Screen13

Meet the Mainstream of The 50's! There was just as much crap on the top of the charts then as now.

Plus, you had crap like this happening. Here's Pat Boone giving a whiter than Clorox version of one of the finest songs ever actually selling it to the 50's version of Idol fans. Same then, same now.

Warning: This may give you nightmares.

Lord Larehip

"Crotchety old men seem to have won this argument.

Modern pop music is too loud and does sound all the same, just like angry old types have been saying for 70 years.

A team from Spain analyzed music from a 55 year period, using an archive known as the Million Song Dataset, and found that songs have indeed become both louder and more homogenized in terms of chords and melodies."

The Million Song Dataset - Science Concludes Modern Music Too Loud, All Sounds The Same

DriveYourCarDownToTheSea

@djchameleon,

You know what? I still like the 1974 song better. Why? Because both sound like a hundred other songs that had already been written by their time, but at least the 1974 song came first.

And The Band Perry song still can't even remotely come close to Faithless Love. I mean, it's like ... no contest! I'd still like to hear any song in the past 10 years that can approach it.

__________________
Stop and find a pretty shell for her
Beach Boys vs Beatles comparisons begin here

djchameleon

I figured you would! The 1974 song has too much "twang" for me. Also, I wasn't pitting Thr Band Perry's song against Faithless Love. I'm sure there is song out there in more recent years but the fact that you have such a hard-on for that song will blind you from recognizing a superior song as such.

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

Here4Muzik

I think the difference between Pop 50 years ago and Pop now is the agenda. Today... speaking in terms of the majority, the goal of making the record is to produce the most profit possible regardless of talent/writing/producing etc.

Obviously 50 years ago Pop artists and record companies still intended to make the most amount of revenue as possible, but it did not come at cost of letting the music suffer. In today's music, especially with the internet, there is such a demand for QUICK music. And because people want stuff quickly, record companies are willing to let music suffer because they know that they can still market it well enough to sell.

__________________
KING OF SWING

ZiggyStardust

Yesterday,
All pop sounded better, it's fair to say
Now it looks as though it's turned to grey
Oh yesterday came suddenly
Why it had to change, I don't know, they wouldn't say
They played something wrong now I long for yesterday

*Sorry.*

__________________
Welcome to the internet, where opinions are like toilets; everyone thinks theirs are perfect but the public ones stink.

Wolfi65

Pop music is, by definition, bland, repetitive, very basic lyrics set to a catchy dance beat. "Oooohh, babee.....' etc.
I'd say the main difference between Pop (or any other genre, for that matter) in the 1920's - 1970's and thereafter might be that in the 'Good Old Days' (......), it was MUCH more difficult for anyone to a) become a musician and b) get noticed beyond a small town/circle of friends.
Today, we have several hundreds of Teach-Yourself paks most people - at least in the developed world - can afford, and we have You Tube......
We also have thousands of different items of electronic wizardry that can make any doofus with enough money to buy them or enough connections to borrow them sound like Spandau Ballet meets 50 Cen'.

Ninetales

This must be from the new websters dictionary that hasn't been released yet

I think you are confusing difficulty with capability. Because there was no Internet of course you couldn't possibly reach an audience as large as now, but on the flip side there is much more competition than there was back then. And competition breeds quality. How are you supposed to make it big if there are hundreds of people in your neighborhood alone that are trying to be the same thing? Answer: by being better, more creative, and by having some degree of luck. There are an almost infinite amount of bands posting on YouTube, band camp, etc trying to get there music to the masses. I fail to see how that makes it easier for one to actually make it.

How is a doofus with a computer different than a doofus with a guitar?
And connections? Um networking is how you get anywhere in any profession, how can you possibly think having connections is a bad thing?

Justin Bieber started out with a guitar and a YouTube channel. He didn't just throw money at big wig execs until they gave him all the fame and power that his greedy fingers could hold. Is bieber great? Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not arguing that he's amazing but I'm arguing that people should be able to believe he is. Personally ill listen to Boyfriend if I want to get in the party mood much like the way ill listen to Harold Budd if I want to relax or Gorguts if I want to rip someone's head off.

Hey some people like listening to chart pop. Why others constantly cry about this and then try to justify how all modern music is **** and that real music died in the 70s blah blah blah boo hoo is beyond me. Music, like everything, is constantly evolving. If you don't like Rihanna's music that's cool but don't patronize those that do just because you have extreme tunnel vision.

But then again what do I even know I'm just a god damn pokemon

Eq McFly

everyone loves to reminisce about the golden years, but they had their fair share of bad music. have to take the good and the bad , some of the most remembered tracks weren't nearly as big as when they were released. Every generation had their 'soulja boy'

__________________
[Link removed by mod, put it back in again and you're gone]

DriveYourCarDownToTheSea

@Surell,

Those are definitely interesting songs. That said, it's pretty much what I would expect of "progressive" pop/rock nowadays - lots of electronics, de-emphasis on melody. "Interesting," but not "beautiful" or what I would call "emotionally moving." I'd give them credit for technique/technical prowess, but lacking emotion/passion.

I found myself listening to the 2nd song more intently. Hard to tell, but it sounded like some interesting time signature changes were going on - like, 3/8 with interruptions of ... something else.

If pop music were to go in this direction, I would consider it a step in the right direction, but would still yearn for the 1960-1990 years.

__________________
Stop and find a pretty shell for her
Beach Boys vs Beatles comparisons begin here