The Official "Music Was So Much Better in the Glorious Days of Yore" Thread

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

Originally Posted by Janszoon

I'm of the opinion that "alternative" rock was in a horrible watered-down abyss of commercialization during the early 90s and as a result I much prefer the 80s. But nevertheless, as a music fan, I recognize that one single form is not the end all be all of music so I appreciate the fact that other forms of music, which were truly excellent, existed in the 90s.

I don't think i've agreed with anything as much as I do with this in the entire thread.

[boo boo]

Originally Posted by Violent & Funky

While a lot of alternative rock was becoming overly commercialized in the early 90s, surely you can admit that there was also plenty of great, not overly commercialized indie rock being released at the same time?

Here's a thought. Why is all commercialized alternative rock inherently bad?

I don't think it is, especially if you want to put RHCP, Smashing Pumpkins and Nirvana into that category.

[Violent & Funky]

Originally Posted by boo boo

Here's a thought. Why is all commercialized alternative rock inherently bad?

I don't think it is, especially if you want to put RHCP, Smashing Pumpkins and Nirvana into that category.

I don't think that either. I like all three of those bands. I was making a point to Janszoon...

[supermarlin]

It's the radio dude, can anything else be expected? Unless you go to genre-specific radio stations, then it might be a bit better.

[Dr_Rez]

Originally Posted by Iggi

Isn't all kind of music on radio a little more POP than ever? Am I wrong?

Have you ever head of the Beatles?

[RVCA]

Originally Posted by RezZ

Have you ever head of the Beatles?

I think there's a huge difference between Beatles "pop" and Gaga/Kesha/Perry/Spears "pop"...

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by Iggi

Isn't all kind of music on radio a little more POP than ever? Am I wrong?

This was a number one hit in 1953:

[TockTockTock]

This is such a frequent topic on this forum. We could write a book with all the comments that are made about this (or at least a really long pamphlet).

[Dr_Rez]

Originally Posted by RVCA

I think there's a huge difference between Beatles "pop" and Gaga/Kesha/Perry/Spears "pop"...

Sure there is, but at the end of the day its still pop. And I dont mean that negatively either. Its like comparing soft rock to fuzz rock. Both different but based on the same principles and still within a genre.

[RVCA]

Originally Posted by Janszoon

This was a number one hit in 1953:

That's awful, but it's much better than the number one hits in 2011.