Originally Posted by BIG JIM MERRILEES

It is up to us the public to get the message across that we will not accept this mediocrity and we demand higher standards. Accepting this state of affairs and saying it has always been like that and how dare we criticise fellow musicians is only condoning and encouraging the problem to get worse. It will always be a problem if we do nothing...Perhaps the people who think that these popstars are talented would change their minds if they actually heard some really talented people for a change.
I have said it before but will say it again...We have been bombarded with so much crap we have become accustomed to it and our expectations have been suppressed and our standards lowered...in fact the bar is at an all time low.



Hey Jim!

Hope all is well in Scotland. I'm doing fine here in St. Louis, MO., USA.

I find nothing to argue with in your statement above. My question, though, is how relevant is the statement in the overall context? What you and many folks might consider mediocrity is, in the eyes of today's audience, not mediocre. As long as they are enjoying it, they aren't going to complain.

They buying public, which is the intended audience of the performers, is the 30 years old and under bracket. their expectations are different from the 45+ crowd. The 30 & under spend most of the money oon music. You can guess to whom the music industry is going to target their product. And if that segment is happy with what's being offered, it isn't going to change.

As far as having the younger audience patriated to "good" music, I'm not sure that would accomplish your goal of improving their standards for music to listen to. Most of this dicussion has been about Traditional Country vs Contemporary Country, so I'll stay with that genre. My son and daughter, 39 years old and 37 years old respectively, grew up hearing the iconic stars of Traditional Country music. They heard it every day of their lives, just about. They still don't like it. My daughter would rather listen to Coldplay and Maroon 5 than Merle Haggard or Ray Price any day. She doesn't care for the Stones, CCR, Pink Floyd, U2 or any of the super groups from those eras. Her description is that the music is too predictable and "plain-jane" sounding. She says it doesn't excite her in the least. My son is more or less the same, although he does like Willie Nelson.

Thus, I'm not so sure that exposure would make a difference. I think it is, always has been and always will be a matter of the evolution of music by generation.

Here in the States, Cadillac makes one of our several expensive, luxury cars. they trange in the $38,000 USD to $80,000 USD in price rnage. Most of their commercials on the TV use Led Zeplin tracks in the background. Why? Because most of the buyers of those automobiles are older, very succesful folks who grew up on that music. they sepcifically say they are not targeting the younger buyer. Just more suggestion about the generational tjhing. My son deplores Led Zeplin and my daughter isn't very excited about them.

Each generation will, for the largest part, remain loyal to the music they grew up on and think that most of the newer stuff is just garbage. that isn't going to change a lot, I would think. Your great-grandkids are going to complain about that 'garbage' your grandkids listen to as they were growing up. So on and so on.

All the best to ya, Jim.

Alan