JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Industry Message Forum I'm tired about hearing about how today's country ****s

I was in a store today and I heard a song on the radio that was just great -- don't know the title, the performers or nothing, but the thought occurred to me: The writing today is just as good as it ever was. It's just that the masters will always be the "masters" and it is hard to compete with sounds that forged your growing up days.

Kevin

There probably is the odd decent tune about...but generally the standard of todays chart music is pretty poor. For instance tonight I watched multi millionaire Miley Cyrus on a live TV prog "PERFORM" a ditty called "Fly On The Wall"....It set a new record in mediocrity. I can honestly say both the song and performance sucked in every way.

Yes there was crap when I was growing up....but even the worst cannot compare with this type of garbage.

On the contrary, I've heard some very good pop music the past few months.
Its all a matter of taste. Frankly, there's a lot of crap and mediocre music from the 60s (Herman's Hermits?), 70s(Glenn Campbell?), 80s and 90s as well.

Kings of Leon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuQiBrBD2JE
Human
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d97XFGR_IP0
Coldplay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ujNzCvjQOs&feature=related
Cheesy but good
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU8zNPpyxvA&feature=related

Darius, Herman's Hermits was a contrived band, but was backed by the best musicians in the UK. Can you say Jimmy Page? He was a session musician and played on several of Herman's Hermits records.
Glen Campbell is a superior guitarist and all around musician. There should be no argument about Glen Campbell. But you started it.
Yes it's a matter of taste.
Please read some history of Glen Campbell before you insinuate that he made bad music. You may not like his songs, but you have to respect his musicianship and his contribution to popular music.

...in fact, if you're ever stuck for a "lead solo" in your song, take the "melody" and play it an octave lower on the acoustic guitar, maybe jazz it up just a little with a repeated note here and there...works every time...oh--and Glen Campbell invented that "baritone guitar solo sound"...and was also the voice of Jimmy Webb, arguably one of the top songwriters of last century; and put a royalties check in Johnny Hartford's mail box every month ("Gentle On My Mind"), so Hartford could then make the kind of records that would re-energize folk and bluegrass...Glen Campbell was my first music hero back in the late 60s...

I think music is always reflective of the times in which we live...There's a "Mylie Cyrus" now, there was a "Donny Osmond" in the 70s, and a Frankie Avalon and Brenda Lee in the 60s...teenyboppers need role models and heart-throbs...

To get back to Kevin's original statement, country IS more sophisticated now, and so is Nashville. The country of the early 60s, when Chet Atkins was producing Jim Reeves and Owen Bradley--Patsy Cline, people sort of "reflected" the sound of those recordings...more innocent, plain spoken, heart-on-sleeve...

Better or worse? that's always a subjective thing that people get real emotional about; I tend not to think in those terms...

I think a good way to know a society is to look at their "pop music and culture" ... it certainly makes sense, because pop culture "is what it is" because people literally "buy into it" because they "identify"...

--Mike

Chet Atkins - To me his the kind of sophisticated in Nashville! But I think its not so much about the songs, it is just as much about the generations of artists.

The songs always have to work with the artist, and since the 90ies it has become a lot more about concepts and artist identities. Identity is the premise of interpretation and judgements about taste and good/bad.

Consequently songs will work well for one artist and will be regarded a poor song for another. So some artists are a bit light, and can't pull the great songs off, but 'lighter' songs work well enough for them to have a career.

But others need the great songs for their career. I think this is also a reason why the strain on songwriters have been harder, because more people can write the 'lighter' tunes, and they really don't need songwriters to do them.

Making the competition hard, because we are only fighting about the artists who does the great songs, and this is a lot smaller (and perhaps also less commercial) market.

Capitalism has that effect in general, that when things are made to fit a market, they will become more and more standarized (alike). In time this means that diversity is excluded, and thereby also what we usually think of the quality of the 'unique'.

I definitely think there is tendencies of this, also in country. So I can understand the voices that promote the story of modern country being of less 'quality' than before, allthough I still hear great country songs out there, like Kevin.

On problem I think is valid, is that since the 90ies the market has run out of voices who are caring about the diversity. In Europe we have thought of these as 'cultural' institutions, securing diversity and a broad representation of tastes. Like national radio has aimed to do here in Scandinavia. In Europe these cultural institutions has transformed more and more into media institutions, working more and more on the premise of 'markets' (whatever those are) and securing their own business, loosing the interest of the broad 'cultural' agenda.

In Europe this is due to a change in the way capitalism work, to a way 'harder' and more 'cynical' version. Not sure about the states, but I think this could explain developments in the US music industry as well, including country music.

Still, I can name loads of great artists and songs right now. None mentioned, none forgotten :-)

Sorry, I have trouble with the keyboard. I ment Chet Atkins is the KING of sophisticated in Nashville, to me anyway.

I was not a particular fan of Hermans Hermits or Glen Campbell...however they could not have been used as worse examples to illustrate bad music.... they produced something approximating music and have stood the test of time.....Even I sing "I'm into something good" from time to time.
Have a listen to Miley Cyrus "fly on the wall" and tell me it deserves any sort of acclaim. Will people be humming that in forty years?
It would be interesting to see what Darius considers good pop that he has heard in the last few months.
Re country music GENERALLY it is hardly ever played in the UK. We just get the tip of the iceberg.

Good and bad music is simply defined by the listener. I grew up in the 1950s and 1960s (born in 1947...yeah, I'm that freaking old!) I absolutely loved hearing Ray Price belt out a country song. I still do. I have almost a dozen CDs and albums of his muisc. He is still my all-time favorite country singer. I thoroughly enjoyed Merel Haggard, Faron Young, The Gatlin Brothers, Jim Ed Brown, Connie Smith, Tammy Wynette, etc.

Society is ever changing with each new generation and significant technical breakthrough. Music is part of society. It has been for centuries...probably always will be. As society changes, so does music. Music is often a reflection of society. You need to keep in mind that music reflects society at that time the music is written.

There will always be classics that transcend time and generations. Their message and presentation is universal and timeless. If we use nothing but the classics as a template for judging music, we are going to be forever disappointed. They are classics becaudse they stand out far above the rest of the music. There are but half a dozen or so classics from each generation. So, why should we expect more than that from this, or any other, generation?

I slightly prefer the country music of the 60s and early 70s to today's country. But, by no means, does that suggest I do not like today's country music. I like much of it. But, I do not expect it to sound like Merle Haggard, Connie Smith or Tammy Wynette cuts.

Those of you who have relatively young children or, like me, grandchildren, will someday hear those kids or grandkids say "I hate this new country music they're playing on the radio. It's pure garbage! Sure wish we could hear some of that good old Traditional Country, like Faith Hill, Big and Rich and Rascal Flats did back in the days when Country was still Country!". It's gonna happen! Today's Contemporary Country Music is going to be the next generation's Traditional Country.

You might remember when the Country Music purists nearly had emotional herart attacks the first time they allowed drums on stage at the Grand Old Opery. That was BIG news for quite some time in the Country Music community. They said any song with drums in it isn't country. Well, the folks we now perceive as icons of Traditional Country Music had drums in their bands...folks like Merle Haggard, Buck Owens, Eddie Arnold (heck, he even had full orchstras with comolicated chord patterns in much of his music), Tammy Wynette, etc.

I'm with Kevin. Today's Country music is no better or worse than the country music of years past. It's just different and many of you do not like change. Personally, I welcome the changes and many of the new sounds. I like seeing Country Music evolve with the rest of society.

Big Jim, one of my best freinds here at JPF, referred to the Miley Cyrus' song. I haven't heard it, so I cannot comment on it. But, even though I am an advocate of contemporary/modern Country Music, I would agree with Jim that few are eternally memorable. But, I could say that about almost any genre of music from any generation. Those of you who listened to Rock music in the 60s and 70s will say "Hety, here's a BUNCH of memorable songs for ya!!". Well, I could do the same for Country back in that same era. But you didn't listen to Country, so if I named them it wouldn't impress you in the least. Remember, that goes both ways! Personally, I liked a lot of the Rock music from the 60s. One of my favorite all-time songs is "These Eyes" by the Guess Who in 1962. But, I have always liked music form multiple genres. Check my Soundclick site...there are at least 8 - 10 genres represented there. I have an open mind to music and try not to prejudge anything until I've heard it. From the dozens of genres of music out there, there is but one for which I can find nothing good to say. But, those who enjoy it...good for them.

What I have never understood is why someone else feels the need to tell me, or another person, that the music we enjoy sucks. Rather than trashing it, what's wrong with simply saying, "Well, it's not my cup of tea. But hey, if you like it, good for you!"? Why does there always have to be that caveat of "Good for you...but I still say it sucks!"? I may not like your listening pleasure; but I'm not going to demean it because I don't care for it. I'm just glad you found something you enjoy listening to. It shouldn't affect me one way or the other. No one forces anyone to buy music they do not like. If you don't like what's on the radio, you have a tuner. You can change the station. If you don't like ANYTHING on the radio, you porobably have a CD player or an MP3 player. And, you don't have to listen to commercials between songs!

So, why not listen to what you enjoy and let me and Kevin, or whomever, enjoy our music without trashing it?

Alan

There is no doubt that the country music on the radio today is played and produced perfectly. The musicianship is terrific. The singers also sound very good (on the recordings at least). The songs and lyrics are a matter of taste I suppose. I have read that the marketers are aiming at the women who listen to the radio on the way to work. Our local country stations seem to have about four songs in their rotation - any time I switch them on I hear the same songs ad nauseum.

I agree Al....Different folks different strokes...that said there are IMO minimum standards especially when people are charting and making so much money. If stuff does not meet these minimum standards then we have the right to trash it. If we do not express our feelings about trashy music then we will get even more of it. The average music purchaser nowadays are programmed to accept just about anything without question. Rather than slap the producers on the back and say good job I say tell them it is crap and is unacceptable. Perhaps the only way the message will get across. I feel sorry for the many talented people who do not get a break but produce brilliant stuff whilst no talented poptarts whos daddy got them into the business make millions from moronic crap.

IMO today's country is nothing more than a bunch of men and women(bunch of snot-nose girls too) screaming with no regards to the pioneers that made country what it is, it lacks traditions that it once had nowadays they take any singer on the grand ol opry without him or her having to have paid their dues beforehand.I as a writer will continue to write the traditional style and will not sell my country soul out to the music row devil.They even get old rockers and new rockers to come in and ruin it further and they shun out the ones that have made and paid their dues to airplay.

Colin,

I do agree with you 100% about the minimal content with the roatation. The redundnacy gets old after a while, regardless of the quality of the music. I love my wife dearly, but I enjoy talking to other folks sometimes, too!

Alan

Jim,

Howdy friend! The problem with determining quality is that it, too, is subjective. I am fine with a suit from Joseph E. Banks...a retailer of nice men's wear here in the U.S. My neighbor wouldn't be caught dead in anything less than the "quality" of an Armani. Thus, his standard of quality is far different from mine. It's the same old thing. The definition of quality differs from one person to the next. As we grow, our experiences, culture, peers and in-born tastes are going to define our likes and dislikes. Few of us have similar experiences, peers and in-born tastes.

I think many folks predetermine the quality and/or likeability of most things before they ever experience it. When a person who does not like Contemporary Country music sits down to listen to a CD by a Contemporary Country artist, they will have already predtermined that they probably are not going to like it and do not listen to it objectively. That would hold true in almost all genres of music that a traditional history followed by contemporary models.

My wife deplores Geln Campbell. I enjoy his guitar playing immesnsely and pretty much like his vocals. To quote my wife: "Anything Glen Campbell does is pure sh*t...end of statement." If he ever did a song she would legitimately like, she would not allow herself to do so. I think similar attitudes prevail about the evolution of music form its past to its present.

Always good to hear from ya! Take care and all the best!

Alan

nubbin,

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But opinions are just that...opinions. If any music is written and performed in a trraditional mode, it isn't contemporary. Music in all genres is always going to evolve and the new style resulting from that evolution is what is contemporary at the time. Keep in mind that what we call Traditional Country Music today was contemporary in the 60s and 70s and a few years before. At that time, Jimmy Rodgers, the Carter Family asnd such were the Traditional Country Music.

My father said that Ernest Tubb ruined Country msuic when he added drums to his band. However, these days, we refer to Ernest Tubb as one of the great icons of Traditional Country Music.

Whether or not a performer is "snot-nosed", arrogant, "has no regards to the pioneers", or whether or not they have "paid their dues" has nothing to do with their musical ability. That is their personality...not their performance abilities. If we used personality, attitude respect for the industry/peers/pioneers, and the like, as a measure of talent, there would be a lot of the traditional icons of Country Music who would never have had a chance. "Talent" is a measure of one's ability to perform and deliver the product...not their attitudes or path to success.

I have met and performed with quite a few of them over the years and more than a small handfull were arrogant, dispresctful and couldn't have cared less about the history or the future of Country Music as long as they got the biggest paycheck possible at the time.

I would never try to suggest you are not entitled to your opinions and perceptions. Although I may disagree with them, that does not deny you the privelege of having them.

The problem I have with a large number of folks who have strong opinions about something is they want to construe those opinions as fact and feel that anyone who disagrees is wrong. I say they simply have a different taste than I do. And that's great. I would not want to dictate to others what they should or should not enjoy any more than I would want those same folks dictating what I should or should not enjoy.

I enjoy most genres of music. There are one or two I do not. But, I simply avoid it and don't try to ruin the enjoyment for those who do like that music. When someone tells me what I like to listen to is rubbish, I take it personally. When they say they disagree and prefer something else, I think that is great. To call someone else's likes and dislikes rubbish, or any similar ascription, is disrespectful to that person/group of people.

I am glad you enjoy listening to, performing (if you do perform) and writing Traditional Country Music. I hope it continues to bring you enjoyment for years to come. In the mean tinme, I'll continue to enjoy both the Traditional Country Music as well as the Contemporary offerings.

Alan

Everyone is entitled to his opinion, even when he is wrong!

Yeah.
I liked the music of Grampa Jones, String bean, and Uncle Dave Macon, but I think those days are gone.

As far as Glen Campell, my favorite part of his TV show was when he sat down and played good music with Larry McNeely.

I disagree

The notion that "today's music is bad, yesterday's music was good" has been around since the beginning of music itself. That right there should tell you something. It's the argument of the old farts. Besides, any music that isn't bluegrass is absolute $#i! anyway.

Kevin,
The Golden Era of Country Music was from 1946, right after the Second World War, until 1956 when Elvis showed up and the music began to change. After a while you get tired of listening to the same old stuff and quit listening or buying it so it fades or changes.

I was fortuntate to be able to listen to all the good Country Music from about 1950 to 1955. Most young people haven't had the experence of hearing music from the Golden Era so they have nothing to compare to when they become Artists today and can only go on what they are familiar with. That goes for all the people in the Music Business. They haven't heard much of the country music from the past so go with what seems to be the popular theme at the moment.

Back in the 50's an Artist didn't have extensive recording equipment. It was done on one track and if they didn't get it the first take they did it again until they got something that was acceptable if they got it at all.

Today it shows when a Record Label takes shortcuts when producing a record. You can't take shortcuts when you write a song and you can't take shortcuts when you record it. Some people are putting out a good product but many are not but it may make it on to the radio just the same.

One thing we have talked about is you can't force a song. If it sounds forced, and a lot of Artists have to write their own stuff because the Labels don't want to pay the full mechanical rate for outside songs that may be better for the project. Hence you hear a lot of "Crap" on the radio.

Of course there was some less than stellar music on the radio in the past also. Most of it came along with Elvis as that was the fad at the moment.

I think the ratio of good to bad music in the 50's compared to today it is no contest. You rarely heard a bad song on the Radio
in the 50's Country or otherwise. Today it is commonplace even tho some are producing superior music.

Tom,

Fully agree with your comments on the "Glen Campbell Goodtime Hour". I also enjoyed it when John Hartford made his frequent appearances. Although I wasn't always the biggest fan of his music (didn't much care for his vocals), I always thought he was pretty close to being a musical genius.

Take care, my friend.

Alan

Mike,

Yep, and the argument ain't going away anytime soon! I don't mind the difference in opinion. I just dislike the fact that some folks think their opinions are more legit than other folks' opinions.

By the way, I like Bluegrass, too!

Alan

today's music is like comparing Babe Ruth to Barry Bonds, the Babe was overweight smoke drank and still could hit a homerun when drunk and outta shape while as Barry Bonds had to resort to some kinda beefed up drugs in order for him to get a chance at a homerun, there's no comparison because the new kids on the block if placed back in the era of the 40's or 50's couldn't cut it without all the technology to make them sound good whereas the old timers with this new technology would be hitting grandslams every time!oh and this is my opinion

One thing that any number of people may have, (me included), is the sense that they know what is good or bad, from the perspective of seeing everything from "their" center of the Universe. With seeing and hearing everything with our own eyes and ears, it becomes a "constant perspective", and can have us totally convinced that our opinion should be fact for everyone.

"Belief" is a very powerful mindset. The issue is, there are many centers of the Universe. One person's crap is another's gold. That's a human constant. Respect, given or not, may say how we see others, compared to ourselves.

"Before Elvis, there was Nothing" is a John Lennon Quote...(Tho I still prefer The Rolling Stones..for "My Formative Period" as a kid back in Cleveland.) Marty Robbins...Johnny Cash..Patsy Cline..Everly Bros..THESE were what we "Northerners" grew up with as "Country Artists"...& yeah, Glen Campbell came along later, too...(& "Wichita Lineman" will forever remain a Great Song in what doesn't seem like very "Early Days" for Country.) Willie Nelson's an "Older Country Artist" to this duffer...& yeah, hard to top some of Willie's Better-Ones...which he STILL plays, thank God!

"Country & Western" brought us Gene Autry & Roy Rogers...before the Genre kinda Bifurcated...& The Sons of The Pioneers played many a Hit..even Up In Cleveland. Hank Williams also aired...so we did hear many a "Classic"..even thru The Rock Era.

As far as Mz Cyrus' Music Goes...I think comparing her era's music to Ours...is kinda unfair. Kids..in Each Generation..pick their Heros...oftimes JUST to irritate their Parents. (How soon We Tend to Forget, eh?)

I dunno about the kids "needing all that technology to sound good." They Have It...they Use It. (Why produce a B&W Video when Color's Available?) ;-)> Why did "Old" Country shed an Acoustic Hawaiian Guitar & go Electric? ;-)>

Country's gettin' like Rock these days: Each Decade has its "Heros"... SHOULDN'T each Decade sound a bit DIFFERENT, as Tastes Progress? Otherwise, all ya get's "Golden Oldies"..which..JMO..in Too-Many-Genres..tends to Rule-lately on the Terrestrial Airwaves...(With Country being the Main Exception!)

All JMO..& I'm so short of time these days, I confess to listening to less & less radio...& "Keeping Up with it all."

Big Hugs,
Stan

There is a subtle difference between taste and quality.

I may not like a particular genre or style of music but I can see and respect the craftmanship and talent involved in producing it... Similarily I can tell when someone has no craft or talent and has thrown together something. I listen to a lot of music and some of the crap produced does not deserve any encouragement or recognition.....that applies to music produced in any era. I may be an old fart but can still appreciate a good musician regardless....problem is nowadays they are pretty thin on the ground...especially in mainstream pop. They seem to have run out of ideas, originality and just plain old talent and ability. That said I can take you to places where some brilliant young musicians play...It sickens me to think that they will never get any recognition...whilst some so called stars with little skill or talent get paid obscene amounts.
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.

nubbin,

I wouldn't argue that point with you. I think it is valid. But the fact that we do have new technology is a good thing. If it makes anyone sound better, that's good for the listener. But, your original point about the old folks hitting a grand slam most of the time is worthy.

Alan

I totally agree with Jim, these TV shows like American Idol, and the others like it aren't the way to find the hidden talent, and it is crap too I don't have to be no damn college professor or have one tell me when I smell or see or hear crap that it's something else!Rise the bar not lower it and if they can't meet it have them rise to it but don't ever lower it just to meet quota.

I accept the argument that what I consider "good" is poisoned by my upbringing. I had limited "genrical" exposure to music as a child (bluegrass and classical), discovered rock 'n' roll late in thre 1960s, played with a bluegrass band three of whose members came from rock backgrounds, and have grown over time to appreciate country music especially for the writing. I still think most of today's music is c**p.

And I blame mostly the *process*. There was definitely c**p being written 50 years ago, and 30 years ago, but not that much of it made it to the radio or to the record stores. There were filters, in the form of all those local DJs at all those local radio stations, that made sure good stuff did get exposed and promoted, and we mostly don't have that mechanism any more. Instead, playlists are controlled by people who aren't necessarily interested in talent, and may be more interested in protecting the work of people they control, and I think what you hear on the radio is the result.

And of course I could be dead wrong. I'm an outsider who is occasionally bothered by rejection, and that mindset is fertile ground for conspiracy theories, as you probably know. I just see a lot of talent (I even know some of it) that can't get any attention, and used to be able to. And (my opinion) a higher percentage of that stuff is good than what you hear on the radio or find on commercial records.

That's not to say I have a solution. I don't. I have simply voted with my feet. I would rather attend--even pay money for--a performance by some of that Unrecognized Talent, and I would rather spend money on *their* records. Because *I* think the material is better. And after three years, I still have not bothered to learn how to turn that Idiot Japanese Radio on in my car.

And I agree with The Foot about bluegrass music. (Of course. I grew up on it. For those who didn't, as Bill Clinton used to say, I feel your pain.)

Joe

yeah Al but here's the problem, if an artist has to rely on modern technology to make them sound good on a record, then when they do a live performance they can't do that same thing and thereby put all sorts of negative thoughts in their previous listeners and sometimes they lose them forever.

Folks of our generation are not supposed to like the current pop music. If we did, the kids would become horrified and move on to something else.

On the reverse, kids typically did not like their parents music either. Sure there were exceptions but, generally speaking, boomers did not play their parents' music. That's one thing that seems a little different today. My friends that have kids tell me that their children really like music of the 60's and 70's.

Scott

Give me that old drunk in his suds, cry baby George Jones so I can bum out.
Sittin here drinkin my suds.
Left my baby in the bar last night
She started usin her mind and I couldn't stand it
And that's why we got into a big ole fight
Oh she left me
Yes she left me

That's how I think of him. But, maybe it is just the type of songs I heard and not others. Some love bluegrass, others disco. Yuk! Who knows? Different folks is what makes the world go round for us. Give me good jazz/rock/funk fusion and I'll be happy as a pig in sh##. The only country I liked was the Allman Bros. LOL
But, then again, if I was sittin around a campfire, I could get into bluegrass.

John

You can't help being you and I can't help being me

Yikes,
Yesterday my wife, daughter, grandaughter, age 14, and I went down to Orange Park, Fl, just outside of Jacksonville to visit some old friends that came east from Utah to visit their children.

Coming back my Grandaughter said turn on the Radio. Well you can guess what type of music she wanted to listen to. I think it is modern rock, the same stuff I am currently evaluating for the JPF Awards. So I thought this is a chance for me to listen to what is being offered on the Radio. I don't listen to it otherwise. Some of it was fairly good, most of it was passable. It gave me a little better guage when I am listening to the offerings I am evaluating. One thing I try to see is if I can hear what I am evaluating on the Radio.

Yes todays kids aren't listening to much of what adults are listening to.

nubbin,

Again, you make a valid point. I think the difference is more in the listener these days. However, I don't think, for the most part, that todays concert attendee or CD/radio listener is that concerned the singer being right on pitch, or that the harmonies meld perfectly. It's more the overall mood of the song...the rhythm, the beat, etc, than it is the actual vocal performance that garners their attention. Does the beat or the aura of the song move them to quit what they are doing to "groove" with the music...that sort of thing.

Also, we had some of the same issues back with the traditional Country as we do today with the Contemporary Country. Many listeners are a bit myopic. Back in the late 50s and early 60s my sister commented that "Anything Web Pierce does is good. I would buy any of his albums before I ever listened. He could never sing a bad song." I'm a big fan of web pierce. But yes, he could sing a bad song. I guess I should restate that...he had the potential to sing any song badly...as does any artist. My sister also said that "Anything Ernest Tubb does is pure crap." I wasn't the biggest fan of his singing, although I thought he was wonderful gentlemen the several times I met him and played with him. But, he had some very good songs. I just find it ludicrous that anyone would think that their favorite artist could never have a bad recording or performance and that the ones they don't like could never have an acceptable recording or performance.


There is but one major, super-star artist in my 62 years about whom I would say I have never enjoyed anything they did. I didn't care for his singing, his lyrics, his musical composition or his delivery. That's just one over three generations of music.

Going back to your original point, I don't think today's audience is as critical of the finer points from live performances. Just play the music that makes me groove is their mantra. But, your point remains valid. All the best.

Alan

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

Hi Alan, I'm glad that all is fine in St. Louie. Say hi to Chuck Berry if you see him. 78 degrees here in SW Fl. and my brother and I are smoking some ribs.

I don't want to drift the thread but I have to respond to what you said about the music industry targeting 30 year olds and younger. Your right, but the over 45's (Baby Boomers) were the first to buy records en-mass. Most have never lost their love of music though some have. The over 45's are more likely to actually pay for the music and not share files. I have a cousin who is 56. He is a clinical psychologist. He never goes anywhere without his ipod, even to work. He has thousands of songs downloaded that he bought from itunes. He even bought my music after I had given him a free CD.
Cadillac targets older customers because they can either pay cash or have good credit and I think that using "era" music in their ads is a great marketing strategy.

It's right there on my first post above
One more
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RSlhNJFohI
One more just for fun
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETrWZsYYJOQ

hMMMmmm kinda proves my point.

Thanks to all that jumped in and made it an interesting thread.

Big Jim: OK, Fly on the Wall is pretty bad (LOL!). Of course, Miley's popularity is based on her being a TV star on the Hannah Montana show. Since my daughter has watched that over the past three years, I think I have seen about every episode. Her foot in the door for music is based more on her TV stardom rather than her talents and she has tons and tons of fans, so I am not convinced that she makes a good argument one way or another on the "state of the music today". In any case your comments are always interesting and you know I always seem to agree with you (ha, ha).

Darius: Herman's Hermits came out when I was listening to a lot of AM Radio and they had some decent hits (or at least in my ears back then). Glen Campbell is a big talent -- he recorded a lot of of great tunes. But that's OK if you think he is a turkey.

Ben: Hey look, we are on the same side of an argument!

Mike Z.: I think that musically (instrumental skill), there are probably more great players then there ever were and the bands are tight I'm talking Nashville, but it applies everywhere). Are they better than the old players/bands? Pioneers are always hard to top.

SongCabinet: Commercialism is always going to "dumb down" the creative voices to make it more palatable to the masses. has always been, will always be. Still room for the innovator, but it has always been tough to be "first" at anything.

Al: Always the voice of reason! You hit the nail on the head here. Taste/Quality is driven by the individual. have the big money forces twisted the market to make more money? Sure -- oh well. Does your wife hate Glenn because of the Tanya stuff?

Colin: Overplaying anything always kills it for me. But during the am radio days, didn't the same hit songs come on all the time, too.

Nubbin: Always nice to see a fair and balanced open mind at work! Why bring the devil into it? Do you think God liked the drunk, divorce, cheating songs of traditional country better than today's drunk/divorce/cheating songs? On to the sports analogy: Today's athletes run faster, jump higher and are stronger than anything in the earlier glory days of sports. Jim Brown, who is probably the best running back of all time, would be middle of the pack in speed and strength today. Barry Bonds is a HOF'er in any era. He was a great player before Steroids. On the other hand, while football and basketball players of today dwarf the old players, baseball does seem to have more timeless quality to it. However, I think today you have better athletes, period.

Tom: I used to watch his show and always enjoyed the playing that was going on.

Mike: The Foot speaks! I like bluegrass, too -- expect it needs drums.

Ray: Good points all. Unless we really, really study the "ratio", we won't know the percentage of good vs. bad.

Tampa Stan: I confess that I don't listen to much radio either, but when I drive rental cars to go on business trips by myself, I will turn on country stations (and others) to see what's happening. When they actually get around to playing music, I am usually pleasantly surprised.

Joe: Right you are -- support your local musicians!!!

Scott: My science teacher in high school said that a lot of the music we were listening to at the time would become unlistenable to us as we got older. He was right about that. Taste changes, but of course certain classics will always be listenable.

John: I grew up on Hendrix/ABB, so I know where you are coming from on that one.

I hope I didn't miss anyone.

Kevin

When something of mine gets critiqued, the word "Retro" comes up a lot. That's because my personal "playlist" just keeps growing larger, rather than always updating to the Here & Now. I don't seem to tire of a great song, no matter how much time passes. It's my disease and I ain't giving it up.

I recently took my daughters to see MGMT and Beck in concert. Wow, LOTS of great new music. And also lots of newer but swiftly aging classics from Beck's catalog. A lot of people thought/think he sucks...well, he doesn't.

We can keep complaining, and the music will keep changing. I remember groaning about the late 70's. I thought disco sucked, most New Wave sucked, Punk sucked...but they all sucked me in eventually. I love all three now.

We'll look back on today and remember all this slick production...we'll probably forget a lot of the artists and instead tip our hats to some of the groundbreaking producers and engineers, who knows?

All I know is that it keeps changing. The king is dead, long live the king.

Well, the only point it proves is you don't like it, which is neither here nor there. I like it - I like the interplay of synths and the band. Very catchy.

BTW, I like Led Zep, Yes, Van Halen, Neil Young, The Beatles, The Police, U2, Heart, The Stones, Metallica, Bob Marley, Beethoven, Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Chick Corea, Herbie Hancock, Bach, Mozart, Gil Evans, Bacharach, Springsteen, Brahms, Peter Gabriel, etc as well. Not just mouthing names - I actually have an obscene amount of CDs of these artists.

I just think music being made today is just as valid as music made in the past.

Today - I like Incubus, Coldplay, The Killers, Alicia Keys, Justin Timberlake.

Here's one more outstanding track for your viewing pleasure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiKloCXW-v4

Brahms??

Dude, that is SO yesterday...

Ben,

Can't find a thing to argue with in this post! Indeed, the 45+ farts, like you and me, are more likely to pay for our music rather than pirate it. I think that's a nice little feather in the hat for our generation! Well, I'm guessing I'm a few years older than you! But, we both fall into that Boomer group.

Although we are more likely to actually pay for our music, I do think in the big picture we buy considerably less than the 30 & under group. We have more financial responsibilities, thus we spend our money differently. Yes indeed, we do buy a lot of muysic...but that big number still pales in comparison to the younger folks. For them, their music is a big part of defining who they are. we already...in most cases...know who we are. Music is simply one of the pleasures we allow ourselves. But it is not necessary to define us. there is a huge disaprity bewteen the two groups regarding the importance of the music. The suits are going to target the audience who is willing to spend their money more readily. We are, more or less, saying the same thing. that applies to the Cadillac commercials as well.

It's always my pleasure to hear from you, Ben. You're always a class act in my book. We often differ in taste and approach to issues. But, it is always done with respect and consideration. I'm sure you appreciate that as much as I do.

By the way, it was pretty chilly here in St. Louis today...upper 30s, but mostly sunny. But I grill year-round, regardless of weather. Burger soof the grill taste equally good in 15 degree weather as they do in 75 degree weather! We had burgers from the grill and some home-made potato salad I put together this morning. I topped it off with some baked beans I made last night. Yummy yummy! All the best to you.

Alan

Well, his music sounds good unplugged.
Artists today have to use new stuff like electric guitars and amps and microphones and effects and computers to sound good. And they need electricity too, to run all those gadgets!