Will the music of now be classic in the future?

Eggy Baby! · 26-05-2014 11:19PM #1

Maybe would have been better in the music forums but anyway....

Back in the day, when Elvis and the Beatles were around, they were viewed by their detractors as either the spawn of hell or a bunch of cocky talentless upstarts. Now the music of the Beatles and Elvis is inseparable with their respective eras.

Likewise, whenever we think of the 80s, "Out of Touch" or Michael Jackson songs come to mind. The 90s, for me anyway, are denoted by "Teenage Dirtbag" and Eiffel 65. Every decade is really defined by the events that happened and the music that was played.

I hate a lot of today's music. It's music snobbery in a waybut its my own taste, and I assure you that I don't simply hate stuff because its modern, if I hate a song, I hate it because I have listened to it extensively prior to making the conclusion that its ****.

I'm finding it really hard to decipher what modern culture really is. I'm sure when I'm 80 I'll look back and hear the music being played now and remember this era and begin to associate so much with it. I know a lot of people may be depressed at this prospect, but what if Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, Lil Wayne, Taylor Swift, One Direction, Ke-Dollar-ha et al will be regarded as classic, as music exemplary of this era we are living in? Like the way the Beatles are the living embodiment of 60s music. What if YOLO will be remembered in the future as as much a philosophy of our time as Flower Power was to the 60s?

It's pretty depressing isn't it?

TL: DR? - Anyway, I wanted to ask two questions:

- Objectively speaking, is music becoming worse?

- Will today's contemporary "artists" be regarded as classic in the future and be worshiped as music legends of the Noughties or the New Tens? Because this is something that has been worrying me for a few months now, as 2000 begin to be left further and further behind.

P.S
Do you know the way your parents might have a favourite song as a couple from back in the day, like a romantic Chicago song or something? Imagine the couples of tomorrow telling such stories to their children: "Me and your mother's song goes something like this: "I WOKE UP IN A NEW BUGATTI I WOKE UP IN A NEW BUGATTI YEA YEA". Depressing right?

Anyway, I have to go to bed for an exam in the morning but I'd love to have a discussion on this when I get home tomorrow. Peace guys

PizzamanIRL · 26-05-2014 11:21PM

Will the present be the past in the future?

26-05-2014 11:22PM

I feel like music has reached "end of history" status. The evolution of music has largely stopped.

Too Tough To Die · 26-05-2014 11:22PM

Yeah it will be to most, unfortunately.

Hotale.com · 26-05-2014 11:23PM

Some of it.

The vast majority of popular music has been shït for the past 30 years, and there's still some considered "classic" today.

The Backwards Man · 26-05-2014 11:23PM

Some will, some won't
(some need a little lovin' and some don't)

There was an awful lot of crap years ago too you know.

5starpool · 26-05-2014 11:24PM

I used to be with it, but then they changed what *it* was. Now what I'm with isn't *it*, and what's *it* seems weird and scary to me. It'll happen to you...

Mr. Incognito · 26-05-2014 11:25PM

No.

Music then was played by talented musicians,

Now it's mostly mass produced electronic formulaic garbage.

Some good tunes and musicians will survive like any area but most of it won't.

FearDark · 26-05-2014 11:26PM

It's harsh to say that today's music is crap, there's a lot of awesome stuff out there. Today's pop music is horrendous stuff though. I don't think there's been a worse decade than the current one we're in.

Sky King · 26-05-2014 11:26PM

It must have been great when rock music came out first.... and then when electronic music came out first. It must have been so amazingly new and fresh.

It's going in circles now. What was the last big original thing? Dubstep?

catallus · 26-05-2014 11:27PM

What you talkin' bout OP?

There is more and better music being produced today than ever; classical music is as strong as it has ever been, some of the orchestral arrangements being released are amazing and choral production is enjoying great popularity. There are so many genres being pursued by artists that it is impossible to follow all of the great stuff that's being made.

Music becomes part of each generation's culture, naturally enough, as you said yourself, and who knows what the effects of nostalgia will do to make a song a classic which will be loved by the generations to come?

antodeco · 26-05-2014 11:28PM

Bohemian Rhapsody will be viewed in 100 years as the way we view Mozart stuff now.

Alf. A. Male · 26-05-2014 11:29PM

By definition musical choice is always improving as everything is available since the advent of recording in some former or other. Some will stand the test of time, some won't, but it'll all be available if you want it.

fearrua · 26-05-2014 11:30PM

See this bothers me, is the music of the 70s and 80s considered to be the best simply because that's the era in which the current 30-50 year olds grew up with? When I'm that age will Classic Gold Sunday etc. feature Take That, Spice Girls and Westlife? Or was that era actually music's golden era and will always be remembered as such? These are the big questions in life, folks.

SaveOurLyric · 26-05-2014 11:33PM

No.

Music has been in steady decline since about 1830. The music of now is ephemeral and of no lasting merit. It will be be forgotten other than by musical historians trying to figure out how writing good music died out.

Hotale.com · 26-05-2014 11:33PM

antodeco wrote: »

Bohemian Rhapsody will be viewed in 100 years as the way we view Mozart stuff now.

Bohemian Rhapsody isn't even the best Queen song, not to mind the best song of the second half of the 20th century.

PseudoFamous · 26-05-2014 11:34PM

itt people comparing todays shitty pop music to the highlight reels of other generations

SaveOurLyric · 26-05-2014 11:35PM

antodeco wrote: »

Bohemian Rhapsody will be viewed in 100 years as the way we view Mozart stuff now.

Not a chance. It is fully understood today how inferior Bohemian Rhapsody is to Mozart stuff.

catallus · 26-05-2014 11:35PM

Well, there is the argument that a lot of the big media companies who control the "mass-media" have an influence on what people are exposed to; and given that these companies are run by older people, and that they might influence what is played through their own particular tastes, that a biased number of bands from their youthful days would be played; but that's to be expected.

We are no longer a passive captive audience; literally millions of songs of all types are available to us; and the number keeps growing. True artists follow their own path, and thanks to technological innovation we have a way to follow what we like.

SilverScreen · 26-05-2014 11:36PM

antodeco wrote: »

Bohemian Rhapsody will be viewed in 100 years as the way we view Mozart stuff now.

Come on now, Mozart isn't that bad.

Donkey Oaty · 26-05-2014 11:37PM

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Some will, some won't
(some need a little lovin' and some don't)

It's something we should talk about.

Just give me time to work it out.

0.53 - 0.59

Jesus, that was horribly dated even back in 1979, even though it was originally written for Blondie.

Obscure fact: the guy who wrote it also co-wrote the Tina Turner hit "(Simply) The Best".

Red21 · 26-05-2014 11:38PM

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

The 90s, for me anyway, are denoted by "Teenage Dirtbag" and Eiffel 65.

Teenage dirtbag wasn't released til 2000 and Eiffel 65 were big in the early 2000's

FearDark · 26-05-2014 11:40PM

fearrua wrote: »

See this bothers me, is the music of the 70s and 80s considered to be the best simply because that's the era in which the current 30-50 year olds grew up with? When I'm that age will Classic Gold Sunday etc. feature Take That, Spice Girls and Westlife? Or was that era actually music's golden era and will always be remembered as such? These are the big questions in life, folks.

I don't know but my favourite music was made before I was born, 70's and early 80's...

The likes of Westlife and One Direction and even dubstep will become classics at some stage, just take a look around you, the world is getting stupider, there will be enough idiots in 30/40 years from now who will tell you that Ronan Keating is a genius.
But that's pop music, the top 40 is shaped by kids in their bedrooms downloading the latest Harry Styles song even if it's a bag of shite because he's "cool"... talent doesn't matter anymore in the pop world and hasn't mattered for some time, it's all about image, videos and social media, there was a point in the early 90's where people had a problem with boy bands because they weren't writing original material, it's an unheard of argument now, it's just accepted that a talentless DJ like Avicii can churn out no.1's like nobody's business... and he's not the worst offender.

Pitbull.

Donkey Oaty · 26-05-2014 11:43PM

fearrua wrote: »

See this bothers me, is the music of the 70s and 80s considered to be the best simply because that's the era in which the current 30-50 year olds grew up with?

Remember, the 70s and 80s produced hugely influential groups like Tangerine Dream and Iron Maiden, criminally overlooked in these discussions because they don't fall into the normal categories - but important to remember that they didn't get any airplay whatsoever.

FearDark · 26-05-2014 11:43PM

Red21 wrote: »

Teenage dirtbag wasn't released til 2000 and Eiffel 65 were big in the early 2000's

Eiffel 65' was definately late 90's... I was still in school.

KeithTS · 26-05-2014 11:43PM

First off, I hope that most music of today will not be regarded as classic in the future because I couldn't stand to listen to it when I'm old and dont have the energy to throw something at the hover-stereo or whatnot.

For me the real difference lies in the bands themselves and how they learn their craft.

Zeppelin have classic songs but also have a catelogue of more forgettable songs which where written over an extensive career.
Same goes for Michal Jackson, Elton John, the Beatles, Balck Sabbath, Metallica, Sting and the list goes and on.

"Artists" these days don't seem to be given the same chance to learn from mistakes or have a long career and as such I dont see them making as much impact o the music scene. On top of this, a lot of the big names these days don't have the same grounding. You hear stories of many bands in vans touring tiny venues up and down the UK for nothing in the early days, leanring their craft, hearing what people like and honing their skills. Much like standup comedians do today.

One direction don't have that same experience and as such, I can't see them (or their team of writers) creating the same impact with their music, not enough to be able to reach across generations at least.

I can't imagine a standup could learn their craft on a talen show, so how come we can expect a musician to?

mrsdewinter · 26-05-2014 11:44PM

I think pop & rock music is comparable to folk music of earlier centuries, the main difference being, much of the 'folk' music of the 21st & 20th centuries (jazz, rock, pop, dance) has been committed to tape/digital memory rather than being either passed down through generations by oral tradition or simply forgotten.
I mean, I love me some Abba at a wedding but not even Benny or Bjorn would argue that Dancing Queen is as sophisticated or complex as, I dunno, something by Mozart.

callaway92 · 26-05-2014 11:45PM

Groups like Arcade Fire will be looked back on in 30/40 years time with legend status memories I'd imagine.

SilverScreen · 26-05-2014 11:52PM

I think that the real difference between now and 30/40 years ago is that major record labels are more afraid to take risks and instead promote artists that will make them a quick buck. Nothing to do with musical artists themselves.

There are also less major record labels today due to mergers and takeovers so you have less people controlling what gets heard.

Agricola · 26-05-2014 11:53PM

The McDonalds-ification of pop music has now reached its zenith. Brightly and neatly packaged, nutritionally deficient, highly processed garbage is being force fed the masses and they are lapping it up. Most of the "musicians" who are commanding hundreds of millions of views on youtube nowadays couldnt sing a note without electronic aid and the majority of them have probably never actually sat down to write a song. It's depressing that this tripe clogs up the airwaves at the expense of better alternatives.
The common retort I hear is that the good music is out there, you just have to look for it. But that's my problem, Im not a big musichead, I don't want to go looking for it. When I was a teenager it came to me. People with real talent were in the mainstream. Now the mainstream seems to be largely about girls acting like bigger and bigger whores in order to gain more attention and boybands who are assembled from a talent show factory line in order to appeal to teen girls with disposable income.

Red21 · 27-05-2014 12:04AM

FearDark wrote: »

Eiffel 65' was definately late 90's... I was still in school.

I'm thinking that, Blue da da dee ****e, anyways you're right it was no.1 in Ireland in Oct 1999

Will the music of now be classic in the future?

Comments