(albeit most people on here acknowledge that there are good bands today)

The 60s and 70s are now seen as the golden age of rock and roll having acts like The Who, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Doors, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin. But in reality, if music ever took a huge drop in thoughtfulness, wasn’t it right there? Once music got rolling, classical music was what was popular and for a couple hundred years, musicians were unquestionably more talented, and understood music better than all of the non-classical musicians of the 20th century.

Then there were radios and rags, swing bands and jazz. Most musicologists will say that it was during the 1920s that music went from an art to a form of popular media. Most popular musicians were no longer classically trained, but were self-taught like many of the musicians from the third type of music, folk and traditional. But people like Joplin and later Ellington injected real music training into these new genres and legitimized them. A few decades later, some of the 20th centuries veritable music geniuses turned jazz into the sophisticated, well respected music it is today. These were people like Miles Davis, Thelonious Monk, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane and many more. This happened during the 50s and 60s. Meanwhile, blues and rock and roll became the popular styles. Jazz was saved when it proved that it could be just as intricately melodic as classical music while also being more complex rhythmically. Rock and blues have structures that restrict them from being as complex as classical pieces. Talk about a huge let down. Music couldn’t get simpler. No geniuses ever saved rock and roll.

Progressive music acts were, well, the most progressive acts when it came to the structures. Progressive bands incorporated jazz into their songs and in that way, the thin stream of art that was still coursing through music was able to reach a new horizon. But it was in the 60s that jazz was overtaken, and thats when music took a shot. Modern rock musicians are just as good as the ones from the 60s. The only thing that the 60s had that no other decade did was The Beatles. Otherwise, rock music has only changed in its accessibility and in its diversification. Today there are more bands, and more creativity in popular music than ever before. The 60s may have established a prevailing sound but nothing has happened since then that can quite measure up to the time when kids decided that they preferred four chords to a complex, thoughtful progression.
I have two problems with every. single. answer. One, no one understood what I was asking, probably my fault. Second, you guys have good points but none of you are winning this argument in my mind. Addressing my references to classical music, I am not talking about popular music from every time period. I’m sure I don’t have to tell you that classical music was the popular music before the 20s. I never said anything that implied traditional or folk music werent around before the 20s. Please don’t try to make me look stupid with illogical arguments.
Other person, I like music from 40 years ago, I like music from today and if I were to live for another 40 years, I would still enjoy the current music.
Sorry, I AM* talking about popular music from every time period. When musicologists categorize music, popular music started to rise up in the 20th century, of course I can’t say that there was a point when this became more popular than what we now call classical music. But I like to say it started with the radio, and I don’t think that is too wrong.
GNR and Led Zep are not geniuses of the same caliber as Miles Davis and John Coltrane. These are the points I’m making: It is hard for rock’s structure to facilitate genius. I call plenty of rock musicians geniuses but at a different level. With that said, it seems that the generation growing up in the 60s decided to drift to genres that were not about the genius of the music. As many of you said, catchiness and complexity are their own categories of genius. In the 60s, music lost complexity, please make counterpoints to that argument, I really believe that you can. Conversely, tell me at one point since that time, that things got worse. Imagine listening to jazz and classical your entire life and then hearing this music that has simple rhythms and progressions, you would think it was hardly a respectable genre at all. That’s how “The Greatest Generation” felt. I don’t think that the “Baby Boomers” are warranted to feel the same way though.
Smiley: When you say I’m being subjective, that is somewhat true, as long as youre sure to put the word “popular” in front of music. I’m not debating what music is though. The subjects would be the modern people of any given time, yes. When I say progressive, I am primarily talking about Canterbury Scene bands. I really don’t consider John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers, Love or Cream (any of the psychedelic or blues bands you listed) to be progressive bands. The internet has created much, much more music. But there are still so many pop and experimental bands today that I love. There are plenty of successful acts today that are nothing but copies of other bands. And perhaps internet culture has shined a light on those. But there is still the same amount of decent bands (and in my opinion, more in fact) than ever in rock’s history.
There are plenty of obscure progressive bands from the past that I will never know about. I don’t particularly care though, I think I would find that 90% of them would be boring by my standards/taste. And it is certainly hard to play in a progressive band without being a talented musician. I think the same is true for modern jam bands though. And I feel just the same way about them, most are boring beyond the main notable ones.
I will admit that I tried to elicit strong reactions with the wording of my question. But when you say something like “nothing new in the last 30 years”, I think the gloves must come off. Just a completely unacceptable thing to say, especially from R&Ps most talented best answer getter, and Smiley, possibly the most knowledgeable prog aficionado on here. I’m guessing youre talk about the garage/post punk revivals. There’s a reason it’s qualified with “revival”, it’s not the same thing. Interpol would love it if someone told them that they sound exactly like Joy Division. But the fact is, theyre not even trying for that. Also, the late 80s is when things started to die? That just so happens to be when Radiohead started, please tell me who Radiohead was copying when they made OK Computer.

Tags: about, cheapened, clearly, complain, decline, generation, music, music's, people, Their