Think about it. Every movement gets a pop rendition eventually. Pop punk, nu metal, etc. Currently, the movement is electronic. EDM is flowing and has never been heard before. However, pop music has integrated with EDM and now EDM is a defining part of modern pop. Pop music just is what the current movement is without allowing it to flow. When people think this decade, they don't think Skrillex or Avicii, but Katy Perry or Taylor Swift. Pop stars that implemented electronic. There is no "pop electronic", just pop. Because of this pop takeover, people assume this decade is ultimately defined by pop. Take On Me (a synth pop love song only remembered for the video) and The Trooper (a defining Iron Maiden and heavy metal song with a badass, well known riff) were both released in 1984. Nobody hates Take on Me, and there were other notable things happening people could look back on.

Think about it. Every movement gets a pop rendition eventually. Pop punk, nu metal, etc. Currently, the movement is electronic. EDM is flowing and has never been heard before. However, pop music has integrated with EDM and now EDM is a defining part of modern pop. Pop music just is what the current movement is without allowing it to flow. When people think this decade, they don't think Skrillex or Avicii, but Katy Perry or Taylor Swift. Pop stars that implemented electronic. There is no "pop electronic", just pop. Because of this pop takeover, people assume this decade is ultimately defined by pop. Take On Me (a synth pop love song only remembered for the video) and The Trooper (a defining Iron Maiden and heavy metal song with a badass, well known riff) were both released in 1984. Nobody hates Take on Me, and there were other notable things happening people could look back on.


The pure EDM this decade is great.  I love Skrillex and Avicii.  Chvrches is also great.  You don't hear them on pop radio though.

Ariana Grande, Becky G, new Taylor Swift, etc define the decade because they dominate mainstream Top 40.  In my opinion, they are evolved and watered down from Gaga, Perry, and the like moreso than the much better EDM artists.

I just think people keep bringing these mediocre people in and with the help of a auto-tuner, they think they've made the next big thing and they keep shoving it down the people's throat to the point where it gets like inescapable like Big Brother in "1984". IT's over saturation. That's why I quit with the radio, and the music stations. I got tired of the mediocrity. I know my preference is very strongly for a certain performer, I do know that there is other genuine talent out there. But there is no talent really anymore. There just an "image".  The only really good popular singer out there now that I'd even give the time of day is Adele. That's about it. Everyone else is really kind of neither here nor there.

Image/sex has always been in music. In the 1950s, they would cherry pick guys that looked handsome so that they could be the next 'crooner'. It was instant money for the record industry and the guys would use their sex appeal to sale records. Yes, they had the voice but their image and their commercialization was very commercial, duh? Also, Elvis used his good looks also. He gyrated his hips and styled his hair.

There were even sexy jazz singers back in the 1920s/1930s. But at least back then there was talent and creativity to create a great balance. And the talent was abundant.

But I think it was MTV in the 1980s when image became imperative. By the mid-80s like 1984/1985, image overtook a lot.     

You could even argue that disco made music very commercial. It was glitzy, glammy, fun but shallow, and its culture very sexual and image bound. But for me, it was the mid 80s when music started to become very commercialize. And every year it just gets worse, that is until we find a musical savior a la Michael Jackson, or even Elvis. Or even better, a Mozart or Beethoven of pop.

The pure EDM this decade is great.  I love Skrillex and Avicii.  Chvrches is also great.  You don't hear them on pop radio though.

Ariana Grande, Becky G, new Taylor Swift, etc define the decade because they dominate mainstream Top 40.  In my opinion, they are evolved and watered down from Gaga, Perry, and the like moreso than the much better EDM artists.


I prefer underground dance music. The electronic music we have nowadays is too polished. Also Ariana Grande, Becky G, and Taylor Swift only define the decade thus far. It remains to be seen, whether they will dominate the late 2010s. And if they remain popular in 2016-2019, I doubt they will keep the same style. After all, Becky G will be entering her 20s, Ariana will be entering her mid 20s, and Taylor Swift will be pushing 30. So even if they remain popular, their music will be quite different from what it is now.

I just think people keep bringing these mediocre people in and with the help of a auto-tuner, they think they've made the next big thing and they keep shoving it down the people's throat to the point where it gets like inescapable like Big Brother in "1984". IT's over saturation. That's why I quit with the radio, and the music stations. I got tired of the mediocrity. I know my preference is very strongly for a certain performer, I do know that there is other genuine talent out there. But there is no talent really anymore. There just an "image".  The only really good popular singer out there now that I'd even give the time of day is Adele. That's about it. Everyone else is really kind of neither here nor there.


To be honest, I never cared for Adele. I don't hate her music, it just doesn't grab me in any way.

I'm just frustrated that popular music won't just get its act together and showcase something exciting and original again like it should be, considering the growing angst of younger generations.  The grunge and gangsta rap movements were made possible by the deep cultural division between Generation X and Baby Boomers.  I had expected music to have already become grittier by this point as a result of the renewed tension between the black community and law enforcement, plus the success of Straight Outta Compton, but instead songs like The Hills and Hotline Bling continue to reign supreme on the charts, while music with something of substance to say continues to get ignored by top 40 stations.  20 years ago, the number one song was Gangsta's Paradise, a radio-friendly yet extremely upfront tale of an African American's struggle to survive in a world of injustice and racial bias.  The vapidness of today's pop charts showcases perfectly the current youth culture's paradoxical mixture of socially conscious world views yet completely apathetic sense of artistic curiosity.

I'm just frustrated that popular music won't just get its act together and showcase something exciting and original again like it should be, considering the growing angst of younger generations.  The grunge and gangsta rap movements were made possible by the deep cultural division between Generation X and Baby Boomers.  I had expected music to have already become grittier by this point as a result of the renewed tension between the black community and law enforcement, plus the success of Straight Outta Compton, but instead songs like The Hills and Hotline Bling continue to reign supreme on the charts, while music with something of substance to say continues to get ignored by top 40 stations.  20 years ago, the number one song was Gangsta's Paradise, a radio-friendly yet extremely upfront tale of an African American's struggle to survive in a world of injustice and racial bias.  The vapidness of today's pop charts showcases perfectly the current youth culture's paradoxical mixture of socially conscious world views yet completely apathetic sense of artistic curiosity.


I don't see gangsta rap coming back.  While there is racial tension today and racism/police brutality is a huge problem, I don't think its near as bad as it was back in the 80s and early 90s during the gangsta rap era.

I don't see gangsta rap coming back.  While there is racial tension today and racism/police brutality is a huge problem, I don't think its near as bad as it was back in the 80s and early 90s during the gangsta rap era.


At the very least, it doesn't seem like African American issues were covered that much more in the 80s and 90s than now.  While the 80s saw the crack epidemic, the early 90s had the L.A. Riots, and the mid-90s were dominated by the OJ Simpson trial, the recent outpour of mid-2010s controversies is really the first time since the latter event that African American civil rights have been standard headlines.  The crack epidemic and Rodney King decision certainly made the advent of gangsta rap possible, so I'm just surprised that the George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson controversies have not fueled mainstream rap this era in the same way.

The crack epidemic and Rodney King decision certainly made the advent of gangsta rap possible, so I'm just surprised that the George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson controversies have not fueled mainstream rap this era in the same way.


Well when Darren Wilson was not charged of any crimes by the Department of Justice, which was led by a black man who was appointed by a black president, that kinda took the steam out of any charges of racism on his part.  Bottom line he got into a scuffle with a neighborhood ruffian who learned the hard way about karma.

Did anyone hear about this recent quote from Lady Gaga? >>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lady-gaga-quit-music_56321b28e4b0631799111053

I'm not crazy about today's modern music, just give me 80's music any day.

I'm not crazy about today's modern music, just give me 80's music any day.

Yeah, even 90s and early 00's pop music is better than todays. It's embarrassing. :-[

Yeah, even 90s and early 00's pop music is better than todays. It's embarrassing. :-[


even with today's music, I can't understand these nonsensical lyrics. ::)

Well when Darren Wilson was not charged of any crimes by the Department of Justice, which was led by a black man who was appointed by a black president, that kinda took the steam out of any charges of racism on his part.  Bottom line he got into a scuffle with a neighborhood ruffian who learned the hard way about karma.


The thing is, though, the Department of Justice is still influenced by the general establishment; a black Attorney General alone isn't enough to combat a system of racial bias stemming from the legacy of slavery and economic disadvantage.  Not to mention, Wilson's way of "defending" himself from Michael Brown was pretty malicious, as he shot him far more times than necessary and basically had no regrets going to such extremes.  He could have simply stunned Brown and spared him his life, but instead he violently killed him.  The fact that this type of police behavior goes ultimately unacknowledged by our system of justice reflects the way so much of society continues to devalue the lives of African Americans, hence the Black Lives Matter movement.  It's because of this reasoning that George Zimmerman was found not guilty for his murder of Trayvon Martin, even though evidence clearly proves that Martin was of no threat and that Zimmerman only got away with the stand-ground law based on the boy's appearance.

Sometimes I think we have no one to blame but ourselves for "bad" pop music. Look at "Friday" from 2010, I don't reckon anyone here knows one single soul who genuinely liked that song, everybody knew it was bad and low budget when it came out and people made fun of it. Yet it somehow garnered tens of millions of views and radio airplay because of the haters giving it extra publicity by telling everybody it sucked. I really think people need to stop talking so much about songs they hate, then maybe that bad song will go away.

Yeah, even 90s and early 00's pop music is better than todays. It's embarrassing. :-[


Do you think we're just in a bad period of music, or is this something that's permanent? Personally, I think we're just in a dark age for music, but I think we'll start to pull out of it around 2017 or 2018. Who knows? Maybe 2021 will be like 1991. I know I act like such a downer when it comes to pop music of the current era, but I just wish we'd have something that was memorable like our parents and/or older siblings had. The pop culture at the moment is bumming me out.

Sometimes I think we have no one to blame but ourselves for "bad" pop music. Look at "Friday" from 2010, I don't reckon anyone here knows one single soul who genuinely liked that song, everybody knew it was bad and low budget when it came out and people made fun of it. Yet it somehow garnered tens of millions of views and radio airplay because of the haters giving it extra publicity by telling everybody it sucked. I really think people need to stop talking so much about songs they hate, then maybe that bad song will go away.


Friday was from 2011 btw.

Do you think we're just in a bad period of music, or is this something that's permanent? Personally, I think we're just in a dark age for music, but I think we'll start to pull out of it around 2017 or 2018. Who knows? Maybe 2021 will be like 1991. I know I act like such a downer when it comes to pop music of the current era, but I just wish we'd have something that was memorable like our parents and/or older siblings had. The pop culture at the moment is bumming me out.


You'll still get great hits here and there, and so far looking at 2015 music you've had a few good ones, but just not consistently great ones from all kinds of genres like the late 2000's and early 2010's. Like for example, in 2015, you'll probably have 1 great hit everyone can enjoy once every 2-3 months. Back in 2009 or 2010, you had about 4-5 hits coming out monthly throughout the entire year everybody would enjoy raging from all kinds of genres. Not only that, but the preteen/teen bop music wasn't the major focus back in the late 2000's/early 2010's when the electropop era was dominant and fresh. It's the complete opposite today.

You'll still get great hits here and there, and so far looking at 2015 music you've had a few good ones, but just not consistently great ones from all kinds of genres like the late 2000's and early 2010's. Like for example, in 2015, you'll probably have 1 great hit everyone can enjoy once every 2-3 months. Back in 2009 or 2010, you had about 4-5 hits coming out monthly throughout the entire year everybody would enjoy raging from all kinds of genres. Not only that, but the preteen/teen bop music wasn't the major focus back in the late 2000's/early 2010's when the electropop era was dominant and fresh. It's the complete opposite today.


I do agree with this.  2015 has been a better year for music than 2013 and 2014.  It's still not great compared to the late '00s and early '10s when there was so much good music out.

I think they hate modern pop music because the nostalgia factor is not there.

You'll still get great hits here and there, and so far looking at 2015 music you've had a few good ones, but just not consistently great ones from all kinds of genres like the late 2000's and early 2010's. Like for example, in 2015, you'll probably have 1 great hit everyone can enjoy once every 2-3 months. Back in 2009 or 2010, you had about 4-5 hits coming out monthly throughout the entire year everybody would enjoy raging from all kinds of genres. Not only that, but the preteen/teen bop music wasn't the major focus back in the late 2000's/early 2010's when the electropop era was dominant and fresh. It's the complete opposite today.


I think what some people are bemoaning isn't really that today's music is so much worse than it was in the past (seriously, look at the Billboard Year-end Hot 100 for 1991, because there was still plenty of garbage back then like Color Me Badd and Nelson). No, I think what people don't like about today's music is that it just doesn't seem to "matter" as much as it used to.

Up until maybe the last decade or so, the top music acts were true cultural icons. Certainly, we're a long way removed from the '60s, when songs by rock bands like The Beatles or The Rolling Stones could actually help spur social movements, or the '80s, when even my grandmother knew who Michael Jackson was, and could probably even name a few of his songs. Even in 1992, it didn't matter if you were a high school freshman, or a middle-aged soccer mom, you likely at least had heard of Guns 'N Roses, Nirvana, or Madonna.

It just doesn't feel that way today. Outside of maybe a select few (like Taylor Swift, Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga) most '10s artists are completely anonymous to the average public. Heck, I'm only in my late 20's, and despite massive popularity among teens, I really didn't even know who Skrellix was until about a year or so ago. Apparently there's a really popular group out there right now called "Five Seconds of Summer", but I honestly couldn't name one of their songs with a gun to my head. Now, compare that to 1991, when a person my age would probably have recognized close to half the songs on the Hot 100 chart at any given time.

I guess you could look at it like this: if an artist were to (God forbid) die in a sudden, shocking fashion in 2015, would you see the same type of mass media coverage you did when John Lennon was assassinated in 1980? Or when Kurt Cobain killed himself in 1994? I would be inclined to say no.

It just doesn't feel that way today. Outside of maybe a select few (like Taylor Swift, Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga) most '10s artists are completely anonymous to the average public. Heck, I'm only in my late 20's, and despite massive popularity among teens, I really didn't even know who Skrellix was until about a year or so ago. Apparently there's a really popular group out there right now called "Five Seconds of Summer", but I honestly couldn't name one of their songs with a gun to my head. Now, compare that to 1991, when a person my age would probably have recognized close to half the songs on the Hot 100 chart at any given time.

I think it's been discussed her how music today is far more aimed at a teen audience than it was in the '90s.  Back then, you did have teen pop but you had plenty of more mature music aimed at slightly older audiences.  Today, most songs that come on the radio are hardly palatable to people over 21, especially guys.




I guess you could look at it like this: if an artist were to (God forbid) die in a sudden, shocking fashion in 2015, would you see the same type of mass media coverage you did when John Lennon was assassinated in 1980? Or when Kurt Cobain killed himself in 1994? I would be inclined to say no.


I agree with this.  Lady Gaga was the last pop artist to have that kind of cultural impact.  There are big artists today (Ariana Grande, 5 Seconds of Summer, One Direction, etc) but they mostly appeal to a teen audience.

I think they hate modern pop music because the nostalgia factor is not there.


the nostalgia will be there in another 20 more years then it wouldn't be so modern anymore.

I think what some people are bemoaning isn't really that today's music is so much worse than it was in the past (seriously, look at the Billboard Year-end Hot 100 for 1991, because there was still plenty of garbage back then like Color Me Badd and Nelson). No, I think what people don't like about today's music is that it just doesn't seem to "matter" as much as it used to.

Up until maybe the last decade or so, the top music acts were true cultural icons. Certainly, we're a long way removed from the '60s, when songs by rock bands like The Beatles or The Rolling Stones could actually help spur social movements, or the '80s, when even my grandmother knew who Michael Jackson was, and could probably even name a few of his songs. Even in 1992, it didn't matter if you were a high school freshman, or a middle-aged soccer mom, you likely at least had heard of Guns 'N Roses, Nirvana, or Madonna.

It just doesn't feel that way today. Outside of maybe a select few (like Taylor Swift, Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga) most '10s artists are completely anonymous to the average public. Heck, I'm only in my late 20's, and despite massive popularity among teens, I really didn't even know who Skrellix was until about a year or so ago. Apparently there's a really popular group out there right now called "Five Seconds of Summer", but I honestly couldn't name one of their songs with a gun to my head. Now, compare that to 1991, when a person my age would probably have recognized close to half the songs on the Hot 100 chart at any given time.

I disagree with this theory.  It feels like these teenybopper, image-promoted artists are more overexposed in the press than ever before.  They blend perfectly together with non-musical "icons" like the Jenners/Kardashians, who have nothing of substance to say and dominate Facebook headlines based on the photos they share of themselves posing in some trendy outfit.

I also think that even back during the Bush '41 era that we've become so nostalgic for, the teen pop artists were either not as ubiquitous as they are now or, in a lot of cases, significantly better than the ones we're stuck with today.  Tiffany, Debbie Gibson, and Taylor Dayne all released pretty catchy and memorable songs, straightforward as many of them were.  Even during the millennial era, the hits released by artists such as Christina Aguilera, the Spice Girls, and the Backstreet Boys had so much more melodic and musical originality/variety than songs today, which either sound like ultra-synthesized versions of beginner's music book songs or coming from the DJ set of a drunk music producer.  Also, considering pop music as recent as four years ago was mostly still quite great, I don't think the current problem is simply lack of nostalgic appeal.

I guess you could look at it like this: if an artist were to (God forbid) die in a sudden, shocking fashion in 2015, would you see the same type of mass media coverage you did when John Lennon was assassinated in 1980? Or when Kurt Cobain killed himself in 1994? I would be inclined to say no.


There was mass media coverage over that? Sure as hell don't recall it...

(Mind you, apart from a few die-hard followers, they didn't mean much in Britain...)

I don't think the current problem is simply lack of nostalgic appeal.

Then what's lacking?

I just think people keep bringing these mediocre people in and with the help of a auto-tuner, they think they've made the next big thing and they keep shoving it down the people's throat to the point where it gets like inescapable like Big Brother in "1984". IT's over saturation. That's why I quit with the radio, and the music stations. I got tired of the mediocrity. I know my preference is very strongly for a certain performer, I do know that there is other genuine talent out there. But there is no talent really anymore. There just an "image".  The only really good popular singer out there now that I'd even give the time of day is Adele. That's about it. Everyone else is really kind of neither here nor there.

Auto tune kills talent. I'd much rather hear natural voices. Adele was a good singer, and people of all ages can like her as opposed to alot of the stuff that just teens would like.


I disagree with this theory.  It feels like these teenybopper, image-promoted artists are more overexposed in the press than ever before.  They blend perfectly together with non-musical "icons" like the Jenners/Kardashians, who have nothing of substance to say and dominate Facebook headlines based on the photos they share of themselves posing in some trendy outfit.

I also think that even back during the Bush '41 era that we've become so nostalgic for, the teen pop artists were either not as ubiquitous as they are now or, in a lot of cases, significantly better than the ones we're stuck with today.  Tiffany, Debbie Gibson, and Taylor Dayne all released pretty catchy and memorable songs, straightforward as many of them were.  Even during the millennial era, the hits released by artists such as Christina Aguilera, the Spice Girls, and the Backstreet Boys had so much more melodic and musical originality/variety than songs today, which either sound like ultra-synthesized versions of beginner's music book songs or coming from the DJ set of a drunk music producer.  Also, considering pop music as recent as four years ago was mostly still quite great, I don't think the current problem is simply lack of nostalgic appeal.

Exactly, it's overhyped! They're talked about too much and get too much attention on media like Twitter because the celebrity news will call attention to every mundane thing they do and say. It all becomes unappealing. Songs from today can be catchy, but alot of that is because they're so repetitive and get stuck in your head whether you want them to or not. Not because they're truly fun to listen to. 

Auto tune kills talent. I'd much rather hear natural voices. Adele was a good singer, and people of all ages can like her as opposed to alot of the stuff that just teens would like.

Auto-Tune is so annoying! >:(

Auto tune kills talent. I'd much rather hear natural voices.


I wouldn't say that is always the case.  I personally really liked the late '00s when auto-tune was pretty much everywhere in hip-hop and r&b.  However, it was the style of music that was popular then and wasn't necessarily used to cover up bad talent.

The only times I get to hear modern pop is when I'm in stores or restaurants, or wherever they're playing it.  I never hear anything that catches my ear.  I lost track of pop music after I stopped listening to it 20 years ago.  In 1995 I was still interested in college pop, but less and less of it appealed to me, and my tastes became more and more esoteric. 

The only times I get to hear modern pop is when I'm in stores or restaurants, or wherever they're playing it.  I never hear anything that catches my ear.  I lost track of pop music after I stopped listening to it 20 years ago.  In 1995 I was still interested in college pop, but less and less of it appealed to me, and my tastes became more and more esoteric.


Can't that also mean spiritual?

Can't that also mean spiritual?


You might be thinking of the word "occult."

The reason for the hatred of modern popular music is simple - it's just a load of bloody crap!

Seriously, it is boring and speaks to neither the head nor the heart. It is soulless, mindless production line drivel and has been so since 1990. Image has become more important than talent with style rapidly triumphing over content and no 'classics' are being composed any more.

In previous times, we had 'Great Balls Of Fire', 'Hey Jude', 'Whiter Shade Of Pale', 'Bridge Over Troubled Water', 'He Ain't Heavy He's My Brother', 'I Heard It Through The Grapevine', 'If You Leave Me Now', 'Bohemian Rhapsody', 'Groovy Kind Of Love', 'Dancing Queen' and 'The Living Years' to name but a few. Still well remembered and respected. Still played. Still well loved. Where are their equivalents today?

The only times I get to hear modern pop is when I'm in stores or restaurants, or wherever they're playing it.  I never hear anything that catches my ear.  I lost track of pop music after I stopped listening to it 20 years ago.  In 1995 I was still interested in college pop, but less and less of it appealed to me, and my tastes became more and more esoteric.


this is why I switched to internet radio.

There hasn't been much that is good in the last forty years. There was some good and really doggone awful disco. When the 80s arrived, the new wave,  Whitney Houston, Prince, Madonna, hairbands,Michael Jackson, metal, Mariah Carey  was all a load of crap. The 90s were terrible, there wasn't even 1 good song in the whole decade (as least there were a few decent songs in the 1980s). The 2000s were unlistenable.
Music, Rest in peace. Death in 1975 or 1976.

Today's pop is a thin stew of hip-hop, top country 40, and R&B.  It's all mixed up with garish spectacle.  It has no life of its own.  Even college/alternative music is homogenized muck.  Been there, done that, ho-hum.
::)

To wit: Bro-country
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxEwxWWPyhg


Just take those Depeche Mode records off the shelf, I'll sit and listen to 'em by myself!

Country is pretty bad today.  Anything newer than early '00s is pretty much unlistenable.  I think the '90s were really the golden age for country.  The classic country station in my town plays mostly '90s.

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000000023/polls_poll_xlarge.gif

You might be thinking of the word "occult."


Oh no!  :(

80s music was pretty good but the late 80s had some gag-worthy songs, so it wasn't a perfect decade.
The 90s was okay, but some R&B songs were kind of tacky.

To me, music was great until 1999. By 1999, it was okay but I could see the quality going down. And by 2000, I was like, 'What the hell is this?"

The reason for the hatred of modern popular music is simple - it's just a load of bloody crap!

Seriously, it is boring and speaks to neither the head nor the heart. It is soulless, mindless production line drivel and has been so since 1990. Image has become more important than talent with style rapidly triumphing over content and no 'classics' are being composed any more.

In previous times, we had 'Great Balls Of Fire', 'Hey Jude', 'Whiter Shade Of Pale', 'Bridge Over Troubled Water', 'He Ain't Heavy He's My Brother', 'I Heard It Through The Grapevine', 'If You Leave Me Now', 'Bohemian Rhapsody', 'Groovy Kind Of Love', 'Dancing Queen' and 'The Living Years' to name but a few. Still well remembered and respected. Still played. Still well loved. Where are their equivalents today?


If you think all popular music since 1990 is terrible but give a free pass to Dancing Queen, then that simply implies you have a strong generational preference towards the 60s and 70s.  More on this in a moment.


There hasn't been much that is good in the last forty years. There was some good and really doggone awful disco. When the 80s arrived, the new wave,  Whitney Houston, Prince, Madonna, hairbands,Michael Jackson, metal, Mariah Carey  was all a load of crap. The 90s were terrible, there wasn't even 1 good song in the whole decade (as least there were a few decent songs in the 1980s). The 2000s were unlistenable.
Music, Rest in peace. Death in 1975 or 1976.


>:(

But in all seriousness, I've always thought this type of purism is such an exaggeration, especially if you're going to place artists like Prince and Michael Jackson in the same category as Justin Bieber and One Direction.  Maybe it's just a generational thing, but just because a musician is of the pop genre and doesn't play guitar, drums, or bass; doesn't write protest songs, and relies on synthesizers and their own voice doesn't mean they're soulless, assembly-line crap with no musical integrity.  There's still a level of importance in melodic, instrumental, or inflective originality, which is what really distinguishes 80s and 90s pop from mid-2010s teenyboppers like Selena Gomez.  Prince, in particular, integrated a gigantic range of musical influences into his music, much of it electronic, but a lot of it coming from genres as diverse as world beat, gospel, hard rock, new wave, and hi-nrg.  Albums like Purple Rain and Sign 'O' the Times are musical masterpieces, even if they simultaneously produced a lot of hit singles with accessible lead melodies (but then again, don't try and pretend The Beatles and Simon & Garfunkel didn't have a strong mass appeal, despite their groundbreaking influence on popular music).  Mariah Carey, while not nearly as innovative as Prince or Kate Bush, co-writes all of her songs and crafts them to showcase her exceptional range (especially on Daydream and her 1990 debut).  From a listening standpoint, at least, I think there's a reason she sold so many albums and released so many #1 singles, whether vocal-based artists are your think or not.

^^^^ I don't understand how someone would compare Prince or Michael Jackson music to mid 2010's teenybopper artists today, that's just laughable, and I wouldn't even compare them to late 90's/early 2000's teenybopper artists either. My parents and other folks born in the mid-late 60's, who spent their high school and college years in the 80's, weren't the only ones who enjoyed Michael Jackson and Prince at the time, I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure folks in their 30's or even 40's at the time the 80's decade was going on, enjoyed a lot of their music as well. My grandparents were born in the early 40's and they loved Michel Jackson too. Not the biggest expert on music when it comes to the melody, beats, electronic, etc. but I'm guessing a lot of Michael Jackson and Prince's legendary music has something to do with it being very original at the time. It appealed to a large audience of folks. I highly doubt that Selena Gomez or Ariana Grande appeals to large audiences of folks. Unless that's really your favorite genre of music.

Country is pretty bad today.  Anything newer than early '00s is pretty much unlistenable.  I think the '90s were really the golden age for country.  The classic country station in my town plays mostly '90s.


80's country music was better. You had Johnny Lee, Kenny Rogers and Dolly Parton just to name a few.

^^^^ I don't understand how someone would compare Prince or Michael Jackson music to mid 2010's teenybopper artists today, that's just laughable, and I wouldn't even compare them to late 90's/early 2000's teenybopper artists either. My parents and other folks born in the mid-late 60's, who spent their high school and college years in the 80's, weren't the only ones who enjoyed Michael Jackson and Prince at the time, I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure folks in their 30's or even 40's at the time the 80's decade was going on, enjoyed a lot of their music as well. My grandparents were born in the early 40's and they loved Michel Jackson too. Not the biggest expert on music when it comes to the melody, beats, electronic, etc. but I'm guessing a lot of Michael Jackson and Prince's legendary music has something to do with it being very original at the time. It appealed to a large audience of folks. I highly doubt that Selena Gomez or Ariana Grande appeals to large audiences of folks. Unless that's really your favorite genre of music.

Wow, you parents are pretty close in age to mine(Dad born in 1959 and Mom born in 1965). and grandparents too, mine were born in 1945 and 1947.

@ Infinity: I see where you are coming from with the generational bias thing. The 1960s and 1970s contains the music I grew up with. But it was made by folk who were serious about it and in it for the genuine love of the music. Nowadays, it's all about making a quick buck and having good visual image.

And just because someone doesn't play, doesn't make them less talented. As far as I know, Barbra Streisand doesn't play an instrument. But she can bloody well sing. Although I have to confess that the ability to play gives you just that bit more edge over the other fellow as it shows your versatility.

I cannot stand Prince either professionally or personally. I think his music is boring rubbish and he is a strange person in general. But I do RESPECT him for writing his own material, having the ability to play as well as sing and for producing his own stuff.

Wow, you parents are pretty close in age to mine(Dad born in 1959 and Mom born in 1965). and grandparents too, mine were born in 1945 and 1947.



My Father was born in 1941 and My Mother was born in 1945, My Grandmother was born in 1917.

Wow, you parents are pretty close in age to mine(Dad born in 1959 and Mom born in 1965). and grandparents too, mine were born in 1945 and 1947.



^^^^ I don't understand how someone would compare Prince or Michael Jackson music to mid 2010's teenybopper artists today, that's just laughable, and I wouldn't even compare them to late 90's/early 2000's teenybopper artists either. My parents and other folks born in the mid-late 60's, who spent their high school and college years in the 80's, weren't the only ones who enjoyed Michael Jackson and Prince at the time, I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure folks in their 30's or even 40's at the time the 80's decade was going on, enjoyed a lot of their music as well. My grandparents were born in the early 40's and they loved Michel Jackson too. Not the biggest expert on music when it comes to the melody, beats, electronic, etc. but I'm guessing a lot of Michael Jackson and Prince's legendary music has something to do with it being very original at the time. It appealed to a large audience of folks. I highly doubt that Selena Gomez or Ariana Grande appeals to large audiences of folks. Unless that's really your favorite genre of music.
Whoa! Same here. My parents are around the same age range as you guy's parents (both were born in 1966) and my grandparents as well (maternal ones were in 1942 and 1943 while the the paternal ones were born in 1944 and 1948/49.)

I agree. My family members and their friends have enjoyed music that was from the 50s/60s to today (not the mainstream stuff) and they are/were over the age of the target audience.

I actually made a thread about that a year ago. I'll link it below.

http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=50514.0

My father was born in 1922 and my mother in 1935 so they definitely hated the music!

My father was born in 1922 and my mother in 1935 so they definitely hated the music!


Why did they hate the music?  ???

Because they were from a different generation, Howard and weren't raised with such stuff.

This thread was clearly made to start a flame war. Troll OP

Because they were from a different generation, Howard and weren't raised with such stuff.


I was raised with the late 70's and early 80's music.

This thread was clearly made to start a flame war. Troll OP

My mother was born in 1965 and she hates most music from 1990 onward.. she especially hates the millennium music era because of the high number of crappy teen pop songs from Britney, Christina, Spice Girls, N-Sync, Boyzone and a host of other terrible artists. I was talking to a taxi driver recently who said, and I quote, 'Music went a bit funny after 1985'.

Music is mainstream precisely because most people like it.. if you came of age in a different era then you'll probably not like today's music because it isn't aimed at your age cohort.

I have XM radio in my car, and if I listen to XM, the music sounds better, because they're willing to play more variety and other music (other music that is still modern). So in that sense, modern music has hope and isn't as bad as I think. If I turn to mainstream radio, they play the same thirty songs every two hours, on repeat, and on repeat. And the songs aren't my cup of tea.

My mother was born in 1965 and she hates most music from 1990 onward.. she especially hates the millennium music era because of the high number of crappy teen pop songs from Britney, Christina, Spice Girls, N-Sync, Boyzone and a host of other terrible artists. I was talking to a taxi driver recently who said, and I quote, 'Music went a bit funny after 1985'.

Music is mainstream precisely because most people like it.. if you came of age in a different era then you'll probably not like today's music because it isn't aimed at your age cohort.
"Beautiful" by Christina Aguilera is a pretty good song. N'Sync-As much as I hate to say it "Tearin' Up My Heart" and "This I Promise You" are pretty good songs. I remember the music video for " Tearin Up My Heart" where they were washing a car and Chris throws a sponge at Justin I think.  Britney-yeah she can't sing really that well. Boyzone-They really weren't big in the US. Spice Girls-I thought "2 Become 1" was their best radio hit.

I think what some people are bemoaning isn't really that today's music is so much worse than it was in the past (seriously, look at the Billboard Year-end Hot 100 for 1991, because there was still plenty of garbage back then like Color Me Badd and Nelson). No, I think what people don't like about today's music is that it just doesn't seem to "matter" as much as it used to.

Up until maybe the last decade or so, the top music acts were true cultural icons. Certainly, we're a long way removed from the '60s, when songs by rock bands like The Beatles or The Rolling Stones could actually help spur social movements, or the '80s, when even my grandmother knew who Michael Jackson was, and could probably even name a few of his songs. Even in 1992, it didn't matter if you were a high school freshman, or a middle-aged soccer mom, you likely at least had heard of Guns 'N Roses, Nirvana, or Madonna.

It just doesn't feel that way today. Outside of maybe a select few (like Taylor Swift, Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga) most '10s artists are completely anonymous to the average public. Heck, I'm only in my late 20's, and despite massive popularity among teens, I really didn't even know who Skrellix was until about a year or so ago. Apparently there's a really popular group out there right now called "Five Seconds of Summer", but I honestly couldn't name one of their songs with a gun to my head. Now, compare that to 1991, when a person my age would probably have recognized close to half the songs on the Hot 100 chart at any given time.

I guess you could look at it like this: if an artist were to (God forbid) die in a sudden, shocking fashion in 2015, would you see the same type of mass media coverage you did when John Lennon was assassinated in 1980? Or when Kurt Cobain killed himself in 1994? I would be inclined to say no.
Color Me Badd-I enjoy a couple songs by them like "I Adore Mi Amor" and "Thinkin Back" :is excellent.

Miley Cyrus-She has been around pop-culture for 10 years now although she had a little break in 2011-2012 re-inventing herself as sort of mimicking Madonna's style. She had the same haircut as Madonna did in the mid 80's with the short blonde hair when she re-invented her style in 2013.

There hasn't been much that is good in the last forty years. There was some good and really doggone awful disco. When the 80s arrived, the new wave,  Whitney Houston, Prince, Madonna, hairbands,Michael Jackson, metal, Mariah Carey  was all a load of crap. The 90s were terrible, there wasn't even 1 good song in the whole decade (as least there were a few decent songs in the 1980s). The 2000s were unlistenable.
Music, Rest in peace. Death in 1975 or 1976.
I agree there was good and bad disco.

Mariah-I used to not like her music when I was young. I was like she oversings. I respect the music she made in the 90's now because its memorable to me.

Hairbands-Like disco it had its crap but I think "Every Rose Its Thorn", "Rock You Like a Hurricane", and "Wind Of Change" are pretty good songs.

Auto-Tune is so annoying! >:(
I didn't know Auto-Tone was that popular still. I thought Auto-Tone lost most of its popularity in 2009.

I didn't know Auto-Tone was that popular still. I thought Auto-Tone lost most of its popularity in 2009.


Yeah, it was at it's peak around the turn of the decade (2009/2010).

80's country music was better. You had Johnny Lee, Kenny Rogers and Dolly Parton just to name a few.
Yeah Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers brand of country music crossed over onto pop radio after disco died I think. Crystal Gayle was popular too around that time too.

At the very least, it doesn't seem like African American issues were covered that much more in the 80s and 90s than now.  While the 80s saw the crack epidemic, the early 90s had the L.A. Riots, and the mid-90s were dominated by the OJ Simpson trial, the recent outpour of mid-2010s controversies is really the first time since the latter event that African American civil rights have been standard headlines.  The crack epidemic and Rodney King decision certainly made the advent of gangsta rap possible, so I'm just surprised that the George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson controversies have not fueled mainstream rap this era in the same way.
Yeah true African American Issues weren't covered a lot from after OJ from 1996-2014 but this past year they were covered a heck of a lot.

First off Zimmerman and Martin are about as equally at fault for their incident which unfortunately led to Martin's death. Secondly, Rap music was all over the place in the 2000's so I wouldn't expect it to be this popular in this decade.

Yeah Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers brand of country music crossed over onto pop radio after disco died I think. Crystal Gayle was popular too around that time too.


soft rock-pop and lite music was getting popular too.