Music forever changed with the advent of recording. It went from being largely participatory to a passive listening experience. Once producers learned they could can it and sell it, record companies became the arbiters of taste (having cut their teeth selling sheet music prior to the widespread availability of records and radio).
I enjoy listening to recorded music. I really have no "taste", other than I like what I like. One piece of recorded music is no better than another, just different. I listen to it all, and sometimes I make an emotional or intellectual connection, and sometimes I turn it off mid-stream. I happen to like old country blues performances sung through a horn and captured on wax. The sound "quality" is limited, but the power of the music is incredible. On the other hand, much of modern pop music, though technically superb, leaves me cold.
Today, musicians can make technically perfect music in their bedrooms using a laptop that comes with free software. Or they can grab an inexpensive ukulele and sing a few songs at a cook-out. Neither is likely to make the performer any money, but I'll leave you readers (or at least those of you who have followed me so far) figure out which I like best.
Is Old Music Killing New Music?
I ran across this Atlantic magazine article on another music forum. It asks the question if old music is killing new music. I didn't realize that older music represents 70% of the music market according to this article. I know I use Qobuz and Tidal to find new music and new artists for my collection, but I don't know how common that actually is for most people. I think that a lot of people that listen to services like Spotify and Apple Music probably don't keep track of what the algorithms are queuing up in their playlists. Perhaps it's all becoming elevator music.