Why Hasn't Music Evolved Since The 60s?

The 1960s was the last time music took an evolutionary leap. Everything today is a derviative of that era. Including electronic and rap, noise, whatever.

Like biological evolution, cultural evolution also jumps in fits and starts.

We are presently experiencing a dormant period in creativity. One reason for this is because money has been infused into music making and money is its own value. Why promote music to be innovative and free, socially relevant, when the money is made from rehashing what already exists?

Take the money out of music and music will once again become alive. Until then, its going to be all image.

I think you mean “Why hasn’t -pop- music evolved since the 60’s?” - and it has, though not too drastically,
cuz then it would no longer be pop, would it?

If you did mean music in general, then geez, have you really tried to find anything new?
Look around youtube. Listen to Squarepusher, Buckethead, Autechre, David Sylvian’s Manofon, A Whisper In The Noise, Thinking Plague, Sleepytime Gorilla Museum, Stolen Babies…

…off with you now. You’ve got work to do. :sunglasses:

music is for grandads and grannies or in best case something you notice when playing computer games. who gives a sh!t?

The last major musical evolution occurred when I was in high school, too. Were we in high school at the same time?

I take STRONG exception to the premise. Most of the problem is that music HAS (de)volved considerably since the 60’s (and 70’s). Unless you think crap like “Single Ladies” represents advancement*




*VH1 recently aired a show that ranked this tuneless garbage as the #1 song of the 2000’s

Agreed.
And that’s why I prefer to listen to the “oldies” station in my city and not the “modern” stations.
And this is coming from someone from the “modern” generation.

And some of that music is great (enough to buy the soundtrack). :smiley:
Skyrim, anyone? :wink:

When you think about it, the music of the 60’s wasn’t such a drastic
leap forward in the evolution of music - musically speaking. . It was a
natural progression which grew from it’s roots in blues/folk/classical…
I believe what made 60’s music so meaningful and important, and therefore
more lasting, was a perfect storm of societal conditions that coincided with
the music. The Vietnam war, the first ever large scale anti war protests,
Dr. Kings speech, the Kennedy/King assassinations, the civil rights act,
the sexual revolution, experimentation with mind expanding drugs, the counterculture, etc etc. -
the music reflected the topics that young people were passionate about,
and was the soundtrack to all that societal upheaval.

I don’t think you’ll see music have that kind of impact again without the social
conditions that gave it such importance.

I think you are all old. :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue:

/me runs

Shush, you. :wink:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Bj6ekG8XNo

Aloha guys,

Lyrics have been the big advance since the 60’s.

The ‘N’ word and the ‘F’ word etc are now common in
todays music scene.

Now days you can pretty much say what ever you want and
there will/may be an audience for it.

30/40 years ago an artist/band could not ‘get away with that’
and it was worst the further back you go.

You had to be clever about it.

‘I’m yo back door man’!!
(he was not really talking about a back door now was he)?

Today users can ‘blow up the intertoob’ and watch/hear
C Lo Green or a down and dirty punk band say whatever they want.
I even remember 2 Live Crew on Phil Donahue singing:
‘Face down a… up That’s the way we like to f…!’

George Carlins naughty seven word thingy is pretty much on the ropes.

Like it, agree with it or not; that IMHO is progress.

But is it music?


{’-’}

There was a LOT of dross around then as well.

And what’s music supposed to have evolved to? Somethng you like? Something I like?
The only people who appreciate evolution are the old and experienced. The young only know it all but all the old jokes are very new to them. And so are all the old tunes.
What happened in the 20th C was that we got super-powered folk music and copyrights.
Music didn’t really evolve it just got an image makeover and louder. And empowered by being given the title “teenagers” children said it was new and radikle and awesome and by golly they were right. Roll on Freddy and the Dreamers! Herman’s Hermits! The Archies! And the James Last Orchestra! :mrgreen:

60s music was an indisdinguishable part of a cultural rebellion. Since then, music has been subsumed by the corporatocracy and most elements of rebellion are either wiped clean or are for hipster show only. Since the 60s, which were about resisting the warmongering, selfish, fearful and poisonous ways of power, a counter reactionary clampdown has emerged which is about retaining the old tried and true ways of perpetuating hatred and violence, profits for the very few. The vaccuous quality and of todays music reflects this clampdown, advertised as ‘positivism’, “Ra-ra USA #1!”. And yes, I am referring to popularized, mass produced music. If a person is not part of this cooperation with the Eve of Destruction, they are labeled "bad’, a ‘downer’ and run out of town, reflecting just how sheltered and spoon fed most folks are concerning the true conditions of the bankrupt and souless economic system.

maybe the rebels grew wiser and realized that half of what they said was wrong? If you don’t expect to be wrong every now and then you shouldn’t pretend to be right either, or the ice is getting kinda thin?

Wrong? What half of peace love and understanding is wrong?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKEZoY-TMG4

That soulless economic system gets things done that you or I wouldn’t or couldn’t. I just know that, given the chance any one of us would rather be rich with “them” than poor with us. Anyone lucky enough to get rich NEVER stays in his hovel, 'hood or muddy village.
The system only works because the poor are greedy enough but not greedy ENOUGH to overcome their own limitations. They buy into anything that someone in a flash suit tells them to. Why? Because they’re so dim they’d starve without leaders.
Everyone is where they are because they WANT to be there. Heaven is no good for most people because they’d have nothing to whine about. :mrgreen:

Thats the standard indoctrination taught you since birth. In short its, “success is its own standard”, and “might is
right.” If you really believe all people would rather be “rich” than “poor” ( I put those words in italics because they standard value of those words really don’t apply to their reality), it only means you’ve bought into the lies hook line and sinker. Good luck! I know where I stand too. Thanks for letting us know what is all about for you, Conman.

Um…no. Thats only what they’dike you to believe. Its like saying the flame of justice and freedom and peace and love has died out. Its only their illusion that violence and socialized thieving bankruptcy of the plutocracy is the only option for mankind. Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the rest.

But it is true that the human struggle for peace and justice and sanity and good earth tending is a never ending struggle. The history of decency and sanity is not a continuous arc, its a zig zag, and nefarious forces are always gathering. For instance, women had the right to property and leadership thousands of years ago. There was a limit to slavery, thousands of years ago. But evil keep coming back, and it must be fought.

It is truly one of the biggest misrepresentations of all times, that the ‘modern’ world and modern people are superior to the people and cultures of the past. We are not superior in intelligence nor in heart. But the indoctrination states that only by ones cooperation with the money system is a person measured.

Works from village to metropolis. What you are told, and believe, is that you are free to break out any time you want by plotting with the like-minded in dark places.
I’m already out. It’s very easy. All you have to do is change your name and disappear. There’s still a lot of places to disappear to out there. Just because they tell us it’s all full it’s not so. If you have the courage to tell this cosy world to effoff you can.
If you’re sitting at a COMPUTER writing about “revolution” then you’re already in nick mate. :mrgreen: Or you’re already rich. :mrgreen:
There’s lots of people been indoctrinating me since birth. Most of them have been saying the same things as you say.
Only poor people sit in pubs plotting against the rich (even Egyptian caves have “Down with Pharaoh!” written on them by cave-drinkers). The rich don’t have to plot because they have proper, professional plans. And if you don’t have a plan you’ll not change a thing because if you haven’t got a plan people (both rich & poor people) think you’re just another fool.
Oil and gold has only been around for a few years and it’ll be gone soon. Make your mind up before it’s all gone and there’s no handy internet to tell people “stuff” on. You think it’s bad now? Wait til the guys with clubs come around and tell you to get down the mines.
Rich citizens ordinary men can communicate with have also only been around a short while. At least you can say what you do without having your head cut off. A lot of good men died getting to this state and I’m not sure they can or could bend the natural orders much more than they have done.
I’m afraid you missed the revolution and this is it’s outcome. It’s a as good as it gets. Enjoy it while it lasts.
When you’re in heaven don’t keep kicking god up the Khyber. :mrgreen:

I’m considered old?

I realize that I’m not a teenager anymore, but I should still be considered “young”.

I’m part of the generation that “modern music” is targeted to.

And I think it pales in comparison to “oldies” music.

As for the question “Why hasn’t music evolved since the 60s?”:

Money.
If you make money from your music, it has now become a business.
Do you take a high-risk gamble and make something new that only a few people may like?
Or do you choose the low-risk gamble and make something that you know the masses like?
Business logic dictates that you take the lower risk (and better return) option.

Also:

When you think about the major “evolutions” in music (the different eras, etc) it was back when music was the entertainment of monarchs and they were constantly trying to “one up” the other (without a war). If the monarch liked a different sort of music, then usually their nobles agreed (if they wanted to stay in the monarch’s favor), and thus a new form of music was born.
Even in the 60s different music was seen as a “down with the old culture” phenomenon.
My point: there was a definite social aspect encouraging artists to do something “different”.

However, nowadays, there is more of a group mentality (especially with the internet) than ever before.
People like what is “cool” and “in-style” meaning “what the masses like”.
Do you go against the norm and win the favor of a few and the disdain of the masses?
Or do you keep with the norm and win the favor of the masses?