Anyone else not 'get' today's music? - Page 6 - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Fleet · 10-15-2007, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by platinumblondelife

There are always going to be people who do not like new music.

But go by the ratios. A lot more 18 year olds in the '50s liked the then-current music compared to 18 year olds today liking current music.

Quote:

In every generation. Again, the opinion that music from a long time ago had stronger melodies = better music/will be remembered longer is still all just your opinion though

Oh, come on. It's SO obvious.
It's in music all over... top 40, TV commericals, radio commericals, etc. In the '50s, it was nice music usually with string instruments; now it's a lot of yelling and crashing and banging!

Show me a current song that sounds like "Moon River" (Henry Mancini, 1961) or "Theme From A Summer Place" (Percy Faith, 1960).

Fleet · 10-15-2007, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fleet

Show me a current song that sounds like "Moon River" (Henry Mancini, 1961) or "Theme From A Summer Place" (Percy Faith, 1960).

Here is "Theme From A Summer Place" to use as a reference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y6X2RF607M

ekkostar · 10-15-2007, 07:31 PM

My musical tastes fluctuate between that of a 14 year old girl and a 40 year old. It's not unusual to have my MP3 player swap between Mariah Carey and Robert Palmer or DMX and Supertramp.

Fleet · 10-15-2007, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hollywood Rock Chic

I agree with you, Tony; but what I was trying to say is, that people whom dislike Rap or Hip Hop, because what is stands for, etc. is basically on the same level as what certain people initially thought of Rock and Roll; I, for one, pefer classic Rock and Roll from the 1950s over Rap or Hip Hop, but that is just my opinion...

Well, for me I dislike Rap and Hip Hop for two reasons... 1. As you said, for what it stands for and 2. because it sounds terrible!

coffield3 · 10-15-2007, 08:17 PM

Im 25 and i love alot the old music, theres like a good handful of bands and singers that i like in todays music, but that dosnt say that todays music sucks it means i need to open my mind more!

platinumblondelife · 10-16-2007, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fleet

But go by the ratios. A lot more 18 year olds in the '50s liked the then-current music compared to 18 year olds today liking current music.

Oh, come on. It's SO obvious.
It's in music all over... top 40, TV commericals, radio commericals, etc. In the '50s, it was nice music usually with string instruments; now it's a lot of yelling and crashing and banging!

Show me a current song that sounds like "Moon River" (Henry Mancini, 1961) or "Theme From A Summer Place" (Percy Faith, 1960).

You do not know whether or not music from today will be all over advertisments in 30 years. And you say a lot more 18 year olds dislike music of their generation compared to the 1950s based on what? Youtube comments?

Fleet · 10-16-2007, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by platinumblondelife

You do not know whether or not music from today will be all over advertisments in 30 years.

If it is, it will be only for laughs.

Quote:

And you say a lot more 18 year olds dislike music of their generation compared to the 1950s based on what? Youtube comments?

From youtube but also from family and friends.

Why can't today's black groups sound like this?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7J2pj0UPQ8

And why can't today's black male singers sound like this?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr0YA48AkPw

And why can't today's black female singers sound like this?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKO5PleuvGA

platinumblondelife · 10-16-2007, 08:16 PM

because that represents the majority of people...? lol ok

Fleet · 10-18-2007, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by platinumblondelife

because that represents the majority of people...? lol ok

I don't know if there is any scientific poll out there, but considering I found all of those comments in a 15 minute search tells you something right there.

Fleet · 10-18-2007, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freshprinceofLA

YEA I don't even know if we could call what we have today music. Music back in the day sent a message and just told it like it was! Guys like Jimi Hendrix and Tupac were real. They sent a message on what they were going through and how thier lives were affected by world events! TODAYS MUSIC IS A PIECE OF SH*t

Well, instead of those two guys, I would pick some who had truly excellent voices, like Ray Charles, Nat King Cole and Johnny Mathis.

Dean Winchester · 10-18-2007, 03:03 AM

I think sometimes people (this is a thing I dislike about American Idol especially) emphasize way too much on the voice and not enough about the songs. A great voice can get you far, but I think strong material is more important, and a mediocre vocalist can make a fantastic song magical. Celine Dion for instance has a phenomenal voice, but a lot of the songs she performs are filler crap. Yes, she can sing, but the songs aren't that great. Same goes for Babs, Mariah, Whitney, Aretha, Christina, etc.... great voices, but probably at least half of their songs are forgettable filler fluff. Compare this to someone like Bjork who doesn't have much of a voice, but she has her style and identity and every song she sings is uniquely her.

A good voice is good, but the material is more important than the voice IMO. That is something I dislike about Idol. It emphasizes vocal talent as the only talent there is, when I do think a lot of people would rather a mediocre voice with loads of songwriting talent/musicianship/etc... over some big voiced diva who sings whatever songs her record company gives her. Granted, there are exceptions to the rule like Annie Lennox who can sing AND write great songs, but it seems to be not very common, people like Whitney and Celine have never written any of their hits. I'd argue among MUSICIANS and SONGWRITERS and people who like their music to be more serious and artistic, that a Bjork or Alison Goldfrapp type who has an "ok" voice at best but writes all her material and produces has more respect than someone like Celine Dion who has a good voice but just takes the songs Sony offers her and works with the songs outside songwriters have written for her.

10-15-2007, 07:31 PM	#78
ekkostar Coffee, Tea & Larroquette! Senior Member Join Date: Apr 16, 2005 Posts: 1,077	My musical tastes fluctuate between that of a 14 year old girl and a 40 year old. It's not unusual to have my MP3 player swap between Mariah Carey and Robert Palmer or DMX and Supertramp.
	__________________ "All my sitcoms had an audience, with four or five cameras, so working this way has always been appealing to me." - John Larroquette A living legend, five Emmys and a Tony award! Your favorites could never...

10-15-2007, 08:17 PM	#80
coffield3 <3 Forum Veteran Join Date: Jul 23, 2006 Location: England Posts: 7,379	Im 25 and i love alot the old music, theres like a good handful of bands and singers that i like in todays music, but that dosnt say that todays music sucks it means i need to open my mind more!
	__________________ Roseanne Fan!! ღღღ

10-16-2007, 08:16 PM	#83
platinumblondelife smooches. Senior Member Join Date: Aug 14, 2005 Posts: 2,189	because that represents the majority of people...? lol ok

10-18-2007, 03:03 AM	#86
Dean Winchester Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Sep 28, 2003 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 14,803	I think sometimes people (this is a thing I dislike about American Idol especially) emphasize way too much on the voice and not enough about the songs. A great voice can get you far, but I think strong material is more important, and a mediocre vocalist can make a fantastic song magical. Celine Dion for instance has a phenomenal voice, but a lot of the songs she performs are filler crap. Yes, she can sing, but the songs aren't that great. Same goes for Babs, Mariah, Whitney, Aretha, Christina, etc.... great voices, but probably at least half of their songs are forgettable filler fluff. Compare this to someone like Bjork who doesn't have much of a voice, but she has her style and identity and every song she sings is uniquely her. A good voice is good, but the material is more important than the voice IMO. That is something I dislike about Idol. It emphasizes vocal talent as the only talent there is, when I do think a lot of people would rather a mediocre voice with loads of songwriting talent/musicianship/etc... over some big voiced diva who sings whatever songs her record company gives her. Granted, there are exceptions to the rule like Annie Lennox who can sing AND write great songs, but it seems to be not very common, people like Whitney and Celine have never written any of their hits. I'd argue among MUSICIANS and SONGWRITERS and people who like their music to be more serious and artistic, that a Bjork or Alison Goldfrapp type who has an "ok" voice at best but writes all her material and produces has more respect than someone like Celine Dion who has a good voice but just takes the songs Sony offers her and works with the songs outside songwriters have written for her.