2016 - The Year the Music Died?

mr_edge_to_you

Rainman16 wrote: »

I think celebrity and popular culture came to rise in the 60's and stars who were in their mid 20's then are in their late 70, early 80's now, and dying out. We have more aging celebrities, so there is bound to be more death

Short and simple and 100% true.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Suas11 wrote: »

But you keep talking about Ed Sheeran, Rhianna etc. like they are the ones that solely define the quality of modern music.

That's because they are the ones ffs!!

Queen, Led Zep, The Stones, Pink Floyd, Quo, Slade, Bowie etc all defined the 60s and 70s. It wasn't Mudd or Mick in some **** hole pub being "at one with his music"

Sheeran and co. win all the awards and get all the acclaim and sell the records. They define this era of music. It's not that difficult to understand

Rothko

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

That's because they are the ones ffs!!

Queen, Led Zep, The Stones, Pink Floyd, Quo, Slade, Bowie etc all defined the 60s and 70s. It wasn't Mudd or Mick in some **** hole pub being "at one with his music"

Sheeran and co. win all the awards and get all the acclaim and sell the records. They define this era of music. It's not that difficult to understand

I see the point you're making but I don't agree with it. There's plenty of people like Radiohead, Tame Impala, Kendrick Lamarr etc who are creative and I think will be remembered with more esteem, albeit not necessarily quite as commercially popular, in the future than someone like Rihanna. I could be wrong but I think people like her will be remembered in the same way as groups like the Spice Girls. There's always been crappy pop music that has been a success at the awards and in the charts but a lot of it isn't remembered, at least not in a positive way.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Suas11 wrote: »

I see the point you're making but I don't agree with it. There's plenty of people like Radiohead, Tame Impala, Kendrick Lamarr etc who are creative and I think will be remembered with more esteem, albeit not necessarily quite as commercially popular, in the future than someone like Rihanna. I could be wrong but I think people like her will be remembered in the same way as groups like the Spice Girls. There's always been crappy pop music that has been a success at the awards and in the charts but a lot of it isn't remembered, at least not in a positive way.

Well, I'd hope you're right but, Radiohead's day went awhile ago sadly. They'll be remembered for their 90's output alright though. That's why I said U2 earlier. Even today, they're still pushing the boundaries, from a live show perspective and what they done in the 90's, from a music point of view, was way ahead of it's time. I just wish something would spark the creativity in them again...Although, their last album was very good. Best from them in a long while.

Samurai12

Just because some of you guys don't like today's music does not mean that it is necessarily bad. Clearly there are people out there who like that kind of music. But we can't tell the future now can we. Some of the most popular musicians from the 20's and 30's did not make the same music as the most popular musicians from the 60's and 70's. So who knows what the future may hold. If you don't like the mainstream music there is lots more music out there to try out.

Anesthetize

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

That's because they are the ones ffs!!

Queen, Led Zep, The Stones, Pink Floyd, Quo, Slade, Bowie etc all defined the 60s and 70s. It wasn't Mudd or Mick in some **** hole pub being "at one with his music"

Sheeran and co. win all the awards and get all the acclaim and sell the records. They define this era of music. It's not that difficult to understand

Some of the best selling artists of the 60's included Cliff Richard, Frank Sinatra, Tom Jones, and Engelbert Humperdinck. They're no better or worse than the likes of Ed Sheeran.

Also, why should crap bands like Queen and Status Quo get all the glory when it was bands like King Crimson, Can, and Tangerine Dream that were doing all the innovating during the 70's?

Declan A Walsh

Rainman16 wrote: »

I think celebrity and popular culture came to rise in the 60's and stars who were in their mid 20's then are in their late 70, early 80's now, and dying out. We have more aging celebrities, so there is bound to be more death

That's a fair point except that the following were in their '50s or '60s:
David Bowie
Prince
George Michael
Glen Frey
Greg Lake
Rick Parfitt

Samurai12

Declan A Walsh wrote: »

Rainman16 wrote: »

I think celebrity and popular culture came to rise in the 60's and stars who were in their mid 20's then are in their late 70, early 80's now, and dying  out. We have more aging celebrities, so there is bound to be more death

That's a fair point except that the following were in their '50s or '60s:
David Bowie
Prince
George Michael
Glen Frey
Greg Lake
Rick Parfitt

David Bowie-Cancer
Prince-Opioid overdose
George Michael-?
Glenn Frey-complications arising from rheumatoid arthritis, colitis and pneumonia
Greg Lake-Cancer
Rick Parfitt-Complications from an infection in an injury.
Yes most of these artists were in their 50's and 60's but most of them also died from diseases or ailments that people in their age are more prone to have or suffer from.

Weepsie

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

U2 are STILL the biggest and best band in the world. That's after them even slowing down and putting out 2 out of 3 average albums, without even trying.


I know there's much more to modern music. I've followed and listen to Franz Ferdinand, Noel Gallagher, Deadmau5, U2, The Killers, The Courteneers, even the Stone Roses' latest I had a keen interest on to see what they could come up with.

I'll give you they're the biggest, but they're far from the best. They've not had a good album in close to 25 years and only a clutch of good songs.

And they are trying, really hard, which is what make their MoR blandness really all the worse. They can perform, and that's disguised the fact they've been a sh!te recording band for a long long time.

There's plenty of good music out there though from Veterans like Radiohead (a band U2 are nowhere near as good) and newer acts too, most of whom I can't name but 6music provides me with plenty of examples

U2 are as guilty of producing the kind of schmalzy, cheesy, radio friendly turd rock/pop the Ed Sheeran, Beyonce et al are too.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Anesthetize wrote: »

Some of the best selling artists of the 60's included Cliff Richard, Frank Sinatra, Tom Jones, and Engelbert Humperdinck. They're no better or worse than the likes of Ed Sheeran.

Also, why should crap bands like Queen and Status Quo get all the glory when it was bands like King Crimson, Can, and Tangerine Dream that were doing all the innovating during the 70's?

Sinatra and Jones were great performers and singers. Cliff had his charm.

But, the mere fact you address Status Quo and Queen (especially Queen) as a ****e band, says a lot more about you then I ever could.

In the end though, those two did get the glory. Deal with it

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Weepsie wrote: »

I'll give you they're the biggest, but they're far from the best. They've not had a good album in close to 25 years and only a clutch of good songs.

And they are trying, really hard, which is what make their MoR blandness really all the worse. They can perform, and that's disguised the fact they've been a sh!te recording band for a long long time.

There's plenty of good music out there though from Veterans like Radiohead (a band U2 are nowhere near as good) and newer acts too, most of whom I can't name but 6music provides me with plenty of examples

U2 are as guilty of producing the kind of schmalzy, cheesy, radio friendly turd rock/pop the Ed Sheeran, Beyonce et al are too.

Ohhhh disagree there completely.

I happen to think Achtung Baby is one of the best albums ever. Far better than anything Radiohead has put out and that's not a dig at them. I don't mind Radiohead at all. It's just how good that album was/is

Pop was good, All that you can't leave behind was good, Atomic Bomb was alright, Horizon was duff and Songs of innocence was good. i don't think any U2 song is in any way as cheesy as Ed Sheeran or Beyonce....Put it this way, I'd stop listening to them if they produced anything like that. Every Breaking Wave is an amazing song and ****s on anything Sheeran or Beyonce ever produced

EDIT: Actually, reading that again, to say they've only got a clutch of good songs is pretty ridiculous.

I Will Follow
ELectric Co.
Out Of Control
October
New Years Day
Sunday Bloody Sunday
Two Hearts Beat As One
Unforgettable Fire
Bad
Streets
WOWY
Still haven't found
Bullet The Blue Sky
One Tree Hill
Desire
All of Achtung Baby
All of Zooropa
Discotheque
If God Will Send His angels
Staring At the Sun
Beautiful Day
City of blinding lights
Kite
Every Breaking Wave
Raised By Wolves

There's no way you could have listened to all them and the rest

Flint Fredstone

I think Status Quo were sh*te myself to be honest but shock horror, people like different things :eek:

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I think Status Quo were sh*te myself to be honest but shock horror, people like different things :eek:

That's fair enough. I know you've got the usual "ugh three chords" opinion and never listened to an album of theirs so, it's irrelevant.

Where as I have had the unfortunate issue of actually listening to all of Ed Sheeran's songs over and over and over....(Ex girlfriend driving in her car) over a long period of time...So, I can say he's God awful.

Which is bizarre as I used to like A-Team when it first came out. Hope he proves me wrong with the next batch

Rothko

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

Ohhhh disagree there completely.

I happen to think Achtung Baby is one of the best albums ever. Far better than anything Radiohead has put out and that's not a dig at them. I don't mind Radiohead at all. It's just how good that album was/is

Pop was good, All that you can't leave behind was good, Atomic Bomb was alright, Horizon was duff and Songs of innocence was good. i don't think any U2 song is in any way as cheesy as Ed Sheeran or Beyonce....Put it this way, I'd stop listening to them if they produced anything like that. Every Breaking Wave is an amazing song and ****s on anything Sheeran or Beyonce ever produced

EDIT: Actually, reading that again, to say they've only got a clutch of good songs is pretty ridiculous.

I Will Follow
ELectric Co.
Out Of Control
October
New Years Day
Sunday Bloody Sunday
Two Hearts Beat As One
Unforgettable Fire
Bad
Streets
WOWY
Still haven't found
Bullet The Blue Sky
One Tree Hill
Desire
All of Achtung Baby
All of Zooropa
Discotheque
If God Will Send His angels
Staring At the Sun
Beautiful Day
City of blinding lights
Kite
Every Breaking Wave
Raised By Wolves

There's no way you could have listened to all them and the rest

You forgot Red Hill Mining Town :pac:

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Suas11 wrote: »

You forgot Red Hill Mining Town :P

No I didn't

Ah no, it's a great album is JT. In God's Country and Trip Through Your Wires.

I think the whole "Pay your taxes Bono" has blurred a lot of the lines within people's opinion of the band. They were utterly loved here at one point until that and Bono was cool as hell in the 90s. Bono, Adam and Larry live here so they're obviously paying taxes.....Different story in regards the business though :D

Weepsie

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

Ohhhh disagree there completely.

I happen to think Achtung Baby is one of the best albums ever. Far better than anything Radiohead has put out and that's not a dig at them. I don't mind Radiohead at all. It's just how good that album was/is

Pop was good, All that you can't leave behind was good, Atomic Bomb was alright, Horizon was duff and Songs of innocence was good. i don't think any U2 song is in any way as cheesy as Ed Sheeran or Beyonce....Put it this way, I'd stop listening to them if they produced anything like that. Every Breaking Wave is an amazing song and ****s on anything Sheeran or Beyonce ever produced

EDIT: Actually, reading that again, to say they've only got a clutch of good songs is pretty ridiculous.

I Will Follow
ELectric Co.
Out Of Control
October
New Years Day
Sunday Bloody Sunday
Two Hearts Beat As One
Unforgettable Fire
Bad
Streets
WOWY
Still haven't found
Bullet The Blue Sky
One Tree Hill
Desire
All of Achtung Baby
All of Zooropa
Discotheque
If God Will Send His angels
Staring At the Sun
Beautiful Day
City of blinding lights
Kite
Every Breaking Wave
Raised By Wolves

There's no way you could have listened to all them and the rest

I said they haven't had a good album in close to 25 years, namely Achtung Baby but also Zooropa to a point (23 years, I rounded up)

Achtung Baby is very good, i'd wager Radiohead have some better albums (they do) their musicianship and craft is just far more layered complex and has so much more depth than U2. but it at the end of the day comes down to music tastes.

My comment about the songs was also in referring to the last 25 years. Again, a clutch of songs since Achtung Baby/Zooropa are good.

Every single one of there albums in that time has been a turgid, dull, music by numbers affairs. A bit of delay here and there, some awful lyric and trite or hackneyed lyrics which hint at faux outrage or how everything is going to change.

With Radiohead, their worst is still better than most bands best.

Neil Young is still producing good music, be they originals or his revisiting of folk classics. Leonard Cohen was still brilliant till his very last. Tom Waits when he last produced something was excellent.

Nick Cave has been going for nearly as long as U2 and is still producing some stunning music. U2, are trying really, really hard to be relevant and are failing. The songs are mostly crap and jaded. If it's what people like, then that's okay, but they ARE as guilty as the rest of the MoR stuff that you seemingly hate.


I put your last line in bold there. How couldn't I have? If you could have, then surely I could have.

But again, I'll repeat, it's down to taste, I just happen to believe U2 are a long, long way off since producing anything good and are unlikely to every do so again.

Weepsie

And back to the OP. AS my previous post said. Nick Cave is still going strong. Tom Waits is still around. Young is still producing excellent music. Tame Impala, Radiohead, M83, The National, Bon Iver, Flying Lotus, Sufjan Stevens, TV on the Radio, Beck, Bat for Lashes, Caribou, Aphex Twin, Kendrick Lamar, Four Tet, Girls, Sigur Ros, Arcade Fire, PJ Harvey, Beach House, Fleet Foxes, LCD Soundsystem............................

have all produced excellent music in the past 10 years. Many in the past 5, some even this year. Music is far from dead. Maybe the Icons are dead. Bowie was an Icon, and his death saddened me in a way the death of a celebrity never should. Prince was an Icon. He was one the best performer I've ever seen live and his death shocked me. Leonard Cohen was also an icon, and had influence over so many.

These people will continue to influence, many people will continue to prefer throwaway pop music which is why you'll see it on TV more, and hear it on Radio more, but it's not going to stop the good music still being made.

Plus we still have Paul McCartney (even if he is a tosser), Ringo, Dylan, Gordon Lightfoot, Brian Wilson, Most of Led Zep, Most of Deep Purple, Ozzy, Nile Rodgers, Most of Can, Most of Kraftwerk, Morrisey, Madonna and all the other innovators, and stars.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Weepsie wrote: »

[/B]

I said they haven't had a good album in close to 25 years, namely Achtung Baby but also Zooropa to a point (23 years, I rounded up)

Achtung Baby is very good, i'd wager Radiohead have some better albums (they do) their musicianship and craft is just far more layered complex and has so much more depth than U2. but it at the end of the day comes down to music tastes.

My comment about the songs was also in referring to the last 25 years. Again, a clutch of songs since Achtung Baby/Zooropa are good.

Every single one of there albums in that time has been a turgid, dull, music by numbers affairs. A bit of delay here and there, some awful lyric and trite or hackneyed lyrics which hint at faux outrage or how everything is going to change.

With Radiohead, their worst is still better than most bands best.

Neil Young is still producing good music, be they originals or his revisiting of folk classics. Leonard Cohen was still brilliant till his very last. Tom Waits when he last produced something was excellent.

Nick Cave has been going for nearly as long as U2 and is still producing some stunning music. U2, are trying really, really hard to be relevant and are failing. The songs are mostly crap and jaded. If it's what people like, then that's okay, but they ARE as guilty as the rest of the MoR stuff that you seemingly hate.


I put your last line in bold there. How couldn't I have? If you could have, then surely I could have.

But again, I'll repeat, it's down to taste, I just happen to believe U2 are a long, long way off since producing anything good and are unlikely to every do so again.

Not agreeing with you on Achtung Baby. Those songs have so much substance to them and then, the tour that came with it, revolutionized the whole thing. Guns n Roses, Nirvana, Pearl Jam etc all around back then and U2 still stood above them. That is quite an achievement tbf

I'll give you the Horizon album...Bomb was the same as All That You Can't Leave Behind but, I think Innocence was a very good album and the theme/concept was well thought out. Not Achtung Baby obviously but, still good.

I'm not arguing against other bands from yesteryear having good music, great music etc....I just have a strong opinion against this era's mainstream music..

adox

Saying you don't like today's music is just a nonsense. In fact it's impossible to garner an opinion on today's music. Why?

Well for starters there's more music available to the average consumer than has ever been. Any flavour you want will have infinite variants available. Also it's easier than ever as a musician to produce music and find outlets for it. I'd say even the most ardent of listeners has barely scratched the surface of what is available.

The same thing is said from generation to generation. "Music was better in my day" etc. Rinse and repeat.

No doubt there were some fantastic bands in the past(I'm 50 and still listen to a lot of the music I grew up with)some of the best bands of all time. They forged new grounds and broke boundaries but as time goes on and avenues explored that gets harder to do. Plus there was some really awful ****e produced from the 50s onwards so X Factor type acts are nothing new, just packaged differently.

Music is an art form anyway and totally subjective so all this Ed Sheerin is crap is just more narrow minded nonsense when stated as fact.

Also lol at you man giving out about main stream music and then listing his favourite bands that are mostly mainstream. :pac:

So my point is, if you think today's music is crap, you are just being lazy and not listening to enough.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

adox wrote: »

Saying you don't like today's music is just a nonsense. In fact it's impossible to garner an opinion on today's music. Why?

Well for starters there's more music available to the average consumer than has ever been. Any flavour you want will have infinite variants available. Also it's easier than ever as a musician to produce music and find outlets for it. I'd say even the most ardent of listeners has barely scratched the surface of what is available.

The same thing is said from generation to generation. "Music was better in my day" etc. Rinse and repeat.

No doubt there were some fantastic bands in the past(I'm 50 and still listen to a lot of the music I grew up with)some of the best bands of all time. They forged new grounds and broke boundaries but as time goes on and avenues explored that gets harder to do. Plus there was some really awful ****e produced from the 50s onwards so X Factor type acts are nothing new, just packaged differently.

Music is an art form anyway and totally subjective so all this Ed Sheerin is crap is just more narrow minded nonsense when stated as fact.

Also lol at you man giving out about main stream music and then listing his favourite bands that are mostly mainstream. :pac:

So my point is, if you think today's music is crap, you are just being lazy and not listening to enough.

No, there's a lot more crap today than there ever was The charts is telling me that, although, my Spotify playlist is telling me different

adox

Sorry that was somewhat off topic to the ops question.
Music is most definitely not dead but it has been an exceptionally unusual year in the amount of deaths. Some are age related, although a lot fewer than people are saying.

There were a couple of real shocks - Bowie and Prince, I don't think anyone had any clue that Bowie was terminally ill or that Prince was taking prescription drugs. Two huge culturally significant artists no matter what your tastes

2016 has been an anomaly imo, especially if you widen the deaths to other art forms, actors etc. I would be surprised if we get another year anytime soon losing so many cultural icons.

adox

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

No, there's a lot more crap today than there ever was The charts is telling me that, although, my Spotify playlist is telling me different

The charts were always the charts though and always represented a fraction of music in any given era and that percentage has never been smaller than today's era.

Rothko

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

No, there's a lot more crap today than there ever was The charts is telling me that, although, my Spotify playlist is telling me different

I'd agree that the charts are probably the worse they've ever been, even though there's always been crap music on them. It just seems worse than ever to me. However, I feel that the great music that doesn't get as much attention from TV/radio evens it out.

Rothko

adox wrote: »

Sorry that was somewhat off topic to the ops question.
Music is most definitely not dead but it has been an exceptionally unusual year in the amount of deaths. Some are age related, although a lot fewer than people are saying.

There were a couple of real shocks - Bowie and Prince, I don't think anyone had any clue that Bowie was terminally ill or that Prince was taking prescription drugs. Two huge culturally significant artists no matter what your tastes

2016 has been an anomaly imo, especially if you widen the deaths to other art forms, actors etc. I would be surprised if we get another year anytime soon losing so many cultural icons.

Next year will be exactly the same. So will 2018 and so on. It'll only get worse as the figures from the 60's/70's/80's get older.

Rainman16

Declan A Walsh wrote: »

That's a fair point except that the following were in their '50s or '60s:
David Bowie
Prince
George Michael
Glen Frey
Greg Lake
Rick Parfitt

The Rock & Roll lifestyle man, Sex, Drugs and Drink

adox

Suas11 wrote: »

Next year will be exactly the same. So will 2018 and so on. It'll only get worse as the figures from the 60's/70's/80's get older.

I don't agree as previously stated. Only some of this years deaths have been age related. I di t think we will see a year like it again anytime soon from a numbers point of view.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Rainman16 wrote: »

The Rock & Roll lifestyle man, Sex, Drugs and Drink

Harsh on Rick....He's the one rock star who didn't die from his lifestyle...

That shouldn't even be typed ffs :(

Samurai12

adox wrote: »

Suas11 wrote: »

Next year will be exactly the same. So will 2018 and so on. It'll only get worse as the figures from the 60's/70's/80's get older.

I don't agree as previously stated. Only some of this years deaths have been age related. I di t think we will see a year like it again anytime soon from a numbers point of view.

If you couldn't predict it happening in 2016 then you obviously won't be able to predict it happening in other years

The J Stands for Jay

Kaylee Obnoxious Vegan wrote: »

They are the biggest. No one is bigger or sells more tickets than them. No one!

Taylor Swift did in 2015.

The J Stands for Jay

Samurai12 wrote: »

If you couldn't predict it happening in 2016 then you obviously won't be able to predict it happening in other years

Dont make me get out the actuarial tables...