The most dire decade for music

supaseagull said:

For those who like to criticise the likes of the X-Factor and the bands/ groups it creates, then I would remind you that manufactured music acts started in the 50's with Elvis and the Everley Brothers and have always been around...The Beatles and the whole Merseybeat genre was packaged and produced by Brian Epstein and going right through to groups like New Kids on the Block in the 90's and One Direction more recently.

Click to expand...

Acker79 said:

It's all so personal. There are examples of good music and bad music in every decade. But the one that we lived through, the soundtrack to our most formative moments will be the one people like most.

Click to expand...

Mellotron said:

Not for me. Can't stand the 90s and that was when I was discovering music.

Click to expand...

supaseagull said:

Threads like this annoy me but I find them fascinating just to see how many people are stuck in the past.

Music tastes are all relative to times of your lives.

There were just as many great bands and great music around in the last decade as there was in the 60's, but it really does depend on what you listened to, when life changing events happened and you place in the world at the time.

I was born in '73 and I've always enjoyed listening to 60's music in particular. However, of recent years I've begun to really enjoy 70's music more. However, when I was growing up, 70's music and culture was considered by most my afe as being rubbish.

From a Pop perspective, when I was about 14, if you liked Abba then there was something wrong with you. However, over the last decade their music is loved more now than it was in the preceding years after they split up. However, ironically, bands like Climie Fisher were popular.

Some of the music around at the moment, is fantastic and I enjoy listening to all different types but I'm also going through a period of listening to early 80's Synth-pop and I would always say to people not to turn their noses up at other genres when they haven't properly listened to it.

For those who like to criticise the likes of the X-Factor and the bands/ groups it creates, then I would remind you that manufactured music acts started in the 50's with Elvis and the Everley Brothers and have always been around...The Beatles and the whole Merseybeat genre was packaged and produced by Brian Epstein and going right through to groups like New Kids on the Block in the 90's and One Direction more recently.

Click to expand...

Jam The Man said:

Anyways, having compiled lists for 70's, 80's, 90's and 00's specific lists, the 00's perfoms pretty poorly against the other decades, and the general concencus is because there's not really much more 'new' muisc that can be made.

Click to expand...

Franks Wild Years said:

The 1720's

Click to expand...

W.C. said:

Very much this.

Look at all the crappy replies in this thread. There's so much good music out there. If you haven't found it, only person you have to blame is yourself.

edit : doh, just realised the thread does in fact ask what you think the most 'dire' decade is so I suppose some negativity is to be expected Carry on.

Click to expand...

Buzzer said:

I strongly disagree both in that the 00's performs badly compared to other decades or that we are at the limits of what new music can be made.

I think the problem isn't the music but the way in which artists get their music to listeners and the way that we listeners access our music. Getting rid of Top of The Pops effectively killed off any relevance in the charts and the advent of the internet means that anyone and everyone can make music and put it out there. The quality control that the charts and record companies provided is not there anymore because of the sheer volume so the listener has to be a lot more pro-active in a) finding the music and b) filtering out the dross. The more passive listeners are relying on ever-more-commercial radio and TV shows to inform them and unfortunately it's often the lowest common denominator.

Musicians also don't make their money from albums or singles so much but from touring and festivals nowadays (some of the biggest touring bands such as Biffy Clyro, Frank Turner, Bombay Bicycle Club, British Sea Power, Muse go practically unnoticed on TV and radio). I think your comment about Billy Joel is a valid one but all it shows is that artists of any longevity struggle to stay fresh. David Bowie can do it, so many others can't. It's why the ubiquitous covers album is such a popular choice for so many established over the hill musicians.

I can assure you that there are tons of great new bands making great new music but I say that as someone who spends a huge part of my spare time searching it out and writing about it. As I say, there's a lot of dross to sift through but the diamonds are still there.

Click to expand...

Bladders said:

2000's , and it's getting worse

Click to expand...

teaboy said:

What, EVERYTHING produced between the start of 1990 and the end of 1999? That sounds unlikely.

Click to expand...

Buzzer said:

I strongly disagree both in that the 00's performs badly compared to other decades or that we are at the limits of what new music can be made.

I think the problem isn't the music but the way in which artists get their music to listeners and the way that we listeners access our music. Getting rid of Top of The Pops effectively killed off any relevance in the charts and the advent of the internet means that anyone and everyone can make music and put it out there. The quality control that the charts and record companies provided is not there anymore because of the sheer volume so the listener has to be a lot more pro-active in a) finding the music and b) filtering out the dross. The more passive listeners are relying on ever-more-commercial radio and TV shows to inform them and unfortunately it's often the lowest common denominator.

Musicians also don't make their money from albums or singles so much but from touring and festivals nowadays (some of the biggest touring bands such as Biffy Clyro, Frank Turner, Bombay Bicycle Club, British Sea Power, Muse go practically unnoticed on TV and radio). I think your comment about Billy Joel is a valid one but all it shows is that artists of any longevity struggle to stay fresh. David Bowie can do it, so many others can't. It's why the ubiquitous covers album is such a popular choice for so many established over the hill musicians.

I can assure you that there are tons of great new bands making great new music but I say that as someone who spends a huge part of my spare time searching it out and writing about it. As I say, there's a lot of dross to sift through but the diamonds are still there.

Click to expand...

Guinness Boy said:

I actually think [MENTION=736]Trufflehound[/MENTION] made a good point but the thread title was most dire decade for music and if that's not a good excuse to have a rant I don't know what is. The 00's is the decade I don't get because there was nothing new, genre wise. As someone else put each decade would see a couple of completely new genres emerge. Even the much maligned 90s gave us grunge and drum n bass (and saw house split in to numerous sub-genres so that what was played at The Zap, The End and Cream were completely different). For me the 00s haven't produced any of that. Maybe I've just got too old and missed the groundbreaking stuff?

That's not to say there hasn't been good music in the 00s. In that 15 albums thread I picked 5 albums made after 1999 - so one third. Just this year I can name albums by The War On Drugs and Seun Kuti & Egypt 80 as the two most regular on my stereo and the new Terry Bickers, Royal Blood and Alt J stuff I've heard on 6 Music I count as really good stuff I've heard in the last two months.

Ultimately, as I said to Truff, this is a moaning thread for miserable people (or those who like writing a quick two minute rant about Coldplay and The X Factor over their cornflakes).

Click to expand...