The State of Music

[Stevebol]

WTF. I wrote more but it disappeared. The monolith of popular culture pre cable television is long gone. There are now 1000s of television stations. Before cable everyone watched one of 4 stations. There was a collective (white mainstream) culture. Most things were marketed at White America.
Kids don't listen to the radio at all anymore. They have the American dream to choose whatever they want to listen to, or watch what they want, when they want.
From what I gather 2bop only listened to hits on the radio. To me that is sad and self limiting. I stopped actively listening to the radio in the 4th grade when a friend made me a mixed tape. (His dad was a DJ and had all sorts of neat gear). That opened my ears and have since then realized the radio sucks. There is is much more out there then what is on the radio. Much of the soul that made it to the radio had to be palatable to a white cross over audience. Music today doesn't need to cross over. Niche markets are the norm. And the market is global. Whatever you want to play or write or create, you will find an audience somewhere in the world.

That is partly why I'm on the board. Jazz hasn't been mainstream since the 50s.

My upbringing was far from normal. Moved all the time because my parents were musicians. No money at all until I reached high school. I grew immersed in live classical and live blues.
I never listen to the radio. I liked Soul Train and Hew Haw on TV. I'd play along. A couple jam bands in the 70's. Off to California in the 80's. Military. In, out, in, whatever. Out.
I didn't own anything except a car, clothes and a guitar. No TV. Didn't listen to the radio.

Shoes are important. Make a bold statement if you're trying to get anywhere.
I was all washed up in music at 27. Totally stressed out.

[Peter C]

Outside the US, maybe Jethro Tull's Aqualung? They didn't go out of their way to sound 'American' like a number of other bands in the UK. The same themes resonate today.

Your posts in general make a great read but none of the UK bands I was listening to at that time (barely a teen) were trying to sound "American" in any way. Who you talking about?

[Stevebol]

Your posts in general make a great read but none of the UK bands I was listening to at that time (barely a teen) were trying to sound "American" in any way. Who you talking about?

The Beatles, Stones. They were great but there was a strong US influence. Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Robert Johnson.
Jethro Tull was a little more 'out there'. Flute solos. IMO they were the first prog rock band. They were eclectic.

I like the lyrics to the album Aqualung and Thick as a Brick.

[2bornot2bop]

WTF. I wrote more but it disappeared. The monolith of popular culture pre cable television is long gone. There are now 1000s of television stations. Before cable everyone watched one of 4 stations. There was a collective (white mainstream) culture. Most things were marketed at White America.
Kids don't listen to the radio at all anymore. They have the American dream to choose whatever they want to listen to, or watch what they want, when they want.
From what I gather 2bop only listened to hits on the radio. To me that is sad and self limiting. I stopped actively listening to the radio in the 4th grade when a friend made me a mixed tape. (His dad was a DJ and had all sorts of neat gear). That opened my ears and have since then realized the radio sucks. There is is much more out there then what is on the radio. Much of the soul that made it to the radio had to be palatable to a white cross over audience. Music today doesn't need to cross over. Niche markets are the norm. And the market is global. Whatever you want to play or write or create, you will find an audience somewhere in the world.

That is partly why I'm on the board. Jazz hasn't been mainstream since the 50s.

Different generation. Different times. Until 1975 everything on the radio was a hit. If it wasn’t, unlike today, it didn’t get played. Let’s face it, with all the freedom and technology of today, where are all the hits! I’ll tell you where they are, they’re non existent.

But from ‘62 to’75 there must have been over 2000 bands from Dusty Springfield to James Brown that produced easily discernible hits. With that I’m out of here. Carry on.

[Donplaysguitar]

Music began it's death spiral sometime around the end of 1965 with the advent of Rubber Soul.

Or - that was just the birth

The death spiral really could have been in 1975, with KC and The Sunshine Band


(I actually like them, BTW. Fun and harmless)

[Doctor Jeff]

The Beatles, Stones. They were great but there was a strong US influence. Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Robert Johnson.
Jethro Tull was a little more 'out there'. Flute solos. IMO they were the first prog rock band. They were eclectic.

I like the lyrics to the album Aqualung and Thick as a Brick.

I think most British groups of the era either derived from skittle/country-western/rockabilly (Beatles) or American blues, i.e., race records (Stones, Fleetwood Mac, Yardbirds). Of course there was interplay and overlap. There was a component of the latter that became heavier, i.e., hard rock. I would put JT and Cream and Black Sabbath in that group.

The interesting thing about Jethro Tull was, in part due to their connections with Fairport Convention, they had a strong folk-rock component as well. So they would feature a heavy guitar-laden balls buster next to a twee flute and acoustic interlude. IDK about being the first progressive group, but IMO they have aged well compared to a lot of their peers. I think they are coming out with a new album soon. Not sure if Martin Barre is playing on it.

[Donplaysguitar]

The Beatles, Stones. They were great but there was a strong US influence. Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Robert Johnson.
Jethro Tull was a little more 'out there'. Flute solos. IMO they were the first prog rock band. They were eclectic.

I like the lyrics to the album Aqualung and Thick as a Brick.

Fully agree, where would all those bands have been without Chuck Berry and the Blues? Sheesh.

And Jethro Tull? Great band, clever lyrics, jazzy drummer, solid pianist. Loud breathing flute style apparently inspired by Raashan Roland Kirk. Martin Barre on guitar was all about the blues, per Martin himself.

Saw them twice in concert. Outstanding.

[Donplaysguitar]

But no need to fret, guys. Just saw that John Mayer is going to get a late night talk show with musical guests. We're saved!

[Littlemark]

Different generation. Different times. Until 1975 everything on the radio was a hit. If it wasn’t, unlike today, it didn’t get played. Let’s face it, with all the freedom and technology of today, where are all the hits! I’ll tell you where they are, they’re non existent.

But from ‘62 to’75 there must have been over 2000 bands from Dusty Springfield to James Brown that produced easily discernible hits. With that I’m out of here. Carry on.

Wait, what?
In p. 6 of this thread you wouldn't shut up about uptown funk.
"Uptown funk ruled the world in 2015."

Is that not a hit? What do you think is played on the radio now? The Top 40 radio format only plays hits.

You aren't making any sense.

What is your definition of a hit? A song YOU like?


*Please note, I was gone fun this thread but two people asked me questions. To which I responded and got dead air in response.

[jads57]

So I heard Havona by Weather Report on the local Jazz station, WOW!
Everything they played after in the Smoothe Jazz genre made me shake my head and go why?

It's absolutely criminal where music has devolved to. There used to be great Music made by great inventive musicians!
Now it's like a bunch of amateurs who are Amway Sales People trying to sell me their wares. Absolute Crap!

And sorry for those of you who never really experienced Real Music instead of what passes for it these days.

[Bach5G]

I was listening to WR the other day and thinking they had aged better than the other groups of that era including RTF, MO and Herbie. Which caught me a little by surprise.

[fep]

I was listening to WR the other day and thinking they had aged better than the other groups of that era including RTF, MO and Herbie. Which caught me a little by surprise.

I think Joe Zawinal flys under the radar. You need to hear/read from people that worked with him to appreciate what a genius he was.

[Stevebol]

I think most British groups of the era either derived from skittle/country-western/rockabilly (Beatles) or American blues, i.e., race records (Stones, Fleetwood Mac, Yardbirds). Of course there was interplay and overlap. There was a component of the latter that became heavier, i.e., hard rock. I would put JT and Cream and Black Sabbath in that group.

The interesting thing about Jethro Tull was, in part due to their connections with Fairport Convention, they had a strong folk-rock component as well. So they would feature a heavy guitar-laden balls buster next to a twee flute and acoustic interlude. IDK about being the first progressive group, but IMO they have aged well compared to a lot of their peers. I think they are coming out with a new album soon. Not sure if Martin Barre is playing on it.

The album was a gift from someone around 73 so I always had a soft spot for Tull. The lyrics are so sad but not always.
I saw Ian Anderson about 6 years ago. It was one of the best shows I've ever seen and strangely more satisfying than seeing them in the mid-70's.

He plays the flute so no R&R Hall of Fame for him.
Such a tragedy,
not.

[steve burchfield]

I just watched The Greatest Ears In Town : The Arif Mardin Story and it completely astounded me what a really great talent he was. Talk about Legacy? It does not get any better my friends.If any of us had but a small fraction of his talent we would be quite famous!!! For rent on YT a must see for all lovers of Great Music!!!

[Litterick]

Covid killed the video star.

[Marcel_A]

Through the 90’s. I’ve not been an active listener for 10 years. And our past was very real, and weren’t you too a part of that real world past? Simply because someone has an opinion that differs from you doesn’t make them invalid. Buzz off!

Bla bla bla.

Maybe you can take the time to react to the point i made. That musicians don't play 'real' intruments anymore . . . . It's just a silly statement.
So buzz of yourself.

[StringNavigator]

To buzz, or not to buzz...
Buzz Me Once... You Don't Get Buzzed Again! Viva Los Crazy Buzzards!

From "The Land Of The Buzzards"
By Loretta "Buzz" Kutz

[Doctor Jeff]

I think Joe Zawinal flys under the radar. You need to hear/read from people that worked with him to appreciate what a genius he was.

Absolutely. I think he was the best multi-keyboard player in music, certainly the most fluid and expressive with synths. (With Chick and Herbie up in the same league.) And his musical mind...capable of encompassing so many worlds and influences.

It is surprising to me that a classically trained musician from Vienna would migrate to jazz and especially soul jazz, then cutting edge music with Miles, then fusion, then world music.

His later solo albums are just so full of energy and influences from all cultures. I am getting into them more and more.

I consider this one of THE funkiest songs ever...all instruments played by JW...vocals from among others Bobbie McFerrin and DeeDee Bellson.

[2bornot2bop]

Wait, what?
In p. 6 of this thread you wouldn't shut up about uptown funk.
"Uptown funk ruled the world in 2015."

Is that not a hit? What do you think is played on the radio now? The Top 40 radio format only plays hits.

You aren't making any sense.

What is your definition of a hit? A song YOU like?


*Please note, I was gone fun this thread but two people asked me questions. To which I responded and got dead air in response.

If a song has over half the planet enjoying it, it’s a hit. You don’t like it? Fine.

[Marinero]

Do you even listen to music after '79? What you are suggesting has nothing to do with the real world.

Hi, M,
Good discussion. There is a very logical mentality for dismissing music after 1979 that may or may not have anything to do with the music---namely: life is short. We have a limited window of personal enlightenment to enjoy quality music, literature, or visual art. And, this is especially true for those whose days are occupied making a living, raising a family, or other obligations that diminish personal reflective time. As an example, do you spend your free time listening to all genres of contemporary music so that you are deemed open-minded, relevant, or informed by your contemporaries? Or, do you focus on those musical genres that move you spiritually and seek an understanding of every aspect of the Art form? As an example, at one time in my life as a young sax player, I was devoted to the study of Gene Ammons. I knew every song, every lick, nuance, and expression. And, during this period, I made great growth as a performer without spending hours listening to other contemporary saxers whose musical expression didn't move me. Did I waste my time not listening to Ornette Coleman, Sun Ra, or Pharoah Sanders? What about contemporary Rock, C and W, or Polka music? And, I've been listening to Wagner's Operas for the last 15 years and feel that I've only scratched the surface of his greatness as a composer. Should I be listening to Rap, New Age, Punk, or whatever infantile aberration is disguised as "music?" So, which approach works for you? I'll be visiting with an old friend, Mertz, in a few minutes. I'll say hello.
Play live . . . Marinero

[Litterick]

Pop music is made for the young.

[Peter C]

The Beatles, Stones. They were great but there was a strong US influence. Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Robert Johnson.
Jethro Tull was a little more 'out there'. Flute solos. IMO they were the first prog rock band. They were eclectic.

I like the lyrics to the album Aqualung and Thick as a Brick.

Yeah, but that was early 60s pop music and, too true, they were ripping off Berry, Little Richard. I never forgave the Beatles for Yellow Submarine, LOL.

The Tull album was in '71 and at that time it was all happening in the UK: King Crimson, Yes, Genesis.... almost too much for my 14 year old brain to take in. Hendrix, then this...???

[Litterick]

I think we can see, in retrospect, a great release of creativity once the Beatles were gone. The Stones especially were no longer standing in the shadows. British rock was relieved of the appalling whimsy that Beatles spread in every album. Finally, it could be serious and tough.

[Donplaysguitar]

Nah. Laurel Canyon, CA in 1966.

there were a couple of recent movies about that, did you see either and are they worth checking out?

[Donplaysguitar]

I think we can see, in retrospect, a great release of creativity once the Beatles were gone. The Stones especially were no longer standing in the shadows. British rock was relieved of the appalling whimsy that Beatles spread in every album. Finally, it could be serious and tough.

yeah, and angry.

Ian Anderson seemed pissed about class, religion, and hypocrisy. I loved the music but was too young to understand.

Roger Waters was pissed off too, still is right?

two GREAT bands.