Quote:
Originally Posted by zachsd
Hm, by modern recording do you mean the development of compact discs and MP3?
Also, I agree that every decade has it's creative types, but the 60s saw a greater audience for those creative types, that's what made the difference. The 60s saw a demand for innovation not only coming from the artistic community itself, but from a greater portion of the general public. After all, art and artists are intrinsically linked to their audiences. The root of that demand for innovation came from the unique time period. Feminism, anti-war protests, etc. all contributed to creating a population that wanted change, including musical innovation. The 60s was an outburst of creative freedom stemming from the restrictive post-war mentality of WW2, and more specifically the restrictive nature of the early 50s. Given the circumstances, it was going to naturally be a period of great change.
|
I will agree that it seems that particular decade saw more than most other decades, but even then it might just be because it was highly publicized. My point was that this creativity exists all the time. I mentioned jazz and blues for that reason. It might not have the historical remembrance that the 60's have, but it was there nonetheless.
By modern recording I just meant recording in general. I should have left off the modern bit, sorry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachsd
I also don't really understand the correlation between "indie cred" and the production of high quality music.
|
I was just pointing out that the 60's was what started the idea that non-mainstream music is better than what's on the radio. The idea obviously persists today, so that might be why a lot of people point to the 60's as starting point for this creative explosion. It doesn't really have anything to do with quality.
Now that I'm on the topic, though, I'd like to point out the 60's had just as much total crap as today. I got really into psychedelic rock recently, and once I wanted to go past the "essentials" it became painfully obvious that I would have to sort through a bunch of bands just trying to sound like Jefferson Airplane. I have just as much of a hard time finding those classic 60's gems as I do finding great modern music. Everyone may have really gotten into music and art in the 60's, but that doesn't mean it was good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachsd
This is getting kind of off topic buy I have to really disagree with this. Maybe in the early 50s jazz was seen this way, but definitely not by the early 60s, even late 50s. During that time jazz got a tremendous white following, especially with the introduction of Dave Brubeck. Whites were very active in jazz by that time.
|
I was really just referring to Jazz pre-60's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachsd
Well that's sort of jumping to a personal judgment. I can think of a number of movements that were significant in the post 60s/70s music scene. Trip-hop, 90s alternative rock, etc. This list goes on, just doing some quick wikipedia researching will get you hundreds. I agree that such movements existed. But nothing, in my opinion, compares to the 60s in terms of the breadth of musical advancement that happened in such a dense period of time. And I feel like I'm looking at this pretty objectively from any social stigmas that may have been associated with the time period.
|
I just don't know. I love psychedelic rock, but was it really that innovative? I think the sound got tired fairly quickly and for that reason lead to the progressive rock of the 70's. I just don't see anything that makes me feel the 60's had all that much more creativity than any other time.