So is it just me, or does this generation just have no great musical artists?

Discussion in 'Entertainment' started by IcyHot4Life, Jun 11, 2008.

  1. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    Remember the thread about American vs. European music the other day? Well, it got me thinking about music history, and a lot of the iconic artists we've had over the years -- michael jackson, kenny rogers, elton john, marvin gaye, etc. And then I realized that no one I could think of in that whole time had come up any less than 20 years ago.

    I know mainstream music sucks crap right now, but I thought I could've pointed to at least one artist from today that might make it into that company. Well, I couldn't. That said, I largely listen to indie artists so maybe I'm missing someone. Can you guys think of anyone from recent times that deserves to be up on the wall next to the greats? :dunno:
     
  2. Deepsix

    Deepsix OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    19,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    like within the last 5 years or like 10-15?
     
  3. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    either, really :dunno: just post what you think, I'm genuinely curious to see what answers pop up

    edit: wow, 1993 was 15 years ago :hs:
     
  4. Coottie

    Coottie BOOMER......SOONER OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    32,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OKC
    Discussions like this crack me up because so many people put forth their preferences as fact.

    Oh and :rofl: @ Kenny Rogers.
     
  5. 7960

    7960 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    60,415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New England
    during their time they were just another artist.

    wait 20 years and we'll see who emerges as the "greats" of this time.
     
  6. Kotu

    Kotu OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,032
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    What's the criteria to be a "great musical artist"?
     
  7. Dale In Sales

    Dale In Sales Search my name on You Tube

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,791
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. Dale In Sales

    Dale In Sales Search my name on You Tube

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,791
    Likes Received:
    0
    These guys kick ass, if you want some of the greatest rock today,
    download every song from these guys

    [​IMG]
     
  9. mushokuro

    mushokuro Advanced being

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2008
    Messages:
    923
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Behind you
    I think most artists just care about a catchy tune and don't even care about the lyrics. Shit, the least you can do is get the lyrics to make sense.
     
  10. KingstyleRoller

    KingstyleRoller New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    0

    emo faggot
     
  11. Erebos

    Erebos OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,209
    Likes Received:
    0
    .

    The majority of artists from any period are extremely forgettable. Can't really tell who will stand out until enough time has passed.
     
  12. poisonivvy

    poisonivvy New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,446
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Washington State
    I think it depends on where/what years you are looking at. I also think it'll be different for each person, depending on what they think/believe are important events and talent.

    If I think back to the early 90's, I think Nirvana and grunge. I wouldn't say they were the must talented, but say they were influential in bringing more styles to the table.

    Are we looking straight at talent and when bands were formed? I'd argue for the Red Hot Chili Peppers to be at their prime in the 90's...even though they started making music in the early 80's. I'd also put U2 in there as well, with a peak during the 90's.

    I'd also lump Smashing Pumpkins & Wallflowers & Foo Fighters in there as well. I believe all of the above have great talent, and have some songwriting technique.

    Now if I start to think about 2000 and beyond...I feel a bit lost. Maybe it's cause my prime listening years were in the 90s...I think I'm biased. Just like my parents say my generation's music is crap, I'm blaming this generations music as being crap so far.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
  13. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    :mamoru: say what you will but the dude has an amazing voice
     
  14. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    I wouldn't go that far (in fact, good hip hop artists are doing some of the most innovative stuff in the music industry right now (real hip hop, not some mainstream snap music shit, mind you)).

    Actually the conclusion I came to is that electronic music -- not electronic as in techno music, but things like non-linear multitrack, sophisticated sampling, electronic instrument synthesis and manipulation -- all these things are very quickly transforming music. There are a number of genres that simply wouldn't have existed even 30 years ago due to a lack of technology.

    Now at the same time as that enables a lot of artists who have nontraditional musical talent, it also makes it easier for anyone to crank out an album on autotune and a whole bunch of post-production, which is where we are today. A lot of record labels got burned by following the acts that college stations were breaking once the bottom fell out of the grunge movement, so in large part they returned to financing safer returns on investment by basically manufacturing their artists with, say, some hot chick and a shitload of studio work.

    At any rate I think it's things like what I described in the preceding paragraph that are destroying music today. IMHO this perceived need to stick to "safe" artists and genres from the mainstream labels have really pigeonholed music in the last 15 years, and they're enabled by technology just the same way that other creative artists are making music now that would've been inaccessible to them just as many years ago, because that tech didn't exist. One side effect of this, I think, is the beginning of the end (or at least a plateauing) of the sort of musical icons of past generations.

    :dunno:
     
  15. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    michael jackson was just 'any other artist' at the time? I think you'd have a hard time arguing that one :dunno:
     
  16. tim duncan

    tim duncan Guest

    eminem, tupac, notorious B.I.G
     
  17. Surefire

    Surefire OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    19,218
    Likes Received:
    137
    Location:
    Everywhere
    I've had this conversation before. It certainly does seem as though the past produced more iconic artists than the present. Some small part of that might be the lack of recognition at the present, but I think it has more to do with the way music is made these days.

    Not just the styles, but the pressure to produce an entire album. It's a simple matter of quality versus quantity. The closer singles draw to extinction, the less effort is put into each song in favor of pumping out twelve or fourteen tracks to throw on a cd.

    Personally, I've never understood this drive to produce the cd. It's obviously not a function of supply and demand, for the simple reason that the majority of each cd never gets air time. Instead, one or two tracks do, and on the strength of that people are expected to go buy the cd with the other 12-14 shitty tracks.

    Rather than pitching a product that people would like to have, record companies are pushing crap they think you will buy. Radio stations are now simply media outlets designed to sell those cd's based on that single song.

    Now, if music packaging continues in the direction it is headed, with songs being purchased individually at a lower cost than cd's with lots of crap no one wants (but the justification for the higher price due to quantity), we will begin to see a change in the diversity of what is being offered. Hopefully, with diversity will come more quality through the ability to indulge more highly specific tastes rather than simply jumping on one of five available bandwagons.
     
  18. djshotglass

    djshotglass New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    0
    there's a lot of great bands out there today if you can see through the shitty ones
     
  19. =*belladonna*=

    =*belladonna*= All aboard the failboat.

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jack White is a good musician
     
  20. BlueThunder

    BlueThunder New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    783
    Likes Received:
    0
    Totally agree. Actually music has been bad for the last several years. I was just watching some music videos from 80s legends RATT and they are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better than anything today!

    Songs like Round and Round, Lay it Down, You're in Love, Dance, Wanted Man, etc.

    You may question them being legends but they are in their own genre of hard rock 80s bands.
     
  21. t8thgr8

    t8thgr8 evry day im hustlin'

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    4,436
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    Uh U2? you may not like them but they certainly belong on that wall
     
  22. MyLittleAirport

    MyLittleAirport OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    18,204
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where's the Bob Dylan, Beatles, Queen, Led Zeppelin, etc. etc. of this generation?
     
  23. BrianFantana

    BrianFantana Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    :ugh:

    Dear god and you actually think your musical taste is somehow "advanced".
     
  24. blackbirdbeatle

    blackbirdbeatle New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Messages:
    5,738
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^^^^^
    Some of them were good but most were not near the level the OP was talking about. Steve Vai just masturbates on the guitar. There is nothing innovative or even good about soloing all the time.

    Most of the tech guys you put are just that, tech. You ruin good songs by overloading the shit out of it with 5 billion notes a second and insane harmonies that don't sound melodic in the least.

    It's like that metal guy from Sweden that plays flight of the bumblebee a billion MPH. It's impressive tehnically but ugly music.

    The jake guy in the ukulele is pretty one note. Amazing to hear the first few times but it gets old fast. All his songs follow the same pattern except the ones he covers.

    RHCP and Incubus shouldn't even be on any list of epic bands.

    I know this is preference but people liked hair bands in the 80's as well and the DaVinci code and HP series are among the best sellers of all time. There has to be a line somewhere where a person can critique art without getting shit on by the, 'It's all subjective' crowd.

    U2 can suck a cock. They did nothing to advance music, only popularized what was already out there.


    Really though music is so fractured now that I can't see anybody really getting the recognition of Elvis, the Beatles, Beethoven, Duke Ellington, etc... anymore. Not on nearly as big a scale.

    There are a lot of kickass bands but they are already treading on grounds build up by someone else over and over. I don't see much innovation, even with 'innovative bands'. I know all music came from some other music but there hasn't really been any big leaps lately like Classical>Blues/Country>Jazz>R&B>Rock, etc... I guess you could say metal of grunge as grunge turned into most of the popular rock band shit that we see today like Nickelback and Incubus.

    I don't know what to think about rap as the best rap still holds more true to poetry I think. The popular stuff is a mess of sampling, using/sampling others music, or just plain shitty lyrics.

    But I'm hopeful that there will be in the next decade or so as the music industry and where the power lies rapidly changes.


    So I guess quote and tear apart as needed.
     
  25. blackbirdbeatle

    blackbirdbeatle New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Messages:
    5,738
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's all relative right? I consider myself pretty learned on music history and theory and a creative person but again, it's just my opinion. Jeff beck is not what the OP wanted. He played with the Yardbirds and was in the rock hall of fame just about 20 years ago. He isn't even my dads generation. He was great and creative and now maybe he is just technically great but he hasn't put out anything creative in a long time.

    Same with soloing. I don't like it. It detracts from the melody and song. It's like listening to a really good rockabilly song and then they start to wank on the guitar. You can play really hard stuff on the guitar without the soloing.

    Miles Davis wasn't a noted technical player and fair enough. What he is known for is an innovator. He helped pioneer almost all modern Jazz styles and modern ways Jazz bands played.

    I guess what I'm getting at is that great to me means creativity and innovation more than technical ability in modern music (Classical and old Jazz can be both in equal levels I think like Mozart or Rachmaninov). The OP may have a different definition of great.

    For instance I would say that the Velvet Underground is great because they have had more influence on other bands than maybe even the Beatles. Not as popular and not able to put out the hits but looking back 40 years they have literally changed the music landscape like few other bands could.

    Another example is The Stooges and MC5. They were doing shit in the 60's that put punk 30 years later to shame. Way more hardcore. If you watch videos of Iggy the announcer is a 40yo straightcut buy in a business suit introducing him and then out comes Iggy and put out a sound that literally nobody has heard before. He was walking on the crowd, screaming, raw driving guitars, etc...

    I just can't see anything like that nowadays. Not saying the music is worse and I know it came off like that but I don't think any of them will stand the test of time or have much influence on advancing music a whole lot. I love a lot of modern music. Radiohead, The Owls, Sloan, The Sadies, Polvo, Sonic Youth, Elevator, etc... but in the grand scheme of things they don't really compare to Dylan or Elvis or whoever, even if I like listening to them more than Elvis.
     

Share This Page