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. 

Is Old Music Killing New Music? - The Atlantic

128x128femoore12

Showing 7 responses by relayer101

Found that quote from Rick Rubin pretty thought provoking. I'm a child of the 60's and love the music from the 60's, 70's and 80's but am also constantly searching for some of the great music available through streaming. 

There's a ton of great new musicians and music out there. 

 

For producer Rick Rubin, The Beatles' recorded achievements are akin to a miracle. The most popular bands in the world today typically produce an album every four years, Rubin told a 2009 radio audience. That's two albums as an eight-year cycle. "And think of the growth or change between those two albums. The idea that The Beatles made thirteen albums in seven years and went through that arc of change ... it can't be done. Truthfully, I think of it as proof of God, because it's beyond man's ability."

@cd318

Well said but in defense of my favorite Beatle from my youth I think his musically unproductive years were more like from 1975 through 1980. He did release four albums from the time the Beatles broke up in 1969 through 1974. Three more albums than most artists today release in the same period of time. Of course artists like Ryan Adams and others are the exception.

Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, Mind Games, and Walls And Bridges were nothing to sneeze at in that four year period. And the song Imagine is potentially one of the most powerful songs ever written.

And the artists during the 60’s like the Beatles and Stones were pressured from their record companies to release two or more albums in a year while also touring. Not an easy task.

Making it in the music industry is for only the few but for those that do make it I’d say they have an easier task in the world of streaming and not being pressured to cut an album every year or three.

I enjoy a lot of the new artists that I can hear through streaming but I’m not simpathetic if I still enjoy the music of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s.

 

 

@mahgister 

By speaking of the Beatles I was not implying that they were over and above Dylan or any of the classical, jazz, or artists from any other genre. And was not comparing them to Bach, Vivaldi, Beethoven, Miles Davis, etc.

I found the article by Rick Ruben interesting and I would say that he knows quite a bit about the artists of today. 

With that said I do think the Beatles were genius in their own right.

 

 

I find Agon to be a major source of discovering music and artists both old and new that I am not familiar with and am appreciative to the folks that share their thoughts. 

Enjoying the thoughts on this thread and many others. 

Top 40 music may be controlled and commercialized but I wouldn’t say that about the music out of the mainstream.

I’m speaking about rock music now but I’m not sure if the artists like Jim James, Conor Oberst, and Les Claypool would go for their music being dumbed down.

The technology of today may make it easier for artists to record their music and get it out to the public but that doesn't make them a great song writer. Great song writers are one in a million.

That one in a million was the case in 1970 and again today.