90s R&B vs. R&B of today
 

which do you think is better?

Both suck really, really hard so it's difficult to say.

lol I feel like 90s r&b was better than it is now.
To me, it had more feeling, more quality. I feel like that's something that's missing in some of the r&b now.

One of the major reasons I hated R&B growing up in the 80s and 90s was how little feeling I felt it had, so I can't say I agree.

Modern R&B is a misnomer.
The fact that modern Rhythm & Blues is abbreviated to just 'R&B' speaks volumes about the music that's peddled in the name of R&B these days.
I hate that contemporary R&B uses the description...with a passion.

There's really not a great deal of contrast between the two. Perhaps a more appropriate comparison
would be between 50's/60's/70's R&B/Soul and the way this genre has been represented since the output of Motown and Stax records was subdued, which unarguably was sometime in the mid to late 70's.

Edit: Right Track you're absolutely right. contemporary R&B, while I'm sure it takes some influence from soul and Rhythm and Blues is really just terrible over produced "urban" music. There are exceptions however.

I think it's sad that what was once a great style/genre (if you could call it a genre) with crucial, historic musical roots has become a catch all description to include something that fails to do the name of R&B any justice whatsoever.
It bothers me when I'm asked what my favourite type of music is by a young lad and I feel it necessary to prefix "R&B" with the word "sixties".

I grew up in the 90s which is probably why I feel the way I do about 90s r&b compared to r&b today. But if we were to compare 90s r&b to 50's/60's/70's R&B/Soul then the latter would definitely win.

No offense Lain_Lain but, the two decades this thread refers to and your choice of forum to put the thread, says it all.

none taken.