-
We're noticing a pattern here, Melvin. It would seem in your world that the history of music did not begin until sometime in the 1930s or so, and it looks like it ended someplace in the 1950s. It would appear that everything that happened before and since are irrelevant in your book.
Humans behave like humans; it doesn't matter at which point in history you look at their goings-on. It was guaranteed on the day that Bing Crosby became wildly popular in the US that at some point down the road he would forfeit his crown to other singers, other styles of music and other fads. The music that is immensely popular with the public right now is doomed to the same fate.
Certainly technology plays a part in that, but it has always played an important role as witnessed by the example I gave of how musical styles changed when the modern piano was invented some 300 years ago.
Sure, the invention of mikes, amps and speakers "changed pop music forever" but changing musical styles due to technology was true before. A couple of years back, the Brookhaven National Laboratory documented the age of several Chinese flutes as between 7,000 and 9,000 years old. They are the first known multi-note musical instruments. You think maybe these might have had a radical impact on the style and manner of the music played by our ancestors? I think one could state that the invention of these flutes "changed pop music forever." And there are certainly technologies in use today that were not available 10, 25 or 50 years that are having a permanent impact on how musicians make the music we hear today and will hear in the future. (And, as with any tool or technology, sometimes they are used wonderfully while at other times nasty things are done in the name of progress.)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
So says you. Just because you don't enjoy a genre of music doesn't make them of "little ability".
I think if anything, technology today has allowed many more people to become involved in music. Think of all musicians of yesteryear who were denied the opportunity to produce/distribute music because someone in an office in NY or LA didn't "like" them or the music.
Now with the advent of technology, small musicians can play, record, and distribute on YouTube, MySpace, etc without needing "approval" from snobby, elitist, blowhards such as yourself Mr. Walker.
Just like 50 years ago, if you don't like the music that's on, turn it off.
I agree you are correct , there is more involvement by musicians of sorts than before because of technology. Because of the advances in technology we have today gangster rap , advocating the killing of police , rappers calling Black American women *****es "n"
hoes, four letter words are the norm. Rock artist are musicians using all kinds of language
promoting drug use and using drugs , etc, etc, etc. Going on stage almost naked, holding their crotch.
Technology has advantages and disadvantages. There is penicillin and there is the atom bomb. There was a "Code of Decency'' in Hollywood once. Music companies controlled
much of the music we heard once. Today's technology and other factors has changed all that.
Just think there was a time when men treated women with respect and foul language was not permitted in front of children.
Times have changed with a little help of technology.
Your post was right on the point. It was excellent !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
There are few standards being produced today.
I have a different take on the nature of the changes. Simply put, there are far more choices available today - both musically and for our entertainment time in general. I see that as a positive change. As for *popular* music, you are correct that it is by and large junk. I feel the same way about network television. I watch zero. None. Having said that, there are countless sources of good music and video that are not the *mainstream* product. The variety available for either pursuit is mind boggling - you just have to look. You are still thinking in a three channel television world when it is now a 200 channel broadband High Def video world. I love science based programs. Where there was once only Nova on PBS, now there is The Discovery Channel, The Learning Channel, The Science Channel, Discovery Health, Discovery Times, etc. There's no reason to limit yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Ipod I have read is inferior in quality to CD's...
You're comparing apples and oranges. An iPod is a player and Redbook CD is a format. iPods can store music in an equal fidelity lossless format. That is yet another choice you can make based upon your preferences. Which do you prefer? Greater storage or greater fidelity? Take your pick.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
I agree you are correct , there is more involvement by musicians of sorts than before because of technology. Because of the advances in technology we have today gangster rap , advocating the killing of police , rappers calling Black American women *****es "n"
hoes, four letter words are the norm. Rock artist are musicians using all kinds of language
promoting drug use and using drugs , etc, etc, etc. Going on stage almost naked, holding their crotch.
Technology has advantages and disadvantages. There is penicillin and there is the atom bomb. There was a "Code of Decency'' in Hollywood once. Music companies controlled
much of the music we heard once. Today's technology and other factors has changed all that.
Just think there was a time when men treated women with respect and foul language was not permitted in front of children.
Times have changed with a little help of technology.
Your post was right on the point. It was excellent !
Right, so Hip-Hop, and Slasher Rock define todays music? Please. Again, if you don't like them don't listen to it. I don't.
What about the countless other acts available? I suppose you don't like Pink Floyd because of some "alleged" substance abuse? They only held the longest streak on Billboard (so long Billboard changed the rules to knock them off).
Or what about that loser James Taylor, Billy Joel, and others?
A "Man" still treats women with respect. And people still swore back in the 50's. If you actually belived what you are posting, I suppose YOU call women "hoe's" and swear up a blue streak in front of the grandkids? Nahhhh, I thought not. People do what they like. And they have been doing it for years.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
Right, so Hip-Hop, and Slasher Rock define todays music? Please. Again, if you don't like them don't listen to it. I don't.
What about the countless other acts available? I suppose you don't like Pink Floyd because of some "alleged" substance abuse? They only held the longest streak on Billboard (so long Billboard changed the rules to knock them off).
Or what about that loser James Taylor, Billy Joel, and others?
A "Man" still treats women with respect. And people still swore back in the 50's. If you actually believed what you are posting, I suppose YOU call women "hoe's" and swear up a blue streak in front of the grandkids? Nahhhh, I thought not. People do what they like. And they have been doing it for years.
Are you implying that rappers are not men ? What are they ducks ? People used four letter words in the 50's but it was not on television are on records.
People are held in check by laws. No we cannot not do some of the things we like.
I may not listen to it , but the effects of the music today has changed the attitudes of our young people. They wear their pants low because they think they are imating convicts.
Rappers don't just call women B's and H's they treat them as B's and H's. Some women call themselves B's and H's.
I once read where if you ignored the Nazi's it would not effect you. Should we ignore entertainers such as Pink Floyd ? Billy Joel and James Taylor ? Will they go away as the Nazi's did ? It took a World War to get rid of the Nazi's , what will it take to get rid of rock and rap ?
When Hollywood , television , and the recording studios gave up control look at what happen ? The inmates have taken over.
As you pointed out technology helped.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Are you implying that rappers are not men ? What are they ducks ? People used four letter words in the 50's but it was not on television are on records.
People are held in check by laws. No we cannot not do some of the things we like.
I may not listen to it , but the effects of the music today has changed the attitudes of our young people. They wear their pants low because they think they are imating convicts.
Rappers don't just call women B's and H's they treat them as B's and H's. Some women call themselves B's and H's.
I once read where if you ignored the Nazi's it would not effect you. Should we ignore entertainers such as Pink Floyd ? Billy Joel and James Taylor ? Will they go away as the Nazi's did ? It took a World War to get rid of the Nazi's , what will it take to get rid of rock and rap ?
When Hollywood , television , and the recording studios gave up control look at what happen ? The inmates have taken over.
As you pointed out technology helped.
No, simply replying to your suggestion that "Men" today treat women like dirt. I was simply pointing out that "Men" don't do that. Sorry the distinction was lost on you.
As far as youth of today, its the same as it has been for 1000 years. Children are constantly trying to break out of the mold that their parents are/perceived to be in.
Unless your initials are JC, I'm pretty sure back in the day you felt your parents were "square" or whatever lexicon was in favor back in the 40's-50's.
Back then the trouble makers wore black leather jackets, and used motor oil to hold their "ducks" in shape. Or have you forgotten about that?
As far as Pink Floyd goes, you are literally off your rocker. I hope that someone lifts you back onto it before you catch a cold. Take a couple of hours, and take a listen to "Dark Side of The Moon". Its very good.
And why exactly would you want to ignore James Taylor? Or Billy Joel for that matter?
No more that 40 years ago people should have ignored Frank, Dean, and Sammy. After all, they were a bunch of drunk, mob affilated, womanizing dorks who could happen to sing. Sometimes not even do that very well. Ever hear Sammy sing "In the Ghetto"? What a train wreck!
BTW, GM, JM, or LJ, I do belive we have our first "Nazi" reference in this thread. Thats gotta count for something right?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
I have a different take on the nature of the changes. Simply put, there are far more choices available today - both musically and for our entertainment time in general. I see that as a positive change. As for *popular* music, you are correct that it is by and large junk. I feel the same way about network television. I watch zero. None. Having said that, there are countless sources of good music and video that are not the *mainstream* product. The variety available for either pursuit is mind boggling - you just have to look. You are still thinking in a three channel television world when it is now a 200 channel broadband High Def video world. I love science based programs. Where there was once only Nova on PBS, now there is The Discovery Channel, The Learning Channel, The Science Channel, Discovery Health, Discovery Times, etc. There's no reason to limit yourself.
You're comparing apples and oranges. An iPod is a player and Redbook CD is a format. iPods can store music in an equal fidelity lossless format. That is yet another choice you can make based upon your preferences. Which do you prefer? Greater storage or greater fidelity? Take your pick.
rw
You are correct there are many more options than there was 30+ years ago. The average young American does not watch the shows you outlined.
As a nation we finish last are near last in testing compared to other western nation including the Japanese.
Newt Gingrich , ex College History professor and ex Speaker of the House ,stated that the average young American does not know who the combatants of World War Two was.
I prefer greater fidelity . I seldom listen to my Ipod , which I was awarded by Direct TV
for buying a subscription.
My car has a 6 disc CD changer in it. Came with the car. My wife also has a 6 CD changer in her car , again it came with the car. Our third car has a 6 disc CD changer in it also. That was a BMW thing I guess , although the newer BMW's comes with Ipod connection , no CD's.
Technology is great I just recorded on my DVD recorder The History of the American Jews.
Berlin , Kern , Rogers , Porter , Samuel Goldwyn , Jack Benny , Milton Burl , Sid Caesar,
the list is endless and you know what they all proved that you don't have to dress like a thug , use four letter words , take drugs . and have babies out of wedlock to be a success in show business !
Times have changed.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
The average young American does not watch the shows you outlined.
Nor did earlier generations of 'youts watch Perry Como and Lawrence Welk. No difference there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
As a nation we finish last are near last in testing compared to other western nation including the Japanese.
Every country (except maybe North Korea) has access to modern music and R&R. No difference there. If you're implying that R&R is responsible for lower academic performance, you'll have to find some real evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
That was a BMW thing I guess , although the newer BMW's comes with Ipod connection , no CD's.
That was a car thing, Melvin. Has nothing to do with BMW or Becker. No difference there either.
rw
-
Melvin, once again you seem to be laboring under the impression that only good things happened during the time span you relish.
I'm not fond of many aspects of modern culture, but you can't ignore that the first half of the 20th century had Al Capone (born 1899, died 1947), Hitler (b.1889, d.1945) and a host of others who didn't have much in the way of reverence for the best in humanity.
There were also scum and other troubled types in Hollywood and the music industry during that period of time, though the press was a bit more active in helping cover-up than they are these days. (For example, try giving a short bio of Judy Garland without using the word "addict." She was hardly alone.)
As for complaints about young Americans, don't forget it was Plato who wrote some 2,400 years ago: ""What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?"
Seems to me humanity is still pretty much the same as its always been.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Nor did earlier generations of 'youts watch Perry Como and Lawrence Welk. No difference there.
Every country (except maybe North Korea) has access to modern music and R&R. No difference there. If you're implying that R&R is responsible for lower academic performance, you'll have to find some real evidence.
That was a car thing, Melvin. Has nothing to do with BMW or Becker. No difference there either.
rw
You will find that earlier young people did watch Perry Como. Mr. Como had one of the highest TV ratings of all time. Como was the number one recording artist in America for several years. Lawrence Welk was another story.
There are many reasons for the poor showing of Americans in testing. Hip-hop and rock has been of no benefit. Rap especially is anti-education. Not so with earlier forms of music.
Many Japanese , American and European cars did not come with 6 disc CD changers as standard equipment . High end BMW's did.
You might say the downside of American popular music started with Elvis. Although the music of Elvis seams quite tame compared to the rap and rock musicians today.
At least Elvis's music used no four letter words and did not put down women.
Elvis's dress though looked down on in the 1950's is far better than the dress of most young people today.
Times have changed !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlsstl
Melvin, once again you seem to be laboring under the impression that only good things happened during the time span you relish.
I'm not fond of many aspects of modern culture, but you can't ignore that the first half of the 20th century had Al Capone (born 1899, died 1947), Hitler (b.1889, d.1945) and a host of others who didn't have much in the way of reverence for the best in humanity.
There were also scum and other troubled types in Hollywood and the music industry during that period of time, though the press was a bit more active in helping cover-up than they are these days. (For example, try giving a short bio of Judy Garland without using the word "addict." She was hardly alone.)
As for complaints about young Americans, don't forget it was Plato who wrote some 2,400 years ago: ""What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?"
Seems to me humanity is still pretty much the same as its always been.
As usual you are correct , there was some bad people in the most violent century in the world's history , "The twentieth century". Let's give Hollywood a little credit there was the "Code of Decency " TV and the recording industry did try for many years to not allow the types that are so popular today. Elvis was not really excepted.
Again you are right Judy Garland had her problems and there was others. But remember these sorts was not excepted , many found themselves unemployed as was the case with Ms. Garland. Today's inappropriate behaviour is the norm.
They call them love babies today , in Garland's era that behaviour was unacceptable as well as drug use , which is excepted today.
No sir times are very different. Very different.
-
Hardly for me. I buy gear for the same reason that I bought gear originally. The communication of art. Popular music is about business. Major labels got R&D people tracking trends so they know what kind of band to sign and what group of people to market. They know what groups of people spend the most money on entertainment by race, religion, age, education. And they know how these people will see and/or playback their entertainment. Good for them.
-
Melvin I have to ask are these posts to make you feel better about the times when you were young? As you age and life begins to pass you by, as it will eventually to all of us, are you clinging to your glory days? Times change and we all reach a point where we can no longer change with it. Enjoy memories of your prime but do not deny others their time in the sun.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
No sir times are very different. Very different...
And again, I ask "what is to be done?". The same freedoms that have allowed you to amass the wealth to afford a variety of hi-fi systems and three luxury cars are the same ones that allow for this unacceptable behavior. It's the hallmark of a free and capitalist society---the right to be petulant. Fortunately for you and I, we need not concern ourselves
with other people's behavior. It effects us not (though apparently it may "affect" us).
BTW, I'm not sure you want to use the ogrish "ex-college History Professor" Newt Gingrich as a source, as he more closely resembles the Nazis which you denigrate than any significant voice of conservatism. The man is so congenitively dishonest he had to have three young male aides screw his pants on every morning while his wife lay dying in bed of cancer. Any sample group of "young Americans" he might've used would certainly be from the two to five age range, if only to prove his obtuse and fear-mongering assertion.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
You will find that earlier young people did watch Perry Como.
Not I and I remember the day. Too cheesy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Many Japanese , American and European cars did not come with 6 disc CD changers as standard equipment . High end BMW's did.
You should reconsider speaking on topics about which you lack the facts. I've had CD changers standard on my Hondas and Acuras since 1995. My current Acura came with a true 5.1 channel DVD-Audio system with satellite XM radio. Voice controlled at that. Yours most certainly does not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
You might say the downside of American popular music started with Elvis.
Then again you might not.
rw
-
Melvin,
I understand your perspective, and cannot hold it against you. My dear old Dad, felt exactly as you did. He just couldn't see the variety of music that I listened to as being musical.
But in truth, music need not come in any particular genre to 'trancend' the listener to music nirvana. I love a lot of the music you mention, but I love other types of music too. Yes Mozart, Bach(s), Chopin, Schubert, Haydn, Mahler, Hindemith, Britten, Elgar, and many more great classical composers can send shivers up the spine and cuase goosepimples. So can Frank Sinatra, Oscar Petersen, Miles, Coletrane, Ella, etc, etc.
This goes for a lot of the great '70s musicians; Creedance, Allman Bros, Fogelberg, EL&P, Beatles and so many more. Then you have the 80's and there is a lot of great music from the 80's, 90's and beyond. The message and feeling of the music is different, but the good stuff, no matter what, can turn us on so to speak. A lot of people group rap and R&B. Some of it is not good, like every other genre. But some of it is special. Take R.Kelly. By all accounts not a pleasant bloke. But he was gifted, theres no doubt. He can write and sing musical and meaningful songs that are from the heart. What about Dr Dre? Some of his music, well you just can;t help moving to the music. The lyrics themselves may not connect to someone outside the culture, but the rythms and harmonies do. What about some of Eddie Van Halen's, Yngve Malsteen's, Steve Vai's, Eric Johnson's, Joe Satriani's, Frank Gamballi's or Stevie Ray Vaughn's amazing guitar riffs. They are unquestionably guitar virtuosos of the highest order. Different than Pepe Romero or John Williams, but virtuosi all the same.
This doesn't even account for a wonderful world of music from the east that most in the West are unfamiliar with; music that is beautiful. Have you ever heard of Jagjit Singh, Zakir Hussein, or the Sabri Brothers? Howa about some Japanese or Chinese music that is so utterly, hauntingly beautiful? Good music transcends genre, it cannot be captured alone by a specific, time, place, culture or person.
I was listening to the Richard Blade first wave show on Sirius Radio the other day, and a song came on that you probably wouldn;t know. Its a really silly song. It was meant to be. It was written by a guy who happens to be a very gifted artist. The song was Pop Muzik by M (Robin Scott). As silly as it is, it has something really cool about it that makes you want to move.
There can be greatness in any genre. Music is music.
But I respect your opinion, and love your great system, especially those wonderful Hartsfields..
-
Quote:
No sir times are very different. Very different.
We'll just have to disagree, then. Sex, drugs, violence and bad behavior have been with humanity as far back as you can reach. It is just a bit more publicly seen these days, thanks to the internet.
Ever read "In Cold Blood"? Those murders took place in 1959 in rural Kansas. Did you know that when Coca Cola first came out, it contained cocaine? Ever read about the violence that took place during Prohibition? Not too different than the violence seen with other illegal drugs these days. Did you know that marijuana was completely legal until 1937? Or that heroin, mixed with alcohol, was sold openly and without prescription in the early 1900s? A hundred years ago there were actually a large number of housewives addicted to heroin because of this.
Ethnic gangs who terrorized their neighborhoods have always been with us. Some mistakenly limit this to the Italian mafia (who were very busy during Prohibtion by the way) but they were hardly the only ones. We also had the rampant racism that was still widely prevalent. There were 2,805 documented lynchings between 1882 and 1930. That activity has never struck me as being in keeping with humanitarian values.
In short, we're back to the main difference between then and now is how these events are reported. I don't think Hollywood was particularly saintly. The censorship was not something they did out of a sense of morality. In 1921 comedian Fatty Arbuckle was accused of the rape and murder of a young girl, director William Desmond Taylor was found murdered; actor Wallace Reid died of a drug overdose; and America's sweetheart, actress Mary Pickford, obtained a quickie divorce to marry matinee idol, Douglas Fairbanks. These and other scandals resulted in state censorship boards and eventually led to the "Production Code." In short, a defensive public relations move to keep themselves out of hot water. The music industry wasn't much different. Same behavior with the same hard work to keep things covered up.
You still want to pretend that "times are very different"? Seems to me times are very much the same in terms of the activities taking place. Just the reporting of same is more brazen and open these days.
-
I would tend to disagree with that. Yes, there has always been crime, drugs, sex, etc. But I think that Melvin is talking about a sense of morality that was definitely stronger in the era he's talking about. There's no doubt things are a little out of control in this day and age. The chances of one's 12 year old daughter coming home pregnant are a lot higher than they used to be, or of one's son having made a girl pregnant, just for one example. But this has little to do with music.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by O'Shag
There's no doubt things are a little out of control in this day and age. The chances of one's 12 year old daughter coming home pregnant are a lot higher than they used to be, or of one's son having made a girl pregnant, just for one example. But this has little to do with music.
Disagree...people just didn't talk about it then. Simple underreporting.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Disagree...people just didn't talk about it then. Simple underreporting.
I strongly agree with this point.
Simple example - Look at the amount of media coverage given to President Clinton having an affair back in the 90's....
Do you really think that no other presidents cheated on their wives? JFK has been rumored to have had an affair with a certain Ms. Monroe for years, but that was never the subject of intense media scrutiny in its time as Clinton's afffair was.
What has happened is largely that more and more 'sensational' (IMO 'disgusting') news is highlighted now-a-days....
Things may indeed be worse in some respects, but not necessarily as bad as you think and definitely not for all people...
Try being an african american or other minority back in those 'golden' days of decency and morality that you so love, and then tell me if you still think times were better then....
-
You can really draw a comparison like this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mel
I once read where if you ignored the Nazi's it would not effect you. Should we ignore entertainers such as Pink Floyd ? Billy Joel and James Taylor ? Will they go away as the Nazi's did ?
Have you heard these artists? I think not.
You either don't have a clue as to what you're saying or have so much vitriol for anything new that you really feel this is justified, and that worries me.
And. Elvis wasn't the first. He simply combined certain existing musical elements. He's just the first that was noticed by middle class America. Pat Boone made more than a few pennies by covering one Richard Wayne Penniman's songs for white America for a few years prior.
And, morally I'd say he's better than Frank Sinatra, who was a mob groupie, or Bing Crosby, who was noted for his cruel treatment of his children. Billie Holiday, anyone?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Try being an african american or other minority back in those 'golden' days of decency and morality that you so love, and then tell me if you still think times were better then....
Excellent point. Thanks for bringing this up.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
Have you heard these artists?
Sweet Baby James and Nazis in the same breath? I'm definitely missing something here.
James Taylor
rw
-
Chacun à son goût
Quote:
Originally Posted by O'Shag
Melvin,
I understand your perspective, and cannot hold it against you. My dear old Dad, felt exactly as you did. He just couldn't see the variety of music that I listened to as being musical.
But in truth, music need not come in any particular genre to 'trancend' the listener to music nirvana. ....
There can be greatness in any genre. Music is music.
But I respect your opinion, and love your great system, especially those wonderful Hartsfields..
"Chacun à son goût" as the French say; everyone to his own taste. The saying applies equally well to music, food, wine ... anything short of criminal acts.
Personally I listen to 90% classical, 5% jazz, 5% anything else (but never Rap, Hip-Hop, Metalica, Techno, etc.). As I alluded to earlier in this thread, I listed to Dark Side of the Moon in multichannel: nice, but frankly I got a little bored half way through. To me it is musically trivial
The point is that my own musically tastes are pretty limted, but it would be foolish and pointless for me to bemoan the fact that others like different stuff. Worse would to be for me imply some sort of judgement about them on account of their musical tastes.
-
Quote:
The chances of one's 12 year old daughter coming home pregnant are a lot higher than they used to be...
That's a common sentiment, but its not quite factual. The teenage pregnancy rate in 1950 was 81.6 per thousand. The rate in 2006 was 84.2 or within 3%. (What has changed dramatically are the number of out-of-wedlock births. Shotgun weddings aren't as popular as they used to be.)
Of course, the US population has doubled from 150 million in 1950 to 300 million now, so you'd expect twice as many teen pregnancies, as well as twice as much of everything else associated with human activity.
However, back to music, I think Melvin has forgotten that his beloved jazz musicians were once reviled by the learned and proper classes. Many were very upset when Benny Goodman played Carnegie Hall in 1938, for example, thinking it sacrilege to bring lowly jazz musicians to such a hallowed place. However, that didn't stop the hoi polloi from making it a wildly successful event.
However, these days those debauched jazz musicians have become the old guard. Instead of the NY classical snobs in 1938 defending the faith against jazz, we have some jazz snobs defending the faith against the current popular trends in music.
What's the old saying? "The more things change, the more they stay the same."
|