The pop of yesterday > the pop of today.

The music of yesterday < the music of today.

After having checked out a pretty good amount of recent stuff (~10 y.o. or less) over the past 1+ year, I think I'm coming to the conclusion that -- at least the recent stuff *I* like -- is probably about as good as the stuff I like from the 80's, and maybe even a little better. However, the 60's and 70's are still better than both IMO, though there are a handful of recent bands that give them a run for their money. As for the 90's, at least for me they are a big black hole.

Having said that, Gene Simmons, in talking about Tame Impala recently, remarked on something I think is very true: If Tame Impala had come around in 1970, they would be a huge band and practically a household name (just paraphrasing him). But having come on the scene in 2010, they've come into an age where musical tastes of the masses are pretty different than they were back then, and as a result, while they're popular within a certain crowd, they still aren't remotely close to anything like a household name.

I think that's probably true for a lot of other current bands and artists, too. And the converse of that is, a lot of bands and artists that are really popular now would probably never have been popular in 1970.

One other observation - "pure" rap, as far as I can tell, seems to be going down in popularity. HOWEVER ... I've noticed quite a lot of pop artists these days have adopted rap rhythms and meters in their songs - stuff like this. I've even heard a lot of country tunes do the same thing.

I can't say I prefer the recent bands I listen to over the older bands I listen to either, but music's potential is so much greater now, with all the possible innovations and better technology. Plus, it's possible for an obscure rock band to survive with a few thousand dedicated fans. There's so much out there that I've never heard and never will hear.

EDIT: Have you listened to the Wallflowers? They're a '90s group you might like. Bob Dylan's son fronts the band.

^
Just checked out a few of their songs. Meh, sounds like a zillion other bands.

I was a teen in the 90s and you couldn't be more wrong, why would I prefer to listen to the bands my parents liked when I had the choice of Primal Scream, The Cure, Morrissey, Stone roses, Happy Mondays, Chapterhouse, Boss Hogg, Insprial Carpets, Ride, My Bloody Valentine, The Family Cat, Urge Overkill, The House of Love, Fatima Mansions, Galaxie 500, The Servants, The Shop Assistants, Blow Up, Redd Kross, McCarthy, Birdland, The Field Mice, Half Man Half Biscuit, The Jesus & Mary Chain, BMX Bandits, The Soup Dragons, Teenage Fanclub, Manic Street Preachers, The Trash Can Sinatras, The Boo Radleys.......

Oh and that list was just 1990 and was just the more poppier indie acts for the most part, that ignores most rock, metal, electronic, hip hop & dance music that was around that time too.

Now you watch him ignore this post like he does all of mine.

These are the bands that I was talking about that took their cue from all that went before them just hoping to catch a little of the fame the preceded them.

No they weren't, that's such a whack argument

All art takes its cues from that which preceded it.

Very true, although I especially take issue with his claim that the bands who do it in the 80s and 90s only did it to "catch a little fame," like their art is worth less or is pettier.