to say that this is some progressive, fun new stuff to show that music isn't going down the drain.

 

[Ironstorm]

I have a 22 year old daughter a 13 year old daughter and a 12 year old son all of them keep taking my Beatles, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, Tull, Ozzy the list go`s on all of them say the new music sucks

 

The only thing that I can`t understand is that my younger kids tell me some of there friends never heard of The Beatles THIS IS A CRIME..

[davio]

"Vintage" is the new "new."

[Bottom End]

One reason I think that a good cover band does well and builds a younger audience is that a lot of 20 somethings haven't gotten to see the songs performed live by the real band. There is something about a good song performed well in a live environment that really appeals to a crowd. Also highlighted in the thread about playing dance music, a dance song, whether it's an old Motown classic or new jack swing, performed by a real live band gets people moving and grooving at least as much if not more than the recorded version.

 

That being said, I'd prefer to play both covers and originals, and have some variety. One of my favorite bands, long since broken up, had four really talented musicians, and a vast repertoire, so even if you saw them 4 nights running, you heard a lot of different covers and original songs each night. I went to see them several night a week for five years, and never got tired of their set.

 

[Tom Capasso]

Some of that old stuff stunk then, or only worked because it fit the time (Jeremy's "what were we thinking" bands, though I find I still like that stuff even if I recognize the sentiment).

 

Jeremy's list of bands is a bit stilted. Dave Clark Five should be played more. The Singing Nun only had one song (and it falls into that "of it's time" category).

 

With music more readily available, and with kids hearing more of their parents music, kids like lots of varied stuff. I think that's great. In instrument stores, you see kids focus on instrument-driven music (Zep, Hendrix) rather that song driven music (Motown - too many orchestral arrangements). It's a "cool factor" thing as well.

 

One could argue that the old stuff (from any era) that hasn't held on isn't "classic" enough. There are always exceptions (stuff that didn't hold up but should have; stuff that held up but shouldn't have).

 

Tom