Will the 00's be remembered fondly?

GoTellTheMountain · 11-03-2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

Yeah, considering that they've been nominated for multiple Grammy and BRIT awards I'd say they're definitely well inside the mainstream.

Fair enough. I wasnt actually aware they had been nominated. Musically, they're pretty unique to me though.

Guybrush · 11-01-2009, 11:33 AM

^I'm not sure I agree .. I don't think The Prodigy sounds like a twist on something from the 80s. I don't think the Crazy World of Arthur Brown sounds like a twist of something done in the 50s. Neither do I think Metallica sounded like a twist of something done in the 70s.

I mean, you could say it but you'd have to stretch your imagination a bit sometimes - there would be some pretty large twists. I definetly agree that ideas are overall less fresh this decade.

**Janszoon** · 11-01-2009, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toretorden

Neither do I think Metallica sounded like a twist of something done in the 70s.

You obviously need to listen to more Motorhead.

Anyway, I wasn't talking about specific bands, I was talking about the various musical trends of the 00s. Yes, they are largely, in one way or another, twists on things that have come before. But that's also true of the musical trends of any decade.

anabundanceoftubes · 11-01-2009, 11:39 AM

I think I phrased that wrong. because upon rereading that I sound ridiculous; of course that's true for any decade. I'm having some difficulty finding the right words. I guess what I meant is that we have nothing that stands out as something I'll think of as uniquely a 2000 thing, whereas when I think of past decades very distinct and concrete genres come to mind. This is probably an oversight on my part, as really, it does all overlap.

**Janszoon** · 11-01-2009, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anabundanceoftubes

I think I phrased that wrong. because upon rereading that I sound ridiculous; of course that's true for any decade. I'm having some difficulty finding the right words. I guess what I meant is that we have nothing that stands out as something I'll think of as uniquely a 2000 thing, whereas when I think of past decades very distinct and concrete genres come to mind. This is probably an oversight on my part, as really, it does all overlap.

I think that's just because we're still in the 00s. During the 90s I found it equally hard to imagine what about the decade would stand out.

storymilo · 11-01-2009, 11:51 AM

It kind of makes sense that the 00's would have less originality, only because we're coming after so much other music. In the 60's if you'd made something like Joy Division, people would have thought you were original. Now if you did it they'd say that you're copying off Joy Division.

So if so much stuff has already been done, it's harder to come up with original music.

**Janszoon** · 11-01-2009, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storymilo

It kind of makes sense that the 00's would have less originality, only because we're coming after so much other music. In the 60's if you'd made something like Joy Division, people would have thought you were original. Now if you did it they'd say that you're copying off Joy Division.

So if so much stuff has already been done, it's harder to come up with original music.

In the 60s, if you made something like Joy Division people probably would've thought you were copying off the Doors.

People already had thousands of years of musical tradition to contend with in the 60s anyway, that's not really that different from today when you think about it.

storymilo · 11-01-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

In the 60s, if you made something like Joy Division people probably would've thought you were copying off the Doors.

People already had thousands of years of musical tradition to contend with in the 60s anyway, that's not really that different from today when you think about it.

Well Joy Division was just an example. And while yes, there have been many thousands of years of music to copy off of, most modern music has originated from rock and roll that started in the 50's, so in the 60's there was so much unexplored music that would later be made in other decades. I'm just trying to say that by now, in the 00's, so many styles have been used that it's hard to think of something new

**Janszoon** · 11-01-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storymilo

Well Joy Division was just an example. And while yes, there have been many thousands of years of music to copy off of, most modern music has originated from rock and roll that started in the 50's, so in the 60's there was so much unexplored music that would later be made in other decades. I'm just trying to say that by now, in the 00's, so many styles have been used that it's hard to think of something new

I'm not sure I agree that most modern music originated from rock n roll. Also, I would actually argue that most of the music the 60s is known for was more heavily influenced by things like folk, blues and jazz, all of which are substantially older than rock n roll.

storymilo · 11-01-2009, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

I'm not sure I agree that most modern music originated from rock n roll. Also, I would actually argue that most of the music the 60s is known for was more heavily influenced by things like folk, blues and jazz, all of which are substantially older than rock n roll.

Maybe you're right. But that's not really the point I'm trying to make. I'm just saying that so many styles have been explored already, particularly in the last 5 decades or so, that it's hard to come up with original music that hasn't been done before and is actually good now.

11-01-2009, 11:33 AM	#2 (permalink)
Guybrush Juicious Maximus III Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Scabb Island Posts: 6,525	^I'm not sure I agree .. I don't think The Prodigy sounds like a twist on something from the 80s. I don't think the Crazy World of Arthur Brown sounds like a twist of something done in the 50s. Neither do I think Metallica sounded like a twist of something done in the 70s. I mean, you could say it but you'd have to stretch your imagination a bit sometimes - there would be some pretty large twists. I definetly agree that ideas are overall less fresh this decade. __________________ Something Completely Different

11-01-2009, 11:39 AM	#4 (permalink)
anabundanceoftubes Music Addict Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Maggie's farm Posts: 56	I think I phrased that wrong. because upon rereading that I sound ridiculous; of course that's true for any decade. I'm having some difficulty finding the right words. I guess what I meant is that we have nothing that stands out as something I'll think of as uniquely a 2000 thing, whereas when I think of past decades very distinct and concrete genres come to mind. This is probably an oversight on my part, as really, it does all overlap.

11-01-2009, 11:51 AM	#6 (permalink)
storymilo Music Addict Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,845	It kind of makes sense that the 00's would have less originality, only because we're coming after so much other music. In the 60's if you'd made something like Joy Division, people would have thought you were original. Now if you did it they'd say that you're copying off Joy Division. So if so much stuff has already been done, it's harder to come up with original music.