The Official "Music Was So Much Better in the Glorious Days of Yore" Thread

[Vancouver]

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

My view maybe a bit tainted because I did used to read Melody Maker back at the time when it was deputy edited by Everett True who thought Corgan was the anti-christ

Liked the record but HATED 1979. UGH.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by Vancouver

Most fans regard it as their best one.

The spokesperson for the Smashing Pumpkins nation has spoken.

[TheCunningStunt]

Originally Posted by Vancouver

Most fans regard it as their best one.

I always thought that, I definitely regard Siamese as their best work anyway.

[duga]

Originally Posted by tore

Urban also brushed upon a good point a couple of pages back. It's not hard to figure out what the classic albums from the past are. Often, it's already well established and has been for years if not decades. You just have to look it up. I tend to like those old albums and think most of them are classics for good reason. Comparatively, discovering new (as in quite recent) music I like usually includes digging through more stuff I don't like.

It doesn't necessarily say anything about the overall quality, but at least it's another possible reason why some people tend to think so.

I'm not saying this applies to you, but for some reason everyone seems to think the classics of today's era are just supposed to jump out in all their glory.

We don't have classics today because, well, the music is new. New music by its very nature couldn't be considered classic. Only time will tell what music holds up in 20 years.

So, yeah, there is endless crap. I seem to remember hair metal being total ****e in 80's. I seem to remember endless Zeppelin rip offs in the 70's. Again, it will be the same today. It is just coming at us in different mediums and under different circumstances.

Originally Posted by Janszoon

The spokesperson for the Smashing Pumpkins nation has spoken.

Nah, if anyone is their spokesperson it is me. I can respect how someone would not like the Pumpkins, but I personally love them. All the way up to and including Machina, I loved it. Even Adore, their most hated album, has some of the best songwriting I have ever heard. This is just my opinion, obviously.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by duga

We don't have classics today because, well, the music is new. New music by its very nature couldn't be considered classic. Only time will tell what music holds up in 20 years.

That was actually my point. In the 2030s, I can discover music from the 2010s more easily because by then, others will have done it for me and can tell me what the classics I'm gonna like are.

[duga]

Originally Posted by tore

That was actually my point. In the 2030s, I can discover music from the 2010s more easily because by then, others will have done it for me and can tell me what the classics I'm gonna like are.

It is good to see there are a couple people here that share this sentiment. In my musical formative years, I also felt old music was better than what is coming out now. Thinking about it that way is really thinking about it in the wrong way.

For anyone who still doesn't see our point, imagine a bowl of M&M's of all colors. You only like the red ones, and you have to sift through all the other crappy colors to get to them. You give up, come back a week later, and see someone sifted out the red ones for you. Score!

[Vancouver]

Originally Posted by Janszoon

The spokesperson for the Smashing Pumpkins nation has spoken.

Please read other posts. I'm not the only one. It must be hard to argue about a band you have no clue about. Ignorant really.

Originally Posted by duga

I'm not saying this applies to you, but for some reason everyone seems to think the classics of today's era are just supposed to jump out in all their glory.

We don't have classics today because, well, the music is new. New music by its very nature couldn't be considered classic. Only time will tell what music holds up in 20 years.

I do agree about time affecting the classic label. Or knowing the level of influence the music has had. Joy Division for example.

[gunnels]

I disagree with the whole 'classics being the good albums sorted out for you' concept.
Only about 1 in every 5 so called 'classics' have been worth the 45 minutes I gave them.

[Vancouver]

Originally Posted by Zero1986

Not me anyway. I rank it 4th behind Siamese Dream, Adore and Gish. There's some really great songs on it but there's plenty of meh songs as well (We Only Come Out At Night??!!??). It's like if Billy went for quantity over quality, i really think he could have cut the track listing down to a really great single album.

we were talking Siamese Dream...

[duga]

Originally Posted by Zero1986

Not me anyway. I rank it 4th behind Siamese Dream, Adore and Gish. There's some really great songs on it but there's plenty of meh songs as well (We Only Come Out At Night??!!??). It's like if Billy went for quantity over quality, i really think he could have cut the track listing down to a really great single album.

I would agree, but have you seen the Aeroplane Flies High box set? All those songs came from the Mellon Collie sessions. I think he was going for relevance to the story over quality, honestly. There were so many amazing songs he left off just because it didn't fit all that well with his concept. Set the Ray to Jerry, Aeroplane Flies High, Marquis In Spades, Mouths of Babes...all great songs.