Best Ever Albums

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Torchlin — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:52:19 GMT

Author: Torchlin

Posted: 07/24/2014 15:52

RepoMan wrote:

1. They're old.
2. They're old.
3. They're old.

I think that just about wraps it up. "Older people" have been bitching & moaning about "today's music" since the cave kids started banging on rocks, dude. I'm pretty sure they all thought they had valid reasons for this belief. (i.e. insert latest technological/economic development here.)

Urgh, when I grow older, I hope I never reach the point where I start bitching about the current music trends and how back in the day people were still playing "good music". It just feels pitiful no matter the argument made.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Facetious — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:26:49 GMT

Author: Facetious

Posted: 07/24/2014 15:26

Gowienczyk wrote:

That and you stop getting dopamine at a certain point which hampers the ability to like new music.

I don't see how that would be specific to "new music": wouldn't it also apply to music that was released earlier but is new to the listener?

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:20:28 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/24/2014 15:20

Gowienczyk wrote:

That and you stop getting dopamine at a certain point which hampers the ability to like new music.

I've heard this and I have to say I'm skeptical. I mean, the loss of dopamine with age is pretty well established, but the connection to our ability to enjoy new music seems a bit hand-wavy. I have actually found myself becoming more adventurous with music as I've aged.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

benpaco — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:52:37 GMT

Author: benpaco

Posted: 07/24/2014 14:52

Skinny wrote:

Depeche Mode are shit though.

Honestly 90% of their discography really is, and the only songs I really enjoy of their's are Martin Gore pieces anyhow, and it's Wilder who "reimagined" some of those that get a bit annoying - Enjoy The Silence is great still but I think Gore's original view of the song would've been better.

Anyhow, Gore's solo work is probably better for me.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Mdemauri — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:49:32 GMT

Author: Mdemauri

Posted: 07/24/2014 14:49

RepoMan wrote:

I'm old based on the median age of this group. 48 years old as a matter of fact, and I love today's music. Not all of it mind you, but there are plenty of new artists and interesting things going on the music world not to at least be curious about and check out. To dismiss "today's music" without even giving it a chance is foolish.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Skinny — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:36:21 GMT

Author: Skinny

Posted: 07/24/2014 14:36

Depeche Mode are shit though.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Facetious — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:57:57 GMT

Author: Facetious

Posted: 07/24/2014 13:57

I don't have much of an opinion or even the data to form one, but if that article is to be believed then the musical Apocalypse is coming soon. Though 6 years have passed and it's still not here 🤔

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

mickilennial — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:20:05 GMT

Author: mickilennial

Posted: 07/24/2014 11:20

RepoMan wrote:

That and you stop getting dopamine at a certain point which hampers the ability to like new music.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 19:39:43 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 23:39

Charicature wrote:

Also a detailed discussion that may explain why older people don't find much to love in today's music.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 19:04:55 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 23:04

Good article Charicature! 😄 I don't think I know enough on what was said to come to my own conclusions although it was a good point of view.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:53:50 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 22:53

Charicature wrote:

But I guess I'll have my answer as to what level most of this thread's discussion will be. :roll:

Do you always get this condescending when people disagree with your opinions?

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

SuedeSwede — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:52:25 GMT

Author: SuedeSwede

Posted: 07/23/2014 22:52

If text could cause cancer I would have cancer

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:07:07 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 22:07

Wow, what a terrible article. It's depressing to see a major musician so closed-minded towards modern music.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:25:29 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 21:25

Charicature wrote:

What difference does it make whether he's a classically trained pianist? I'm sure there are countless "classically trained" musicians participating in modern music, as if that somehow legitimizes their opinion about what art is. He must live in some kind of narcissistic bubble to even consider suggesting that all modern music has suddenly ceased to function as "art" simply because it is disseminated in a more compressed digital format.

I mean, think about it. You lost 25% of your hearing, right? As you're listening to vinyl or CDs, do you find yourself no longer to appreciate old music as "art" simply because of that loss in sensitivity (most of which will likely be in the range chopped off by digital compression)?

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Necharsian — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:01:37 GMT

Author: Necharsian

Posted: 07/23/2014 21:01

Charicature wrote:

Anyway, there's much more substantive comments in this article...and come on, you guys if you're going to retort can do a little better than snark and Kristen Stewart-style exasperated breaths. It's an article that attempts to tackle a subject with substantive comments, so if you're commenting on it, make substantive explanations of what you're saying.

Brevity is much more powerful than words words words. Im not going to waste my time providing in depth analysis on an article that's not worth the Kristen Stewart breath.

Charicature wrote:

After all, children often lack the knowledge and experience to guide their actions in a rational manner, yet their desire to be considered grown up and respected often causes them to make the mistake of arrogantly thinking they know better than their elders.

I think this is a joke?

Charicature wrote:

But I guess I'll have my answer as to what level most of this thread's discussion will be

Yes I am sorry that I am not praising someone for saying “modern music isn’t art” like it isn’t a statement of someone who claims dolphins are the only things living in the ocean because he saw one jump out of the water once.
“True [musical] excitement” is not something that’s universal, so saying some general statement and then tacking on a song and saying “see?? Music is now garbage” is as empty an argument as they come.
In regards to the MP3 stuff, im no expert, but I am pretty sure that’s either out of date or incorrect. MP3 can be of very high quality, better than vinyl, right?
Like, I understand his underlying point about record companies, but it seems like he’s just using it as an excuse to attack modern music as a whole and then doing what I absolutely hate in writing by just using the conclusion as a diving board for questions that the reader can quite obviously understand which side the writer is on. It’s like your driver is asking whether to take a left or right turn while consistently veering left the whole time. So no, it’s not an interesting take. In fact it’s quite stale. Oh an older person hates modern music how refreshing. next he’ll be yelling at kids to get off his lawn and talking about how he used to walk a mile to school and paid 5 cents for coke.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

benpaco — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 16:56:56 GMT

Author: benpaco

Posted: 07/23/2014 20:56

I mean, I think it's fine to put things here to discuss, I just agree with most of what's been posted by others. That said, views of music definitely have changed. See

Monarchy wrote:

We feel a bit like the album concept is over, so we're going for EP's. But definitely more EPs before the end of the year. Aiming for September.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Charicature — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 15:54:01 GMT

Author: Charicature

Posted: 07/23/2014 19:54

satiemaniac wrote:

Quote:

Is modern music regarded as an art form at all anymore?

if only we could go back to the days of High Concept Art with a capital A... days long since past... days in the year 1965 when you could make large amounts of money doing simple chord progressions, when singing required no technical ability whatsoever, when the best drummers in the world were about as good as Han Bennink as a toddler using Tupperware containers and a wooden spoon... those were the days of rational ecstasy on a massive scale

You understand Wilder is a classically trained pianist and also spent years developing an expertise as an electronic sound engineer? He did most of the production work on 5 of DM's albums, learning on the fly in 1984.

But I guess I'll have my answer as to what level most of this thread's discussion will be. 🙄 Still, it's an interesting take.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 15:52:12 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 19:52

Quote:

Is modern music regarded as an art form at all anymore?

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Charicature — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 15:50:10 GMT

Author: Charicature

Posted: 07/23/2014 19:50

Necharsian wrote:

Hmm...quote's blank....

Anyway, there's much more substantive comments in this article...and come on, you guys if you're going to retort can do a little better than snark and Kristen Stewart-style exasperated breaths. It's an article that attempts to tackle a subject with substantive comments, so if you're commenting on it, make substantive explanations of what you're saying.

Quote:

True excitement comes from variation in rhythm, tone, pitch and a wide range of dynamics which in turn provides space and warmth - something you're unlikely to find in much of today's rock/pop music. If you want a good example, listen to The Arctic Monkeys 'I Bet You Look Good on the Dance Floor' for a bombardment of the most unsubtle, one-dimensional noise.

Oh, and just because you don't like hearing "no, it's the children that are wrong" it doesn't mean it's not true 🤣 After all, children often lack the knowledge and experience to guide their actions in a rational manner, yet their desire to be considered grown up and respected often causes them to make the mistake of arrogantly thinking they know better than their elders.

I found this part interesting because I never understood myself how people say digital music isn't as good as analog - my ears don't hear the difference, but possibly it's because I've lost something like 25% of my hearing over the years.

Quote:

At the moment, MP3 compression allows a smaller file to be created by excluding the musical information that the human ear is less likely to notice. Much of the information left out is at the very high and low end (MP3s don't reproduce reverb well for similar transience reasons). So when the already squashed CD master is then consumed via MP3, the flattening effect is enhanced further. The result - an unsatisfying, brittle, indistinct, hollow experience with no punch.

Re: Music for the Masses? - I think not!

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:02:04 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 07/23/2014 17:02

Thumbnail. Click to enlarge.