I'm going to start this one with a couple of thoughts.
The first thought isn't mine. I think I heard it on VSauce, which is this incredible YouTube channel with really interesting videos. Go check it out.
In this particular video on "risk," he mentioned that people always comment on how music was so much better "back then." "Back then" might refer to when that person was young, or maybe refer to a time even before they were born. Why do people say this? Is it because the music that was made was such better quality back then? Is the music made nowadays crap? Were there more talented musicians "back in the day?"
No, it's more likely that the reason we say and think that, is because the music that has survived from "back then" is the music that is generally considered good. There was plenty of crappy music released, for example, in the 60's, along with the good stuff that has survived the test of time. But we don't remember that crappy music (well, most of us don't.) We don't hear it still played over and over. The music that we remember and hear from that time is stuff that was popular enough and considered good enough that we still hear it and have easy access to it today. It has survived.
Right now, see, we are bombarded with ALL of the music that's popular now. Will we and future generations remember every song that is popular now? No, probably not. Only the music that proves "good" enough to be popular with a larger part of the population will be remembered and continue to be replayed in subsequent years. It will be the surviving music. What music is popular now that you think will survive this test of time? Katy Perry? Skrillex? Mumford & Sons? I honestly don't know.
My other contemplation is kind of related and it's one that's really bugged me recently. That is: people love to hate on music. Specifically, they love to bash music that doesn't fit into their little predetermined mold of what they considered "good music."
For example, I don't know how many fans of rock music I've heard complain about the popularity of electronic music. As if there is no value to music unless it has the traditional guitar/bass/drum combo. Often they won't even give a piece of music a chance simply because it's been labeled as a certain genre. It makes me sad because I feel like those people are really limiting their own musical experiences.
Of course, there are many people, myself included, that are guilty of excluding a specific genre of music from their playlists...country music anyone? I honestly have tried to enjoy some country because i don't want to miss out on something that might be awesome, just because it has a label that I historically haven't enjoyed. The problem is, as it is with most music, what we're exposed to on a regular basis is the popular stuff on the radio. And I know that if i turn on the country station here in Jacksonville, I will not like most of what I hear.
So, there are many people that limit themselves because they've decided that anything with a certain label is not worth their time. It might be rock fans hating electronic music, country fans dissing rap, old people bashing "new" music, young kids disregarding "old" music....it is all kind of sad.
Just do yourself a favor: open your mind and go listen to something that you might never have given a chance to. This is the age of the internet, so don't just turn on the radio. Check out a digital streaming music service like spotify, pandora, grooveshark, pitchfork. Or check out online radio stations from around the world. Or, just go to www.npr.org/music/radio, pick a channel, and enjoy. Trust me, your life will only be better if you expose yourself to more music. You've got nothing to lose.
I'd like to end this post with a little bit more from the awesome book Andriy got me called Defining Moments in Music. In my last post, I kicked this literary commentary off with a song from the turn of the 20th century. I'll continue it with a hit from Billy Murray, who was a very popular performer at the turn of the century, performing "Under the Anheuser Bush," a song commissioned by the Anheuser-Busch brewery in 1904. The other is listed as a key song in the book, by Scott Joplin, released in 1902 which i'm sure you've heard because Joplin's popularity continued through the 20th century. It's "The Entertainer," a song I used to love playing on the piano, or attempting to anyway. Enjoy!
The first thought isn't mine. I think I heard it on VSauce, which is this incredible YouTube channel with really interesting videos. Go check it out.
In this particular video on "risk," he mentioned that people always comment on how music was so much better "back then." "Back then" might refer to when that person was young, or maybe refer to a time even before they were born. Why do people say this? Is it because the music that was made was such better quality back then? Is the music made nowadays crap? Were there more talented musicians "back in the day?"
No, it's more likely that the reason we say and think that, is because the music that has survived from "back then" is the music that is generally considered good. There was plenty of crappy music released, for example, in the 60's, along with the good stuff that has survived the test of time. But we don't remember that crappy music (well, most of us don't.) We don't hear it still played over and over. The music that we remember and hear from that time is stuff that was popular enough and considered good enough that we still hear it and have easy access to it today. It has survived.
Right now, see, we are bombarded with ALL of the music that's popular now. Will we and future generations remember every song that is popular now? No, probably not. Only the music that proves "good" enough to be popular with a larger part of the population will be remembered and continue to be replayed in subsequent years. It will be the surviving music. What music is popular now that you think will survive this test of time? Katy Perry? Skrillex? Mumford & Sons? I honestly don't know.
My other contemplation is kind of related and it's one that's really bugged me recently. That is: people love to hate on music. Specifically, they love to bash music that doesn't fit into their little predetermined mold of what they considered "good music."
For example, I don't know how many fans of rock music I've heard complain about the popularity of electronic music. As if there is no value to music unless it has the traditional guitar/bass/drum combo. Often they won't even give a piece of music a chance simply because it's been labeled as a certain genre. It makes me sad because I feel like those people are really limiting their own musical experiences.
Of course, there are many people, myself included, that are guilty of excluding a specific genre of music from their playlists...country music anyone? I honestly have tried to enjoy some country because i don't want to miss out on something that might be awesome, just because it has a label that I historically haven't enjoyed. The problem is, as it is with most music, what we're exposed to on a regular basis is the popular stuff on the radio. And I know that if i turn on the country station here in Jacksonville, I will not like most of what I hear.
So, there are many people that limit themselves because they've decided that anything with a certain label is not worth their time. It might be rock fans hating electronic music, country fans dissing rap, old people bashing "new" music, young kids disregarding "old" music....it is all kind of sad.
Just do yourself a favor: open your mind and go listen to something that you might never have given a chance to. This is the age of the internet, so don't just turn on the radio. Check out a digital streaming music service like spotify, pandora, grooveshark, pitchfork. Or check out online radio stations from around the world. Or, just go to www.npr.org/music/radio, pick a channel, and enjoy. Trust me, your life will only be better if you expose yourself to more music. You've got nothing to lose.
I'd like to end this post with a little bit more from the awesome book Andriy got me called Defining Moments in Music. In my last post, I kicked this literary commentary off with a song from the turn of the 20th century. I'll continue it with a hit from Billy Murray, who was a very popular performer at the turn of the century, performing "Under the Anheuser Bush," a song commissioned by the Anheuser-Busch brewery in 1904. The other is listed as a key song in the book, by Scott Joplin, released in 1902 which i'm sure you've heard because Joplin's popularity continued through the 20th century. It's "The Entertainer," a song I used to love playing on the piano, or attempting to anyway. Enjoy!
No comments:
Post a Comment