Where is this decade going in music?

Jeff:

Sorry for not being clear but I was talking about pop music of the '70s. However, I will be the first to admit that I'm not a great historian of the '70's, but you named off great artists. I should have been more specific that I was talking about pop music, but everything seems to be running together in this thread.

Also, I already have the "The Essential Lynyrd Skynyrd", so I guess I'm confused that you thought I was going to buy a Skynyrd CD. I mentioned them because I have something by them. I also have stuff by Kansas, Meat Loaf, and Styx plus Motorhead and Ozzy but overall my '70's music is lagging.

 

AAAUUUGGGHHH!!! YOU b*stard!

Just becuase you think Bob Dylan weasled his way to a grammey a couple of years ago is no reason to leave him off this list! Grrrrrrrr.....

 

I was trying to pick quintessential 70's acts. Dylan, though Blood on the Tracks was 1974, was and still is considered the heart of the 60's as an artist. Pink Floyd released albums in the 60's but they were almost synomonys with the 70's.

I know what ya' mean, though.

 

Everyone knows rock attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact.

But I like you point, Jeff. I accepted your challenge of finding bands that released their first album after 1987 and before 1998, and who are still popular. I couldn't think of many.

Tool
Offspring (this is debatable I guess, but I think they are still popular)
Pantera (this is considering Cowboys from Hell as their first album)
Creed (just barely met the criteria, but they will be popular for a while, I think)


Really, I can't think of many more, but this is just going off my own tastes. I am sure there are a lot of bands that I just don't know about.

This was a depressing challenge to take.

 

The one's Raven mentioned aren't exactly taking the world by storm (except maybe for Creed). Pantera is marginal in terms of popularity and Offspring are limited in scope as is tool. They are not in the same universe of long-standing popularity or critical acclaim as, for example, Bob Dylan or REM.

There are others that have managed to last to a degree. Dave Matthews is one and there are a host of r&b and rap artists. However, the point is valid because there are far fewer and their impact is far less than those before them.

But, I'm not ready to say that it is because of a decline in MUSIC. There is still some amazing music being released today. I think it is more a decline in the MUSIC INDUSTRY that is creating the problem.

There is a saying that dates back to the late 80's that goes something like this:

An artist gets his entire life to write his first record and six months to write his second.

That's where the sophomore jinx comes from and why so many artists fail after a successful debut. The problem, though, isn't just that they shot their wad. It is the fact that they had no lead development time. Most artists up until around 1985 got at least an album or two to find their voice stylistically and creatively. Much like NBA players seem to find themselves in their third year, there are a lot of really amazing third albums out there indicative of creative development.

It is easier to hone your skills when all you do is work on them. For unsigned artists, they still have to flip burgers or work regular 9 to 5 jobs to support their dreams. If all they had to do all day is practice and improve themselves, their skills would make exponential leaps or they wouldn't. Either way, we would KNOW whether or not this was an emerging talent. The problem is that the industry isn't patient enough to wait for that success.

As a result, we have what would seem like a decline in MUSIC when I really think it is a decline in the industry itself.

 

Just a note about the 70s and how they didn't suck: punk, new wave. Elvis Costello (not my husband - I'm talking about that consistently brilliant man with the specs who gets no props from anyone despite being a genius), the Clash, Sex Pistols, Talking Heads, Blondie, Ramones... even all the new wave one-hit-wonders like M and the Knack. Fun stuff!

Manny, I really really *love* the 'sell-out' Bee Gees ('blaaaamin it all on the nights on Broadwayyyy...' And the 'Staying Alive' bassline is so ******* great!). I love disco generally. I think it's been unfairly maligned even during its recent renaissance - things like Donna Summer's 'I Feel Love' sound so ahead of their time to me.

I, like Mrs JB, don't think people are personally defined by their musical tastes. (If I was that much of a snob none of my best friends would *be* my best friends, because there are very few people as pathetically obsessive as Elvis and I!) But the 'there's no good music around today' argument is basically indefensible to me. There's lots of *great* music, you just have to spend time looking for it. (Jeff pretty brilliantly dissected why the stuff you hear on the radio is mostly bollocks - the music industry is an awful behemoth right now and needs to be taken down. Great post!)

I hate Creed. To quote Cartman, I hate them so very, very much.

An aside: wow, Men at Work had some funky hair. VH1Classic, how I love you...

 

What about Pearl Jam? Their albums still go platinum.

 

jeff--what did you mean with the VALID part of popular and valid? because I can actually think of some groups everyone here would agree are pretty crappy that are still selling nice ammounts of records that were popular before 1998.

example: backstreet boys

 

I agree with Jeff's line of thought.

I think that, like almost everything in our current mass cultural setup) will continue to get worse for some time, but then will basically shoot itself in the foot due to lack of foresite. This, then, will lead to a destruction/creation movement ala Bakunin.

I generally don't listen to the radio (I am too picky and there is too limited of a selection) so I am not too up to date on the current pop music scene, but when "creativity" is controlled the way it is, I generally can predict the outcome.

One day I will get you all in line to my revolutionary agenda (I know I have generally called it a "visual culture revolution" but everything is in line with it), but I will patiently wait.

I also agree that Manny seems to be a little obsessed with his cd collection.

I was also a bit turned off, Manny, by some of your comments to f4p. You act as if it is unnatural for someone of musical knowledge/taste to not like the bands you mention. Well, I don't like plenty of the ones you mentioned (NIN, Smashing...) but I don't think you would want to question my musical knowledge/background.

Remember that it is all so very subjective and age has nothing to do with it (at age 7, my "favorite artist" was Mahler. While I still love his music today, I love too much more to be so limited, and can appreciate different types on an equal level, so Elmore James, Journey, Zounds, MC Solaar, and Phil Ochs can all have a place, despite Mahler being the "higher level" of music).

 

I saw some "Behind the Music" style documentary a few years ago with David Bowie. He told the story of how, in the late seventies, Iggy Pop rushed over to his house basically breathless with excitement about the new record he had just purchased. He claimed it was going to change the face of popular music. "Those driving, Teutonic beats!" It was Donna Summer's "I Feel Love." Bowie was still laughing as he recounted the story 20 years later. So maybe Donna didn't change the face of music, but it's still a damn good song.

I have a soft spot for Disco myself -- Earth Wind & Fire, Donna Summer, yes, even some KC and the Sunshine Band. Peaches and Herb's "Shake Your Groove Thing" has to be one of my alltime favorites.

I also happen to love big band, bluegrass, fifties lounge and jazz. I guess I figure I just don't know enough about music to be a snob -- few people do. There are so many styles and so much history that I'd be foolish if I thought I was done learning.

 

I think I can address both of these at the same time. IMO, "valid" means that an artist still is able to have popularity and critical acclaim - the necessary double double to making an artist a true legend.

Let me further say that critical acclaim doesn't necessarily represent peer respect or even success with critics. What it usually represents is an influence that is felt over the course of time. Sometimes critics get this and sometimes peers do as well, but not always.

As an example, there was a lot of critical ridicule when Bob Dylan went electric. He was hammered by the folkies who felt they had been abandoned. Yet, that was a seminal moment in pop/rock music history.

Pearl Jam had this during the days of Ten but it has since faltered. They don't have the scope of influence they once did. The Backstreet Boys, like the manufactured pop hits of the 60's (Frankie Avalon, Fabian, etc) never had the critical success because they are pop music's equivalent to cotton candy - very sweet and gone very quickly.

You just don't have the broad range of artists today who still hold appeal to a specific audience (it doesn't have to be huge, just long-standing) and can maintain an important influence in the world of music like you did 20 years ago.

 

Manny, Manny, Manny ... I'm afraid we got off on the wrong foot for some reason and haven't yet recovered. That's a shame because I enjoy reading your posts and think you have pretty damn good taste in music.

The Moby comment was actually meant to be silly as opposed to "flippant". I probably should have used the little winky face to let you know that. I just remembered reading his name in a lot of your posts so I threw it out there. Sorry if it offended.

I understand having strong personal tastes in music. Mr. JB and I used to have some fairly serious spats over our listening habits (he's a musician and I, at the time, was the music editor for the school paper so you can imagine how ugly that got). Luckily, we've both loosened up substantially and now actually agree on some things.

So, in summation, Mrs. JB bad, Manny good. No hard feelings, I hope.

 

A. man, manny gettin' taken to task in this thread. i didn't think anything he said was that bad.

B. plz God don't ever let me and manny be in a room with only one musical source between us. One of us will surely kill the other within the hour.

C. about massive attack, no i haven't heard any of there songs unless i heard them and didn't know it was them. NIN- closer was the song (knew the lyrics, wasn't sure which lyric was the title). haven't heard the other pumpkins songs, probably didn't listen to alternative when those were on.

D. and jeff, i guess my closed-mindedness is more a product of how much i like music compared to you. I mean you are a musician, music is a passion, you want to experience it all and hear new stuff all the time to find what's good (i hope that's a good description). for me it's more just a pasttime (although a fairly big one - right behind tv i guess) and it's a pasttime that i have plenty of satisfaction in. between my mp3's, the radio, and cd's i have more than i can ever listen to at any given time. it's not that i have anything against hearing new stuff, i just don't have the desire to find it nor the desire to spend the time finding it. so in that sense i am close-minded, but for now my ignorance is bliss and i have no intention of changing it.

E. also, thanks for saying i don't have to defend my tastes (liking britney and madonna and other pop stuff ain't easy) and understanding where i'm coming from.

 

That's exactly what I meant. For some, music just isn't that big of a deal. I can respect that. I could care less about some things and others I love. That's just personal taste.

By the way, I like some of Madonna's stuff too. You can find good in just about anything.

 

I really think someone less lazy than I should start up some sort of "music club" on this BBS, whereby people turn others onto different bands, by perhaps mailing each other CDs or something. Ideally it would be organized right here, and those who want to participate would...and we could give reviews of each others' stuff or something. Like if I said I wanted to hear some good punk, someone could say "I've got just the thing for you...", and then me or someone else could offer that person something else, and so on. Okay am I a complete dork or what?

 

That is SO wierd. My wife said just today the exact same thing. I'm not sure Clutch would want the potential liabilities of such a forum but a listserv somewhere or a moderated, invite-only forum might work.

It wouldn't be too tough to do. Any ideas on how to handle it?

 

Jeff -- your wife and I seem to be on the same wavelength often lately....for instance earlier in this thread she said "I've known some real jackasses who had some of the best record collections I've ever seen", and that describes me perfectly.

Seriously, I don't think Clutch has anything to worry about. I was thinking more along the lines of mailing actual CDs (probably burned copies, of course, of one or various artists, perhaps), and after a specified period of time they would get mailed back. I for one know that I would buy anything that I liked, so you at least wouldn't have to worry about me stealing music.

 

Aw, Freak, you don't have a good record collection! j/k

Since we are on the internet, wouldn't MP3's be more efficient? I know, I know. Me stealing? No, NOT THAT!!!

 

I'm sure it would be more efficient, but I'm an idiot and have no idea how to upload an MP3 somewheres.

Btw...I was joking about my record collection, but I'm sure you knew that.