When did music start to suck?

Post Reply New Topic

13.5 billion years ago, the first ever sound wave pulsed though the densely-packed quark-gluon plasma of the early Universe. It was sweet. 2 milliseconds later, the second ever sound wave followed it, and it absolutely sucked.

I'm going to argue that genre founding (at least in any meaningful sense) is almost over, unless we find some radical way to breath new dimensions into music. At the same time there are some very talented bands and musicians out there even now, you're just not as likely to find them arriving in droves and they won't be shoved in front of your face.

Revivalism is a big thing. There's at least a handful of Manchester England hip hop artists who've gone super-Dilla, mainly thinking of The Mouse Outfit affiliates, similarly neosoul is looking good. You have folk singers like Jose Gonzales whose a bit like the second coming of James Taylor meets Juan Luis Guerra, KEXP also gets a lot of good acts through. You have a whole bunch of progressive rock acts out there who are trying to remake the six or seven song long-player albums from the 70's including that style of artwork, I'd add in a similar stack that you can't easily knock bands like Animals As Leaders with the only exception that they're strictly instrumental.

It seems like what's missing is cohesive scenes, like things have atomized, that there's not a lot that's truly new and exciting, but - there are still people tearing it up!

it didn't

To misquote Prof. Farnsworth: "The very moment you became old."

I know someone on another forum who genuinely believes it's all been garbage ever since the start of the 18th century.

[edit] so I should probably check if he's a vampire?

I listen to lots of different music in the current day. I feel as though the best period was from the 1950's until the early noughties and then it has gone a bit rubbish since then, in large part.

When did music start to suck?


Probably around the same time that movies, television, video games, and social media started to suck too.

I don't think Stock Aitken Waterman helped much.

For example:



Personally I'd rather Fleetwood Mac than this pile of crap.

For rock and metal i feel it was mid to late noughts and definitely the tens music production seemed to change. It became more a wall of production and nothing breathed. They started sampling drums which is a pet hate of mine.

Yes and all the festivals are dominated by the old guard (rightfully so in my opinion until something worthy comes along which I think can't happen in this current time)

Like most things, things begin to go downhill the more the big guys start to pump money into things.
The more things get commercial to make profits, the .ore things generally go downhill.
Seen it in mountain biking and other similar sports, where old "Fair" rules are done away with and new rules are made specifically to favour those who can invest big money so they can reap the rewards. Gone is the ability to compete as a privateer when such things happen.
A similar tuing took place in the music indusyry from the late 1950's onwards. Priorto thatptetty much anyone could go to a sound studio, make a recording and hit the charts. After big money arrived on the scene who automatcally bought up thousands of records to boost their bands chart ratings (E.g. The Beetles and many others), the small guys just could not compets and pretty much the music industry became sewn up by the few who could plough in big money to give tneir bands a chance.
Some rather rubbish music made it in the charts simply buy buying up records to boost their chart rating. (I mentioned The Beatles as they were the first band known to do this. From tyen on it became the "Norm" to get bands into the charts in this way, and it became a case that the more money invested to boost the chart fgures, the higner up in the charts ones band became as ordinary folk like you or me buying recordssimple because we liked the music became insufficient to compets with these vast cash inputs).