Originally Posted by Carpe Mortem (Post 1497337)

Food for thought: I've gotten my cousin into a few non-mainstream bands that would never get radio time. She asks me to make cd's of these bands, but doesn't look into them or others like them herself, because she's technologically inept and not that into music. Me making a mix CD of random songs is fine for her because she doesn't think in terms of artists or albums she likes, she thinks in terms of songs.

For people who don't become obsessed with music like us here are, their listening doesn't extend much beyond what they hear on the radio and what other people show them. And yes, most of the radio music follows a specific formula that apparently suits such people just fine. So more similar music is made to appeal to that greater demographic, even though they don't necessarily love it, they're just cool with it. I think if bands not following the formula would get more airtime, they'd have just as many fans as those who do.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1497565)

It's really not. It's only 60 years. People have been making music for thousands of years so one 60 year span is just a blip. I understand their reason for doing it—it's easier to collect data on recent eras—but I don't think it tells us very much.

Originally Posted by Oriphiel (Post 1497574)

And these last 60 years have seen incredible strides. Like I said, quality over quantity. It may be a short amount of time, but you shouldn't just pretend it doesn't matter, or wasn't worth analyzing. It tells us quite a bit about modern music.

Originally Posted by Oriphiel (Post 1497543)

I disagree. Listen to the underground bands of any generation, and you'll find as much innovation and love for music as any other point in time. Try listening to the "Pebbles" and "Girls in the Garage" compilations (A big collection of 1960s underground music forgotten by time), and you'll very quickly see that even back then people were tired of the same-old pop formula. People like to think they are more experimental and mindful than their ancestors were, but in the end, they were people just like us, singing about the same themes and trying to have as much fun as possible with the tools at their disposal.

Originally Posted by Holerbot6000 (Post 1497559)

I think there was more variety in the 60's because you still had stuff like Jazz and Lounge and Exotica actually making the charts. People were just as likely to buy a Frank Sinatra single as they were a Beatles single. Roger Miller could dominate the pop charts with country novelty songs. A lot of musical styles, like garage rock, psychedlia, prog, etc. had their roots in the 60's. There were also huge folk and Latin movements, and this was all taking place in the popular arena - TV, Radio and the Pop Charts.

If you just look at what gets played on the radio these days, it's either Modern Country or Pop-Hop and that's pretty much it. It's all heavily manufactured so it's pretty bland and homogenous. There is a lot of really interesting stuff going on but it's all on the internet or independent, so you have to look for it. The average cow consumer doesn't get exposed to the variety of music that they did in the 1960's unless they make the effort to actively seek something out. And most people don't.

Originally Posted by ladyislingering (Post 1497055)

basic ingredients of a modern pop song:

- party party party
- mention of "dance floor"
- distorted vocals
- loud electronic noises

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1497580)

It tells us something about modern western pop music but I'm not sure how much can be extrapolated onto all other modern music from that.

Originally Posted by Oriphiel (Post 1497701)

I see your point, but western music has heavily influenced the world. Go to Russia, Germany, Italy, Japan, China, etc. and you will find hip-hop, western pop, punk, rock and roll, etc. Other countries have really started producing large amounts of chart topping musicians, but they all share a trend in that their musical stylings are deeply rooted in the western beat. So I think the trends in western music aren't just a blip on the radar of modern sound.

But hey, if you want to talk about the musical trends of other nations, feel free to. I'd love to see similar studies done around the world, or at least the opinion of someone from outside the U.S. Other countries have certainly changed in their sound as well (The same country that produced "The Ambush From All Sides" and "On the General's Mandate", China, is now producing auto-tune laden pop).

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1497704)

My point is that the music being charted in that study is a very tiny sliver of the music being made. Even within the western world, pop music is just a tiny sliver of all the music being created. So there's not much that be gleaned from that data except things that apply to an extremely small percentage of music.