Maybe I am showing my age.

But surely the music of the 60's to to 70's has touched and described all human emotions?

Previously we had classical music, but no words and it was/is certainly emotionally charged, but no words. Through the 20th century there were many entertaining artists, and the Blues was always a force of the people, but until we hit the 60's it wasn't really mainstream. But now for me, and for a lot of my colleagues, life will be defined by the music of the 60's and 70's.

The vast quantity of computer produced pap music nowadays seems designed to to either charge the atmosphere into a demented rave or to subdue us into a meaningless doze, without making any statement or stimulate any thought.

Is this as good as it gets?

I think we had similar topics before and yes, you are right.

Emotions, feelings and attitudes are always changing. There will always things to write or sing (or paint) about that are fresh and thought provoking even if they may contain a base emotion that has been dealt with before.

Emotions, feelings and attitudes are always changing. There will always things to write or sing (or paint) about that are fresh and thought provoking even if they may contain a base emotion that has been dealt with before.

True .... but the base emotion in the music industry today is money.

Emotions, feelings and attitudes are always changing. There will always things to write or sing (or paint) about that are fresh and thought provoking even if they may contain a base emotion that has been dealt with before.

True .... but the base emotion in the music industry today is money.

They have to pay for their bling somehow.

I have a stint on the local radio station at the weekend with another ex-pat as a co-dj. The music we play is primarily 60s 70s based, as he is a little bit older than me (in the same ratio as my Dad was) he will dip into the 50s every now and again and I will throw in some more recent stuff.

We have a fairly extensive music library, all computer based as mp3s, that has been begged, stole or borrowed from various sources. A few months ago I decided that it would be a good idea to try and fill in some gaps in the library via some research on the net. I started with the year 1978 and started working my way up and found hours of stuff that we didn't have, up until the mid 80s when it started to thin out more than a little bit, by the mid 90's it had thinned out more than a little bit, still a few gems to be had, but still slim pickings. By the turn of the century, popular music has become a competition as to who can <deleted> up the English language the most.

Last week I restarted my searching with 1977 and going down, the quality returned.

I'll admit it is getting harder to find quality music but there is still a hel_l of a lot of good stuff coming out. It takes a but more work to find with the internet I am finding stuff that still manages to blow me away just like the classics did & do.

Some bands from the 60s are still surviving, be it just their airplay given such as the Beatles, or even with live appearance as the Stones still did not long time ago - and rumours are there that they will tour again.

Bands from the 70s...well...getting thinner, but there is still Queen and Van Halen and some others around.

80...phewww...who was in the 80s....the New Wave stuff is not much talked about anymore even though Gary Numan for instance did some interesting stuff. But no oine talks about it anymore.

90s. Now I really have to think...but the only thing that comes to mind is Madonna...or was she 80s?

00s....no idea, really!

Raro.....

Here's one of the websites I found I found during my tireless search, have a look a a few years from each decade, pretty much sums it up.

http://www.nutsie.com/digitaldreamdoor/197...20Songs/2199305

try this site for new music beyond the commercial pap.

http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listenpop/listen_live.htm

Raro.....

Here's one of the websites I found I found during my tireless search, have a look a a few years from each decade, pretty much sums it up.

http://www.nutsie.com/digitaldreamdoor/197...20Songs/2199305

really an eyeopener and confirming what I said before.

I clicked on 1993 and all top100 songs were either from bands that were around for a while (Rod Steward, Stones) or never really heard of anymore (Ace of Base et al).

It is generally best to avoid the popular charts if you are looking for quality music (afterall Britney Spears is the most popular artist of the noughties ).

It is generally best to avoid the popular charts if you are looking for quality music (afterall Britney Spears is the most popular artist of the noughties ).

I agree with you, however, they are after all a reflection of what most people listen to - or buy to be more precise.

Looking closer into the music industry and their interest to streamline their production we can sumarize like that:

We have Mr. Phil Collins (or Britney Spears for that matter) with a guaranteed x million sold CDs. So we produce (!) another album with said "artist" (whereas Phil Collins writes and arranges his stuff by himself, an ability that I doubt Miss Spears has) and make sure that the radio DJs play the new hit single (which automatically becomes a hit single by calling it a hit single) and the equally corrupted Rolling Stones (the magazine, not the band) writes about Britney's new hairstyle.

The kids that are supposed to buy those CDs have to shell out 600 Baht for the purchase of an item that costs 5 Baht to produce (including booklet) and another 10 Baht or so to distribute. The rest goes into financing the media machine, the high-end studios and last not least the profits for the music industry.

Wind back

Jimi Hendrix' Electric Ladyland album was produced on a 4-track recorder and is still by today's standards an outstanding sound. Same applies to the Beatles Sgt. Peppers and lots of other albums from that period. Why? Because there were people at work who knew HOW to record and musicians who knew how to play their instruments and not post-production teams that edit-out any tiny mistake and make it that flavour-free gravy that pop music is nowadays.

Who is suffering? the artist who does not get a record deal because his music is too out-of-the box for the record companies and hence a risk to the business. And in the end we, the consumers, are suffering as we do not get innovative bands anymore.

tried to find a Zappa interview on youtube were he describes this phenomenon in his own sarcastic way, but couldn't find it anymore..

I agree with everything Raro just said.

It's why torrents will never die.

Regards.

The worst thing you can do is set up artificial barriers to the types of music you enjoy. Regardless of whether it's performed by a symphony, a boy band, or someone playing a congolese nose flute, it's the sensation it gives your senses when you hear it, not whether it charted that matters.

Raro.....

Here's one of the websites I found I found during my tireless search, have a look a a few years from each decade, pretty much sums it up.

http://www.nutsie.com/digitaldreamdoor/197...20Songs/2199305

What a neat site. Thanks very much.

Well wasnt that nice.. I thought it was

The worst thing you can do is set up artificial barriers to the types of music you enjoy. Regardless of whether it's performed by a symphony, a boy band, or someone playing a congolese nose flute, it's the sensation it gives your senses when you hear it, not whether it charted that matters.

This is a good point. When I was a lad I fell in love with classical music because of the 'tingle' factor. I was disgusted when my father (who was hardcore working class) said "That's not music for our class of people". I remember saying "What does that mean?"

I love music from every era. Although the 80's and 90's are the thinnest!

Well wasnt that nice.. I thought it was

So do I my friend, it was the first song I danced with my wife to, you have a habit of posting gems, didn't you first post 'Simplicity' by the Dubs, a delight I thought had been lost too the archives?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlssW7c9igw

There it is my friend

We always loved this song...

Well wasnt that nice.. I thought it was

yeah....nice....but that's as far as it goes with Clapton. Never really understood the hype around him. And you don't play the Blues with a necktie...

Admitted not as old as some but must agree.

A lot of the music I enjoy was recorded or are from bands that formed in my single digits... I am of the opinion if a band or artist doesn't sound good live and can't play decent without a lot of tech, it's just not worth listing to...

One band that I lost all respect for is Metallica. I really loved the music and have all of their stuff up to the Black album. But all of that whining about p2p file sharing cutting into their profits made me lose all respect for them. Not to mention that they got too mainstream IMHO.

Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, and many others are my favs. Seems all the drugs helped put out some great tunes

Look at how this young, beautiful man torteres a great song - dedicated to all the feminazi's out there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFW7E2m9WcI...h?v=GFW7E2m9WcI

Sorry - will try again later..

Look at how this young, beautiful man torteres a great song - dedicated to all the feminazi's out there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFW7E2m9WcI...h?v=GFW7E2m9WcI

hmm...link doesn't work...I'd be much interested in songs dedicated to feminazis....

@ gunnyd: I am 100% with you. If they can't play life they should stay away from studios, too.

Zappa quote of the day: "Today's musicians visit the studio only on their way to the haircutter".

Sorry to once again bring up MJ, but the latest Australian music charts have a very retro flavour:

The top 3 selling albums are all by Michael Jackson. (a record)

He has 14 singles in the top 40 and 35 in the top 100. (not even the Beatles approached this)

His songs are all selling more copies and reaching higher chart positions than they did when initially released.

Sorry to once again bring up MJ, but the latest Australian music charts have a very retro flavour:

The top 3 selling albums are all by Michael Jackson. (a record)

He has 14 singles in the top 40 and 35 in the top 100. (not even the Beatles approached this)

His songs are all selling more copies and reaching higher chart positions than they did when initially released.

Quincy Jones must be a happy man then...