Does the Age of an Artist Matter?

[Anderton]

Old guys aren't relevant. Young guys don't have anything to say. We see these stereotypes all the time. I'm of the opinion that age is truly irrelevant when it comes to art. 

 

Mozart was at the peak of his fame when he was 28 years old. Tina Turner was at her peak when she was 48. Stephane Grappelli was at the peak of his fame in his 70s. The fame of many artists peaked only after they were dead. And of course, fame is not the only arbiter of someone's talent. Musicians can become better musically while falling off the public's radar.

 

I think it's time to put this concept that age matters to rest. What matters is that an artist of any age is able to explore new worlds. 

 

 

[nursers]

Indeed - I think the biggest battle in some ways is for those that maintain a long career. The stereotype of someone's early work being the most potent is the hardest to battle. Using Springsteen as an example: he's generally considered to have critically peaked around Darkness on the Edge of Town / Nebraska and then peaked popularity wise with Born in the USA. I'd argue one of his post brilliant albums is The Rising, released in the early 2000s. However, because he was 'old' and had the back catalogue he does, the critical praise hill is too steep to climb for most....

[Notes_Norton]

I was good in my teens. Not only did I sit first chair tenor sax in the all-state band, every year I was eligible, but I took the section leader away from the default first alto player. That's like making a violist in an orchestra concertmaster.

 

I chose musician as my career and other than a couple of day jobs I took while investigating what 'normal' is, I've made my living doing music and nothing but music all my life. (for me, normal is soooooo over-rated).

 

I played in rock bands, with an exuberance of energy, good technique, and good but limited knowledge

 

Through the years I learned more and more. There isn't enough time to learn everything one can about music. I also picked up bass, guitar, flute, wind synth and keyboard synth. Since drums were my first instrument, that gave me a well-rounded experience on what everyone's job is in a small, pop band. Each new instrument helped me play the others better.

 

Through the years I learned how to play many genres of music (in no particular order): Classical, Rock (from Elvis-era Beatles, to Psychedelia, to Classic, to Metallica), Blues, R&B), Jazz (from Big Band Standards to Bop to Fusion), Country, Reggae, Soca, Calypso, Merengue, Salsa, Disco, New Age, Hip-Hop, and others. Each genre cross-pollinates to the others to make me a better player in each. And I love putting on the different 'hats' to play authentically in each style.

 

I learned how to make my own backing tracks in each genre, and how to write aftermarket styles for Band-in-a-Box that are as good or better as the ones PG Music writes for themselves.

 

Now I'm of retirement age, but I'm still gigging 15-20 times a month, to mixed audiences, and have no intention of slowing down or retiring.

 

I'm playing better than I ever have, and will continue to get better as I learn more and more about the finer points of making music. I think the 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60-year-old me would agree.

 

Put that's just me.

 

Is it the same for others? I've seen famous musicians get better and better, I've seen them stagnate, and I've seen them get worse through the years. It's pretty much the same for musicians I've known for years.

 

I agree, put the age concept to rest. It doesn't apply to all.

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[KuruPrionz]

I saw Ray Charles a few months before he passed on. I've never seen a better music performance and I've seen lots of great musicians. 

I saw him a year earlier so twice I got to hear one of the greatest musicians of our time perform. Fabulous. 

 

I am finally coming into my own as a singer, I "sang" in my twenties and thirties and then became a sideman for vocalists (I did sing harmony in those bands). 

A week from Friday I have my second solo gig at a local restaurant/lounge that has a patio for summer gigs. I'm 67, no spring chicken. 

 

Great music is great music, the age of the creator and player of that music is not relevant. There will always be people who think otherwise. Some of them will change their stance over time but newcomers will balance that. I've got things to worry about but that isn't one of them. 

[RABid]

It is very dependent on instrument, style, and willingness to compensate. I can tell you from experience that it is much easier to keep going on keyboard than on drums. My fingers don't fly over the keys like they did when I was 20, but I can pull it off in short spurts. I also make up for it with better control of the pitch and mod wheels, along with a more mature choice of notes. With drums I've learned to conserve energy. One big difference is bringing everything into a tighter circle. No more long reaches for cymbals. I've considered getting rid of half of my drums and getting a Roland SPD-SX Pro which is a nine pad sampler. That would let me really get the sound I want out of a small space. I've also been sacrificing instruments. The older I get the harder it is to stay in practice on keys, drums, guitar, bass, trumpet, sax, etc... Muscle memory is not what it used to be. Better to stay tight on one or two instruments. 

[David Emm]

It only matters if they keel over dead at a concert and plant their head in the bass drum.

 

I admire Phil Collins for doing one last round, singing from a chair and sounding good. That tenacity partly shows me why he was such a superior percussionist.

 

RABid's mention of the SPD-SX Pro rings my bells, as I started out with the very first Octapad. If I was still in that realm, I'd see a pair of SPDs and a HandSonic as The Kit. Its a percussion pairing that's very much like a carefully-selected keyboard stack. What you can't do is irrelevant when you have 98% of it covered.   

[KenElevenShadows]

I really wish people would do that. But as much as I see "ageism", I also see too many people putting down younger artists as being lazy, stupid, untalented, and so forth. Y'know, the same things that older generations called their generation.

 

I would agree that we should judge artists on their own merits.

[KuruPrionz]

3 hours ago, David Emm said:

It only matters if they keel over dead at a concert and plant their head in the bass drum.

 

I admire Phil Collins for doing one last round, singing from a chair and sounding good. That tenacity partly shows me why he was such a superior percussionist.

 

RABid's mention of the SPD-SX Pro rings my bells, as I started out with the very first Octapad. If I was still in that realm, I'd see a pair of SPDs and a HandSonic as The Kit. Its a percussion pairing that's very much like a carefully-selected keyboard stack. What you can't do is irrelevant when you have 98% of it covered.   

If you try a Korg Wavedrum, you will quickly realize you need at least one in any electronic drum ensemble. It responds to techniques that rubber pads will not generate, very touch sensitive and responsive, super fun to play. FWIW, I have a Roland Handsonic also but I rarely consider using it for recordings. 

[Notes_Norton]

20 hours ago, RABid said:

My fingers don't fly over the keys like they did when I was 20

I can still race on the sax, but it's much easier to play fast than on keyboard. Although I can, and sometimes do, I've left Bebop behind and am more focused on playing interesting melodies when I improvise. Short bursts are great punctuations between melodic passages, Stanley Turrentine and Stan Getz, both very different players, but both knew how to do that.

 

I started guitar late (7th instrument) but I don't think I'll ever get to blazing speeds on that. Drums? My first instrument. I'm good for a song - maybe. I'm definitely out of shape for endurance. Most of the drums I play now are for a backing track for my duo, or a style for Band-in-a-Box. Back in the day, when I played in a band with a drummer who could sing, I'd sit at his kit for a few songs and let him out front on the mic. I'm undoubtedly past my prime to be a gigging drummer.

 

As we grow, we all grow differently. I've seen some musicians play blazingly fast in their senior years, and do a damn good job of it. There is more than one right way to make good music.

 

I'm singing better than ever. When I got into this duo, I was a fair singer. Good for easy songs. My duo partner is a great singer, but one person singing all night is dangerous. What if she caught a cold. So I started singing more and more, and now I do half the songs (she still gets the most difficult ones). If she loses her voice, I can cover the vocals all night.

 

Fortunately, being a wind instrument player, I learned to breathe through my diaphragm instead of my chest, so I won't end up with nodules and a frog voice like too many pop singers who didn't learn proper breath support.

 

Notes

[surfergirl]

No.

[Old Music Guy]

I'm a better drummer now at 70 than I was at 20. For me, I believe that experience is the key difference. I've always been a great time keeper, but I've learned that not every open space needs to be filled. That also comes in handy playing bass. 

And those whole note rests are a good time to take an Advil and catch my breath. 😎

[Anderton]

I think one leveler is electronics. I don't get to practice guitar as much as I used to, but being able to do punches and a variety of editing techniques compensates. For example, last night I was doing a rhythm guitar part, and there was one chord change that I just couldn't get to sound clean. So I recorded the two chords individually, and pasted them in place. Problem solved.

 

Or in one part, I didn't fret a full chord cleanly and two of the strings were bent sharp. Instead of re-doing the part or punching, I used the polyphonic version of Melodyne to fix the two notes.

 

Slowing down tempo to record MIDI keyboard parts is something I've done for years. Even if I can play the parts in real time, it means I can do the part in one take. 

 

Cheating? Well...who actually cares how the music was made, if it sounds good?

[David Emm]

20 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

If you try a Korg Wavedrum, you will quickly realize you need at least one in any electronic drum ensemble. It responds to techniques that rubber pads will not generate, very touch sensitive and responsive, super fun to play. FWIW, I have a Roland Handsonic also but I rarely consider using it for recordings. 

 

The Wavedrum doesn't seem to be in production, as in no Sweetwater entry. There's a used one on Reverb for $604, but I think I'm past really digging into it properly. That age thing has crept up my snout and into my hands. When it first appeared, I remember the Wavedrum being seen as more sensitive. You can bet I played the Octapad with sticks! Roland has improved a lot, but playing hard plastic pads is definitely not a premium experience. You'll ache after much of it. 

[KuruPrionz]

15 hours ago, David Emm said:

 

The Wavedrum doesn't seem to be in production, as in no Sweetwater entry. There's a used one on Reverb for $604, but I think I'm past really digging into it properly. That age thing has crept up my snout and into my hands. When it first appeared, I remember the Wavedrum being seen as more sensitive. You can bet I played the Octapad with sticks! Roland has improved a lot, but playing hard plastic pads is definitely not a premium experience. You'll ache after much of it. 

You are correct, I keep forgetting that the Wavedrum has been discontinued. I'm glad I have one!

The Roland Handsonic is nice, lots of cool sounds. It just lacks the level of expression that the Wavedrum has in spades. 

[Nowarezman]

The connection between age and artistry is a very real thing, I must add to the discussion.  It's worth considering when getting to know an artist in depth.  There are certain patterns or arcs of artistic careers that seem to come up again and again.  

 

The problem is whether you apply the concept of age to increase your understanding and appreciation of an artist, or whether you use the concept of age to pigeonhole them and reduce them, typically in a pejorative manner. 

 

It's still true, if the only thing you know about an artist is their age, you know nothing about the artist.  But if you know, say, that Paul Simon turned 60 in 2001 with some of his best music yet to be produced, you know that his achievements in his older years are remarkable and unusual. More power to Paul!!  He inspires me endlessly.  I think it's fair to say, "wow, at his age..." in admiration.  

 

But if you are a rock journalist who considers anyone over 30 as automatically washed up, well, that's moronic.

 

nat

 

[KuruPrionz]

4 minutes ago, Nowarezman said:

The connection between age and artistry is a very real thing, I must add to the discussion.  It's worth considering when getting to know an artist in depth.  There are certain patterns or arcs of artistic careers that seem to come up again and again.  

 

The problem is whether you apply the concept of age to increase your understanding and appreciation of an artist, or whether you use the concept of age to pigeonhole them and reduce them, typically in a pejorative manner. 

 

It's still true, if the only thing you know about an artist is their age, you know nothing about the artist.  But if you know, say, that Paul Simon turned 60 in 2001 with some of his best music yet to be produced, you know that his achievements in his older years are remarkable and unusual. More power to Paul!!  He inspires me endlessly.  I think it's fair to say, "wow, at his age..." in admiration.  

 

But if you are a rock journalist who considers anyone over 30 as automatically washed up, well, that's moronic.

 

nat

 

Paul Simon is a great example, so is Leonard Cohen. 

[MathOfInsects]

I sure hope not!

But in discussions like this I always remember something my grandmother told me. She said "No one looks older than an old woman trying to dress like a young one. If you just dress well for your age, no matter what that age is, you'll always stop traffic."

I think it's the same with artists. If you keep refining your art, you are only going to get better and better at it as the years go by. Your productivity may drop, but what you do create will have that much more depth. 

But if you used to be a classical trombonist and at 65 you've decided you'd like to try a Bruno Mars - inspired dance set to stay "relevant"...IMO you are going to seem ridiculous.

Unless you slay. Slaying is the great equalizer. 

But you won't. 

[bill5]

Does age matter? Buddy Guy I think would give an emphatic no  

 

 

[Ivan May]

I certainly don't think age matters when it comes to an artist, however, I would like to point out that a lot of artists usually peak in their thirties and fourties. Butch Vig was already 35 by the time he had been asked to produce Nevermind for Nirvana, and it wasn't until years later that he found eve more success as a member of Garbage.

 

In short, age is just a number.

[KuruPrionz]

Of course, we need to mention Willie Nelson, who is now 90 and still performing.

 

I saw him live decades ago with Grady Martin on guitar and a stellar band. Great show, they played Willie Nelson music for almost 3 hours straight. 

[o0Ampy0o]

I see a lot of credit given for just going out and playing into old age, for better or worse.

 

A lot of musicians become living cliches of themselves. There is nothing fresh and inspiring in their performances. (i.e. Carlos Santana, BB King, Eric Clapton, David Gilmour)

 

Or they have become businessmen and always have something going because they like accumulating large amounts of money, as if they do not have enough already, (i.e. Keith and Mick of The Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney and David Gilmour).

 

Many musicians blew their money on drugs and partying. The way the record industry turned out there are no residuals to retire on. They did not invest in retirement. Many have to tour because it is the only way they can live day to day.

 

Rock music has been a genre of youth, at least until everyone grew older and older.

 

A general observation that baffles me is how old graying men decide to grow a beard. This excludes the likes of longtime bearded Michael McDonald, Willie Nelson, Billy Gibbons and the late Dusty Hill. A beard doesn't cover varicose veins, wrinkles or a double chin so well as it emphasizes old age when it is gray and especially white. This, when the audience / fans have only known them clean shaven (i.e. Micky Thomas). Robert Plant sort of got away with it because he has remained in the spotlight. I had not seen Micky Thomas since the mid-eighties when I saw him at the Eddie Money tribute event.

 

Speaking of Willie Nelson, once he grew the beard he has had the appearance and sound of an old man most of his career. The Country genre can absorb age better than Rock and Pop. There are exceptions, generally though it has been the case.

 

 

 

 

[bill5]

1 hour ago, o0Ampy0o said:

Or they have become businessmen and always have something going because they like accumulating large amounts of money, as if they do not have enough already, (i.e. Keith and Mick of The Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney and David Gilmour).

Or maybe they simply enjoy performing and can still do it at an at least relatively high level so why not? What else are they supposed to do? Play checkers? 

[KenElevenShadows]

1 hour ago, bill5 said:

Or maybe they simply enjoy performing and can still do it at an at least relatively high level so why not? What else are they supposed to do? Play checkers? 

Yeah. They don't need the money. The don't need the hassle of touring. I'm inclined to believe that many people just like <gasp!> playing music in front of enthusiastic audiences.

[o0Ampy0o]

2 hours ago, bill5 said:

Or maybe they simply enjoy performing and can still do it at an at least relatively high level so why not? What else are they supposed to do? Play checkers? 

 

Thinking "supposed to do" came from your mind.

 

In the context of the thread topic I was pointing out that some old timer's objectives have changed and that is a reason why they continue.

 

"Simply enjoy performing" is a long way from world touring and the orchestration of a one-off at Pompeii, and multiple variations of recordings and related collectibles. 

[Notes_Norton]

On 5/27/2023 at 4:13 PM, Anderton said:

I think one leveler is electronics. I don't get to practice guitar as much as I used to, but being able to do punches and a variety of editing techniques compensates. <...snip...>

 

Slowing down tempo to record MIDI keyboard parts is something I've done for years. Even if I can play the parts in real time, it means I can do the part in one take. 

I've done new songs with MIDI that I haven't practiced enough to play flawless, Especially with keyboards. Piano/organ is the only instrument I play that I wouldn't take a gig playing. I'll double on one for a few songs, but not all night.

 

At home, I can do left and right hand separately, or practice enough to get the feel right and most of the notes right on. It might take dozens of hours to get it perfect, while it might take a few minutes to fix a couple of clunkers. If making a backing track for my duo and I have to record the drum part, bass part, keyboard part, string part and other comp parts, there is a point where conservation of time involved says, it's fixable.

 

I've slowed down a few to record a tricky part. Sometimes that works, sometimes it has to be done a tempo in order to get the feel.

 

My stamina as a drummer isn't what it used to be, but I can more than get through a song for a backing track. But I think I have more taste than I used to have. If I wanted to gig as a drummer, I'd have to train to get in shape.

 

11 hours ago, o0Ampy0o said:

A lot of musicians become living cliches of themselves. There is nothing fresh and inspiring in their performances. (i.e. Carlos Santana, BB King, Eric Clapton, David Gilmour)

 

For some, that's arbitrary. People want to hear what you've done, the way they remember it. I've seen the public reject artists who progressed too quickly or too drastically.

 

The Temptations recorded an album of Great American Songbook standards, it flopped. Joni Mitchel did a fine job on a Mingus LP and it didn't sell well at all.

 

When I met Chet Atkins, he told me he secretly wanted to be a jazz guitarist, but knew what he needed to continue doing to stay relevant.

 

If you have a career, you have to satisfy the customers, and your fans are your customers. I remember reading an article in the AFofM newsletter when I was young (and still in the union). A retried Nashville keyboard player wrote an article. In it, he said, “Don't let the 'suits' know you are really into jazz, because they actually believe in this crap.” Country Music has come a long way since then, it's a lot more sophisticated than it was in the Buck Owens days, but I suspect a lot of them are still into something other than what they are playing.

 

Willie Nelson was brought up. He still does Willie Nelson, which isn't all that different from last decade's Willie Nelson.

 

16 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:

But if you used to be a classical trombonist and at 65 you've decided you'd like to try a Bruno Mars - inspired dance set to stay "relevant"...IMO you are going to seem ridiculous.

Unless you slay. Slaying is the great equalizer. 

 

If you are old, and doing young people's music, you have to be as good as or better than the top players/singers in that genre if you want to be famous. And you can't disguise the fact that you are old when you do it. It's easier to be accepted as an old person slaying young music, than it is to be an old person trying to be passed off as young.

 

On a non-famous level, it's a lot easier.

 

When I targeted the retirement crowd, I was just 40 and we did Glenn Miller, Duke Ellington, Frank Sinatra and other 'standards' and the old folks would remark that we were so young and knew how to play their music. (Secret: it's just music, and a good musician can learn just about any type of music).

 

We play at a beachside resort, outdoors, adjacent to the public beach and a huge public park. We get people from teenagers to geriatrics in the audience. We do some 21st century songs, and the younger people seem to appreciate these old farts doing their music. At least they smile, stay and applaud. Not all of them, but a good percentage. And if we mix the genres and eras enough, and are careful not to be too hard core in any direction, we can make it everybody's music, instead of nobody's music.

 

So if we can entertain the young folks who come in, the oldsters who want 60s music, the country fans, those who come to Florida and want Caribbean music, and the majority of everyone else who walks in, age doesn't matter. Being authentic in any genre you play does matter.

 

We don't do hard-core rap. A few songs with a rap break in the middle, but not an entire rap song. I think that would turn everybody's music into nobody's music. We do a Metallica song, "Nothing Else Matters", but if we did "Masters Of Puppets", we'd alienate enough people to make it nobody's music. When mixing genres, you have to be careful.

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

 

 

[The Real MC]

Age doesn't matter in my book.

The best era of any musician does not seem to follow any age patterns.

[Anderton]

I do a project every year. It's interesting to look back at them, because I get to do exactly what I want. There are no commercial pressures, so the projects are all unfiltered and very different.

 

I do think that my production chops improve from year-to-year, but I've also drifted more to "composition" from "playing." For example, I'm more interested in adding a sampled cello in just the right place than playing a blistering guitar solo. That might be a function of getting older, and wanting to explore more directions rather than sticking with what worked in the past.

 

Aging gracefully is something I agree with, for sure. Even when I do something more EDM-like stylistically, it still has a veneer of experience from playing other forms of music.

 

[o0Ampy0o]

6 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

For some, that's arbitrary. People want to hear what you've done, the way they remember it. I've seen the public reject artists who progressed too quickly or too drastically.

 

I was talking about how some musicians grow tired from repetition then respond by being repetitive, checking out or they get lazy and fall back on patterned routines not reworking / improvising a standard vs. presenting it the way people expect to hear it.

[GovernorSilver]

I finally got the opportunity to meet Paul Jackson Jr. and attend a clinic he taught.

 

This guy was recording guitar parts for the Thriller album and loads of others while I was still a little kid.   I haven't been a kid for years.  Let's just say I'm no spring chicken now.  So the math says Paul Jackson Jr. has some years on me although nowadays he has this ageless Zen monk kind of look.

 

He sat in on Isaiah Sharkey's clinic just like the other students.  So I knew he wasn't kidding when he said he's still learning new things, as well as revisiting his Joe Pass books to refresh himself.  He's a high skilled chord-melody player, although that side of him is not as documented on records.

[o0Ampy0o]

Want to bet the old guys are the ones saying age doesn't matter while the young guys observing the old guys disagree, not 100% but the majority (gotta qualify it).

 

...Just playing with you all. 😉