Why Is Old Music Superior To Modern Music?

[Jack8991]

I’m 23 years old but I think that old music from the 80s/90s is just superior to modern music. I listen to 90s west coast rap and it just sounds way better than modern rap, in terms of the way they rap and especially the instrumentals. Also, 80s pop music sounds euphoric to me, whereas pop music from 2010 onwards is just horrible to me. Why do you think this is the case?

[tiggerblue10]

Rapper's Delight by the Sugerhill Gang was the first rap song I think. But Blondie was more mainstream.

[tiggerblue10]

I would put boybands in the 'grates' category.

[1ozzy]

You beat me by one year tigger.
But I prefered Blondie,

[1ozzy]

Boy bands, girl bands, most are canned pop.

[andy-hughes]

1ozzy - // Some people credit Deborah Harry and the group Blondie being the first rappers way back in 1980. //

Blondie were miles away from being the first rappers.

However, they were the first mainstream white pop band to include a rap on what would become a huge hit single, thus introducing the medium of rap to a white audience who would never have found its home in black underground urban music.

[woofgang]

music from the 80's "old" ROFL

[andy-hughes]

woofgang - // music from the 80's "old" ROFL //

I know, but it's all relative.

If you were fifteen in 1985, in the middle of the '80's' pop music, you will be fifty-one now!!!!!!!

[Hopkirk]

It's a fact of life that as you get older, the music that 'the young' listen to just sounds like noise.

We are all turning into our fathers.

[andy-hughes]

Hopkirk - // It's a fact of life that as you get older, the music that 'the young' listen to just sounds like noise.

We are all turning into our fathers. //

I am happy to be the exception that rule, because I have a professional interest in music, rather than simply as a casual listener.

As I have said previously the composition and production of music has changed out of all recognition, as it always must do, and I think the approach is to accept what is clearly not aimed at people of, ahem, a certain age, and ignore it, but keep an ear out for the good stuff that is always out there.

The Internet simply makes finding it so much harder because there is so much more stuff to sift through, but panning for gold is always worth finding a nugget in all the dross.

[royfromaus]

dannyk13
One man's meat-----
_____________________________
Are they your favourite rappers, Danny?

[naomi24]

AH, you have what you say is a ‘professional’ interest in music and yet you have confessed to being disinterested in current offerings. Furthermore, an interest of any description in music doesn’t render an opinion or judgement any more valid than the next man’s. I think some of your choices are abysmal - but then as Danny quite rightly says, one man’s meat ….

[andy-hughes]

Naomi, I have never dreamed of suggesting that my opinion is any more, or indeed less valid than anyone else's.

One of the great pleasures of music is that everyone can have an opinion, and then agree or disagree with everyone else's.

I don't think my opinion is more or less valid than anyone else's, I just happen to be in the fortunate position of being able to share my opinions with a worldwide readership, and to be paid for the privilege.

[naomi24]

Indeed. The internet is a wonderful thing.

[andy-hughes]

It is, but seventy-five percent of my output still ends up in good old-fashioned magazines.

[andy-hughes]

Wow, looks like I've got away with a response without getting into an argument - that's a rarity!!

[Atheist]

Naomi at 23:01.
I think you meant uninterested, not disinterested. I may be wrong, in which case I wouldn't really unjderstand what you were trying to say.
:-)

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // Indeed. The internet is a wonderful thing. //

It is, but it's a two-edged sword.

In the same way that technology has given everyone a camera in their phone, that just means everyone can take pictures, it does not mean they are photographers.

Similarly, it gives everyone a chance to send in interviews and reviews, but it does not make them writers.

It does mean that some lazy or tight-fisted editors will take sub-standard free copy from fans, at the expense of professional writers, but happily there are ebough of them who still value a professionally done job to a requisite standard, and are willing to pay an appropriate fee in order to get that service regularly, rather than relying on the notoriously inefficient and inefficient amateurs who soon find out that going to gigs and getting free albums is great, but writing properly to a house style and getting copy in to a deadline is actually harder than they thought.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // AH, you have what you say is a ‘professional’ interest in music and yet you have confessed to being disinterested in current offerings. //

As Atheist observes, I am uninterested in a lot, but by no means all, of modern pop output - principally because it's not covered by the magazines and websites that I write for.

Should that situation change, I can soon develop an interest - being a professional means writing about artists and bands that generate interest, and that tends to mean those with a career, rather than a one-off single hit song.

Of course, being a professional, I am more than capable of writing about something I don't actually like personally, and do so on many occasions.

[Mozz71]

I'd imagine being a music journo is very much akin to being a commercial radio DJ. You have to pretend to not hate an awful lot of pap.

[andres]

Give me the 50s/60s music anytime. Romantic ballads ,rock and roll, ballroom dancing. Saturday nights at the local dance hall where a lot of us met our future partners. Dancing cheek to cheek in a close embrace.
Nothing quite like it today. It's all screeching and wailing as to who can shout the loudest.