Quote:
|
It's weird how these ''creatively stagnant" decades have so much more musical diversity than the 60s.
|
I'm not calling them creatively stagnant, just in comparison to the 60s they were creatively stagnant. Also, my point wasn't so much that the 60s had so much more diversity than other decades, it's just that the growth of musical diversity happened in such a comparatively short amount of time. It saw some of the best moments in jazz, various genres of rock, popular folk music, and the beginnings of other genres such as the minimalist movement, proto-punk, etc. For example, compared to the 60s, I would call the 80s culturally stagnant. Of course, this is in
comparison. I wouldn't really call any decade culturally stagnant in it's own regard.
Quote:
|
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.
|
Yeah, we can definitely agree on this.
I agree with most of your points. Maybe we disagree just because most of what I listen to is from the 60s/70s. I still firmly believe that certain decades see a greater output of better quality music than other decades. I mean, proof that creatively stagnant (comparatively) eras exist in the first place is the Dark Ages. I don't see how this can't be applied to music as well.