The DU Lounge
Related: Culture Forums, Support ForumsWhy is modern pop music so terrible?
About 20 minutes long, but a real eye opener. I agree with it for the most part, well no, with all of it. Everyone has an opinion. Mine is just one of them.
https://m.
dalton99a
(84,631 posts)SergeStorms
(19,312 posts)Don't get me wrong, there are some great bands out there today, but they're not getting the play the Pop Music gets. They play to a niche market, and some of those bands want it that way. They refuse to get caught up in the Pop Music machine, and they're to be commended for that.
The 60s were a time of great experimentation in all facets of life, and tremendous upheaval took place in sexual, life-style, musical, art, cinematic and numerous other aspects of life. Something like that only happens a few times each millennia, and we were honored to have witnessed this explosion of change. Now, all change is not good. There were some real clunkers that happened in that period, such as the dumbing down of America, Republican politicians (directly responsible for the dumbing down of America), the wholesale destruction of our planet (also attributable to Republicans), just to name a few. As I look at it, Republican politicians are probably responsible for most of the negative aspects of 60s change and it's aftermath.
Anyway, the 60 and 70s were a great time to be alive, and I always look back and feel so lucky to have been part of such a remarkable era - not only musically - but in all the change that took place, for good or ill.
rpannier
(24,585 posts)radio stations in the 60's and 70's were almost all local. There was little-to-no all day syndicated crap
Lots of stations would play music because it was local and cheap
KOME in San Jose played a lot of local metal in the 70's
Now, most AM is talk and FM is coast-to-coast crap
tecelote
(5,141 posts)Today, everything is controlled by very few so the only bands to "make it" are the bands that are made by basically the same people who control the airwaves.
We're fed corporate music just like we're fed corporate news.
quickesst
(6,307 posts)... on shows like America's Got Talent, American Idol, The Voice etcetera, who have come and gone that are far more talented than a lot of the "superstars" of today. Ironically, most of these people are doing older music for their performances.
DBoon
(23,117 posts)but in retrospect it was amazing that you could hear Petula Clark next to Jimi Hendrix. You grew up appreciating the best of each genre.
The closing off of genres and fragmenting of the music world has diminished its quality.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Response to quickesst (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
yuiyoshida
(42,813 posts)Asia... for real.
rpannier
(24,585 posts)that Korea would produce the top pop group
and (more so) that the hottest metal band would be Japanese teen girls
I was a teen in the late 70'early 80's
yuiyoshida
(42,813 posts)rpannier
(24,585 posts)and BM does have the most kickass musicians.
Thanks for the Band Maid. I'll check em out
yuiyoshida
(42,813 posts)The girls from Band Maid sing and play their own instruments and in my mind that makes them superior.
NBachers
(18,166 posts)yuiyoshida
(42,813 posts)bored at the time?
Atman
(31,464 posts)I like it. It different. And its LOUD. Just as he was saying. No instrumental nuance or creativity, but there sure is a lot of energy and noice. And Japanese girls in school uniforms.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)classical musicians in the world, both international concert artists and chamber music and orchestral players especially considering the size of its population.
There are six superb full time symphony orchestras in the Seoul metro area alone - Seoul Philharmonic, KBS Orchestra, Incheon Philharmonic, Bucheon Philharmonic, Korean Symphony Orchestra, and the Seoul Opera Orchestra .
How many cities around the world can compete with this? -not that many - Tokyo, London, St Petersburg, Moscow, to name a few...
rpannier
(24,585 posts)I'm merely pointing out what the pop and metal world was like in the 70's and it was centered on the US and Britain
I've lived in Korea for two decades and there is some great music and performers here
I'm not into KPop, but there is still a lot to like and listen to here
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Just--eh.. I have quite a few Korean musician friends, so added a little to the discussion...
I've only been to Korea twice, to hear a couple special concerts, and so far only Incheon and Seoul... NOT ENOUGH.. I love it... Something special happens to me when I walk out of customs and into the terminal at ICN. There is just some.. special vibe in the air.....
Maybe its knowing I will be having a bowl of Samgye-tang in a little place across the street from Sejong Arts Center.
msongs
(70,220 posts)real music by real musicians has variety of tempos, players being ever so slightly out of sync or time with each other, giving ones ears a break from the relentless robotics of the digital productions.
dynamic range compression makes the hearing process grow weary
Blue_Adept
(6,437 posts)And this episode in particular about how things changed way back in the 60's with technology
http://www.pbs.org/video/soundbreaking-next-episode-2/
cagefreesoylentgreen
(838 posts)Classic Depeche Mode still sounds better than 99.9% of the crud that gets shoveled into radio these days.
VOX
(22,976 posts)It's all digitized through an electronic "sausage grinder," and thus there's no challenge or "catch" to the hooks.
griloco
(842 posts)I don't like their hair, their styles, their piercings, their tattoos, their mangling of language, their values, their music, etc...they should be more like my generation which was, like, perfect
Tobin S.
(10,420 posts)The video is an honest comparison of older and newer pop and is hosted by a guy who appears to be in his 20s. I don't see anything about any of the other things you listed.
Tobin S.
(10,420 posts)For one thing, most people think the music of their youth is better than new music. And I don't see anyone disrespecting the younger generations here.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)You confuse response and answer. Two separate concepts.
(see aside)
sarge43
(29,167 posts)I don't recall that he ever made any criticism of "kids today". He did criticize how pop music is currently produced and marketed - not the same thing.
So, what current chart topper has the quality, complexity and depth as say The Beach Boys Good Vibrations or The Four Tops Reach Out?
Soxfan58
(3,479 posts)In 1972!
griloco
(842 posts)Tobin S.
(10,420 posts)You're probably just not going to find it on a pop station.
I think a big part of the problem is that many younger people don't have an appreciation for older music in general. I'm 45, but I've always listened to music that was before my time as well as new stuff. I've got the Beatles in my CD player in the car right now, for example. I've also got a new band called Ghost in the car as well- a band who knows how to pay homage to older acts while at the same time producing quality new music.
But if younger people were to start seriously listening to pop acts of the 60s, and 70s, they would find a lot of musical treasure there as has the young man hosting the video. There was some crap being made back then, too, that didn't really have an business being on the charts, but the overall quality of the music was just better than today's pop. As the video suggests, there was more range and variety in pop music as well as much better musicianship. There was also more substance to the music and lyrics in most cases.
Break free from modern pop.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)Older generations have difficulty with change. Older generations have provided the people that have created our current political, economic and social mess. It is time for huge change, perhaps even in the music we listen to.........! I am the older generation.
SharonClark
(10,336 posts)I've never understood its appeal when there are so many other genres that are great.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)localroger
(3,718 posts)The OP isn't remotely like the criticism of soul or rock or disco when those genres were new. People are still making good music, and you can tell it when you hear it, but it doesn't get played on the radio, at the mall, on movie soundtracks, etc. etc. The music that does get all this airplay is quantifiably bad -- it's not just unfamiliar to older ears, it's less rich, simpler in structure, and more repetitive. Often we like it mainly because millions of dollars are spent making sure we hear it enough for the brainwashing familiarity effect to kick in.
Soylent Henry
(32 posts)Chrissy Hynde nailed "alternative music" as an alternative to music!
marble falls
(62,394 posts)"I preferred rock when it was in the dark, when it was a secret between me and the audience, when it wasn't mainstream."
Billboard Interview, www.billboard.com. April 3, 2006.
In other words, she preferred alternative music.
msongs
(70,220 posts)samnsara
(18,290 posts)...the millennials have nothing over the Boomers regarding music. No comparison.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)dawg day
(7,947 posts)I'm a boomer, and as I grew up, I listened to old Elvis and Chuck Berry as if the songs were new. It was all a continuum.
But the first 20 years of rock-- I don't think we thought of Elvis as "back then music."
Also, there was more-- not a blend, but a chain-- of genres... There was country and country rock and rockabilly and blues and folk, for example, and they all connected like a chain, so that Ray Charles (blues/soul) and Johnny Cash (country) could sing the same songs, even sing together. They didn't sound alike, but there were connections, so it was easy to like some of everything.
There was a huge shift (which you can hear clearly) when "stereo" took over (and FM took over then from AM)-- listen to the early Beatles and then the late Beatles. The early stuff was wonderful, but it was all recorded in mono, so sounds thinner. (Plus they got very experimental with multi-tracking later.)
Another big shift was when music went digital-- CDs sounded so precise compared to the more ambient recording of a tape or vinyl. Not better or worse, but it all sounded different.
I think we generally love most the music we loved in mid-to-late teens, don't you think?
But notice how many commercials and soundtracks play 60s and 70s music. (Of course, that could be because boomers have available $ and are easy to seduce with a little Motown memory.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)And I was really into music at the time. I went up and down the eastern seaboard for concerts. When the mood strikes, I still listen to some of that music on my iPod.
I saw Backstreet Boys a few weeks ago with a friend (my age) and while I wasn't into them back in the day, I prepared for it by listening to them. One of their songs was playing the first time I was ever behind the wheel. Their show made me feel like a teen all over again. (I was with a rock band fandom and listening to boybands and the pop girls-- Britney Spears, Christina Aguleria, etc) were looked down upon. At 37 I don't give a shit. At 18 I did.
I was recently talking to another (27) friend about this. We were in his car listening to Bruce Springsteen (a must when in Asbury Park). I was asking him if he thought this generation had a Bruce and he replied Rihanna. I don't think the two of them can compare.
griloco
(842 posts)"It always has been and always will be the same. The old folk of our grandfathers' young days sang a song bearing exactly the same burden; and the young folk of to-day will drone out precisely similar nonsense for the aggravation of the next generation. "Oh, give me back the good old days of fifty years ago," has been the cry ever since Adam's fifty-first birthday. Take up the literature of 1835, and you will find the poets and novelists asking for the same impossible gift as did the German Minnesingers long before them and the old Norse Saga writers long before that. And for the same thing sighed the early prophets and the philosophers of ancient Greece. From all accounts, the world has been getting worse and worse ever since it was created. All I can say is that it must have been a remarkably delightful place when it was first opened to the public, ..."
The Idle Thoughts of An Idle Fellow
Jerome K. Jerome
1886
quickesst
(6,307 posts).... as far as the pop music of today is concerned, to base my opinion on the science and logic behind the video.
griloco
(842 posts)The Wielding Truth
(11,422 posts)localroger
(3,718 posts)...the idea behind which was to democratize music production by removing the expensive instruments and training. My father, who just turned 77, has played the accordion since his teens. Make all the accordion jokes you want, but he just finally bought a new instrument to replace the thoroughly worn out one he'd been playing since 1974. It was $8000 and he had to special order it from Germany.
But it was rap producers who started the loudness war. Sure there is a lot of art in rap, but there is a lot of musical art that isn't and rap lends itself to dynamic range compression because there really isn't any timbral complexity to lose. This means other pop music has to keep up so it won't get shouted down by the competition, and that makes it unproductive to use an orchestra of trained people playing expensive instruments when you can get by with a drum machine, guitar, and PC. And all that practice and training! With autotune anybody can sing in key, so producers can go for the cutie who will look good in the inevitable video instead of the person who spent a lifetime learning their craft.
GreenEyedLefty
(2,102 posts)localroger
(3,718 posts)NWA and Eminem are real artists. But it has to be very good to be any good and there's just way too much of it.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)JonLP24
(29,354 posts)But there are so many different styles like Lil Boosie and Southern hip hop to Yukmouth West Coast I don't know how it compares to pop music but I don't listen to music at all. I only like 5% of all genres but from my POV pop music was always horrible.
griloco
(842 posts)"The period from the end of the First World War until the start of the Depression in 1929 is known as the "Jazz Age". Jazz had become popular music in America, although older generations considered the music immoral and threatening to old cultural values."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920s_in_jazz
DBoon
(23,117 posts)100 years ago today, 'The Rite of Spring' incited a riot in a Paris theater
...
Henri Quittard, a music critic at French daily Le Figaro, described the debut as an exercise in "puerile barbarity,"
https://www.theverge.com/2013/5/29/4375736/igor-stravinsky-rite-of-spring-100-anniversary-paris-riot
griloco
(842 posts)The overabundance and popularity of ragtime was not always met with enthusiasm. For example, at the 1901 convention of the American Federation of Musicians in Denver, "Resolutions were adopted characterizing 'ragtime' as 'unmusical rot.' Members were encouraged to 'make every effort to suppress and [to] discourage the playing and the publishing of such musical trash." (Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 5/14/01, 1)
https://loc.gov/item/ihas.200035811
greymattermom
(5,795 posts)There are thousands of wonderful indie bands that travel to small venues and sell their music on line. You just have to get advice from a friend.
localroger
(3,718 posts)...the OP isn't remotely like those complaints. He doesn't talk about content AT ALL except to point out that it's gotten quantifiably simpler according to word count analysis. Everything he talks about is a quantifiable phenomenon that is new to the era of, in the case of the loudness war, CD's and for some of the other phenomena portable music players. Those are not social phenomena.
Blue_Adept
(6,437 posts)and similar to above, I really recommend watching the Soundbreaking series on PBS for a lot of music history in the modern era.
That said, everything is cyclical. This current system cannot last forever, though it may go on for longer than some care for, and it'll change when a new disruptor is there.
But the biggest change has to come from performers. They really do have a lot of competition out there but they also have so much more access through various portals from YouTube and the like to do it on their own at the start and find and audience. The monolithic approach of radio is dying (and is really kinda dead due to the lack of honest local stations anymore) and the fracturing means both producers of music and consumers of music have to actively work at it a little more to find things instead of just turning on the radio and being exposed to it.
Just like TV
Just like books
Just like gaming
Tikki
(14,796 posts)when talking to my granddaughter (age 9), then I say,"oh that reminds
me of or you should hear this", then I play a song from youtube or
on my pad for her.
When I take the time to put the vinyl on she knows it is special.
These songs are not always older music...many are releases from 2017
or a year or two ago.
I have, also, introduced her to music she'll never hear on any radio
station or TV, except maybe a college station.
I have to be careful not to overwhelm her with too much in one day.
I believe I have that figured out.
The mister and I took her dad and uncle to many of the concerts and
shows with us as they grew up.
We are planning to take her, also, soon.
Tikki
Response to quickesst (Original post)
Mosby This message was self-deleted by its author.
mythology
(9,527 posts)There's a reason he didn't compare I Want to Hold Your Hand's lyrical depth compared to current pop music. They could afford to spend 300 hours in a studio because they made a boatload of money selling bubblegum pop and then took a chance on other stuff.
Also Bob Dylan was never pop. He's had 4 top 10 hits ever. Also a singular talent who won a Nobel Prize for his lyrics.
I would also be interested in comparing the lyrical depth from other periods. Was the 1960s an outlier? My initial guess from what little I've heard of popular music in the 1940s and 1950s is that the lyrical depth then wasn't particularly deep.
Different Drummer
(8,699 posts)During my life (I'm 56), I have never cared much for the "good beat, easy to dance to" stuff that I've always thought of as being pop. I guess an incident that happened several years ago influenced my opinion more than anything else. I'm in the metro Atlanta area and, for several years, we had one--count it--one radio station that had a modern *rock* (groups like Rise Against, In This Moment, Nothing More, Deftones, Seether and several dozen others) format. It was very popular and Clear Channel/iHeart owned the station. In the summer of 2012, Clear Channel/iHeart apparently decided Atlanta didn't have enough pop/op 40 stations (though the airwaves in Atlanta have been crawling with this type of music for a long time) and converted the modern rock station to a Top 40 format, which remains in place to this day (despite numerous protests from local listeners who liked the old format). Now the airwaves around here consist mostly of pop/top 40, AM hate talk and a bit much C&W for my taste.
quickesst
(6,307 posts). older music, I don't think I started thinking about the genre of music call Pop until the 80s and 90s. On the other hand, I feel like pop music and rock and roll did not start to separate themselves from each other until the late 60s. Although there may be a few songs by pop artists today that I like, I could not for the life of me tell you what the name of the artist is simply for the fact that there are far too many of them to keep up with, and the fact that most of them sound exactly alike. As far as the video, I formed my opinion about agreeing with it based mostly on the science and the logic the presenter put forth. When the video ended and I had time to think about what I had just seen, in the end I could only come up with five words...."you can't argue with that."
drmeow
(5,314 posts)and had to stop watching. If he had used The Beatles "Love, Love Me Do" or "Help!" or "All You Need Is Love" (all of which quite likely would support his argument), I could have stuck with it. But "A Day in the Life" was never, ever a "pop" song (except in the sense that it wasn't classical or jazz) and it never would have ever gotten any airplay if the Beatles hadn't already had a ton of hits.
Second, how much of the "degradation" of music is a result of the increase in sheer volume of music over time. How many new "pop" songs were released in 2010 as compared to 1970?
Don't compare apples to oranges and make your case using "per capita" (or whatever the song equivalent would be) numbers.
"
Don't compare apples to oranges and make your case using "per capita" (or whatever the song equivalent would be) numbers."
I think you're trying to pick a fight that you're not going to get or win. Of course I disagree with your apples to oranges comparison, but, on the other hand, if someone asked me to watch a video that was 20 minutes long, and I decided to form my opinion after only three and a half minutes in, I would not be surprised if it were laughed off as making a premature judgement based on inadequate information. So, haha.
drmeow
(5,314 posts)Your study? You seem awfully defensive. I was making a critique. I'm not interested in a fight for the same reason I'm not interested in watching 17 1/2 more minutes of an analysis which starts with a fundamentally flawed example - I really don't have the time nor do I care enough. I've made my critique and I've said my piece. Do what you want with it. And have a great new year.
Not my video nor my study. Let's look at this one more time.
"Don't compare apples to oranges and make YOUR case using "per capita" (or whatever the song equivalent would be) numbers."
Looks personal to me. If you had replaced "don't" with "they shouldn't," and replaced "your" with "their", I wouldn't have taken the shot and just marked it up as another opinion I didn't agree with. I was actually wondering if I should have pointed out that I did not have a hand in the creation of this video. Sort of looks like most people don't agree with your assessment but, you're darn sure entitled to express it. Happy New Year to you too!
Orrex
(64,209 posts)I'm not a big fan of YouTube's clickbait revenue generators. Further, I am certain that whatever point it purports to make can be made in under three minutes without losing anything.
Does anything distinguish this grossly overlong puff piece from any of its predecessors? Or does it--like all of its predecessors--pit carefully chosen great songs of the past against garbage pop songs of the present?
A glance at the top 40 list of pretty much any year reveals utter crap regardless of the legendary great songs that also came out that year.
"These kids today listen to terrible music," says every generation.
quickesst
(6,307 posts).... I am 100% certain that you absolutely did not watch the video.
Orrex
(64,209 posts)Twenty minute YouTube videos worth watching are more rare than honest Republicans.
I once watched an 18 minute video that showed how to build and stain a full-sized bookcase from scratch. I simply can't believe that this fellow's pop music ruminations are worth the time.
quickesst
(6,307 posts).... that I watched it in its entirety. What actually convinced me that I was in agreement was not really about my musical taste, but more of what the science and logic behind the video revealed to me. Personally, I felt like there was something that had been off about music for the last 10 or 15 years. After watching this video it finally dawned on me that I had been listening to variations of the same few songs over and over again all that time. It was one time I was glad the length of the video did not deter me from watching it, but to each his own.
Orrex
(64,209 posts)I've actually seen that type of analysis before and, although I personally lack the musical expertise to discuss it, I recall that a previous video demonstrated the point by mashing up a dozen or so songs more or less seamlessly to show how little variety exists in pop music today.
I think that that vid was about six minutes. QED.
quickesst
(6,307 posts)....and this video did do something similar. I believe the difference between your experience and mine with the two different videos is that I was more interested in the science this one offered up as evidence for the argument. Had I watched the 6-minute video you are referring to, I probably would have come away with the same opinion that you have. Thanks for replying.
One person's $1000 a bottle Champagne is another person's worthless overpriced wine.
Live and let live. I am not a country music fan, but I will NOT ridicule it or demean those who love it. I've been on the receiving end of the snobbish ridicule of my genres far too often to ridicule someone else's music. Justin Bieber ? Not my thing but....hey whatever floats your boat, doesn't affect me at all. Just don't play him too loudly at 3 AM, please
MissMillie
(38,986 posts)haven't listened to music radio in more than a decade.
I'm more of an NPR listener.
These days I hear a name of a performer and go.... "Who?"
quickesst
(6,307 posts)The only time I listen to the radio is when someone else turns it on. I do enjoy watching and listening to the older performances on YouTube. Takes me back.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,745 posts)quickesst
(6,307 posts).... an automated laser system. After a couple of "incidents" I didn't have that problem anymore.
steve2470
(37,468 posts)Phentex
(16,526 posts)he's the Debbie Gibson of today.
quickesst
(6,307 posts).... although I do think Maroon 5 is a pretty cool name....... for a space colony.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)I've been reminding myself for decades now that older generations like their own stuff better than new stuff.
For a while, my son the musician used to send me new stuff to appreciate, and I did. I've noted with some humor that, now that he's reached 40, he listens to less and less "new" music.
I can also say that pop music has never been a genre I connected to, although there have been songs I liked. My favorite genres are rock, folk, and blues.
I also rarely listen to the radio anymore. The video's point about local vs canned national lists hits home.
All of that said, I'm still always looking for new music that I'll like, and still mostly coming up empty. A couple that I do like aren't really all that "new:"
I like the Eels, whose pop sound contrasts with darker lyrics:
I like Lucas Nelson and Promise of the Real, whose musical roots make him not at all new:
What truly NEW artists are out there that I should tune into? Give me a list!
quickesst
(6,307 posts).... is pretty darn good. Thanks for posting that. As far as a good playlist? You're asking the wrong person. For me it's just few and far between and hit and miss on finding songs I like that are current. I usually make do with the older rock and roll( Uriah Heep, ELO, Zeppelin etc.) Motown, and 80s and 90s country. I know country music is not very well received here, but I like a lot of it so it doesn't really matter what anyone else thinks.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Basically, old country. I grew up with it, and still appreciate Hank Williams Sr. (although I never could stand Jr.), Roger Miller, Johnny Cash, Loretta Lynn, Loudon Wainwright...there's probably a modern country artist or two I'd like, but none come to mind at the moment.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)She's got some brilliant lyrics.
dawg day
(7,947 posts)But a band that will completely surprise most is Kaleo. Believe it or not, they're Icelandic:
Alabama Shakes is another surprise-- the lead singer is a woman, though she sounds like Ray Charles:
Greg Holden is kind of singer-songwriter in the CSNY tradition, I think. This is lovely:
Another singer/songwriter- Reuben Bullock-
&index=6&list=FLjdoMGtEQY32cvxAASkQ02w
And the Rivvrs-- soulful.
&list=FLjdoMGtEQY32cvxAASkQ02w&index=7
And just to connect the 20th and 21st C... This is a cover that is so good, the songwriter (Paul Simon I mean) reached out to promote it.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)I liked them all, and all but Disturbed's cover of "Sound of Silence" were new to me.
As for that cover...I'm someone who simply doesn't do favorites, but if I had to name a favorite song, that would be it. I usually don't like covers, but this one? Despite the lack of the beautiful harmonies from Simon & Garfunkle, it is, in it's own way, more powerful. This newer version tears my heart out; the pain is there to experience. I'm grateful to Disturbed for bringing this song to a whole new generation.
For the rest...I'll be listening to more and updating my playlists!
dawg day
(7,947 posts)That Disturbed singer has a set of pipes, definitely!
MiltonBrown
(322 posts)Well done video.
Even though I disagree with the guy about the Beatles, his explanation of how producers battle for today's airwaves was spot on.
Thankfully there are credible artists doing music for most every taste today if one looks hard enough.
quickesst
(6,307 posts)... As you say there is still good music out there. You just have to look for it. For me it's kind of like being hit by a car . You're not looking for it, and you damn sure don't expect it when it happens. I suppose I'm at that stage of life where the 3 or 400 CDs/albums I've accumulated over the last 30 or 40 years provide me with enough entertainment. Practically all of them were recorded before the year 2000. besides my wife's two Enya CDs, all of them fall into the category of rock and roll, Motown, and pre-2000 country. That's who I am.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I've been asking this question since 1977.
steve2470
(37,468 posts)Matter of fact, I know it was.
I still like disco.
F*** the haters. Live and let live.......
quickesst
(6,307 posts)Rebellious music is one thing. Crappy artificial auto-tuned cookie cutter junk is another. 1976 was a good year, and I like the Bee Gees.