Keep Reaching for the Stars: American Top 40, 50 years ago

[maumann]

I think about this sort of juxtaposition every now and again....when you look at a list of music from (in this instance) 50 years ago and you realize many of these songs still get airplay and/or appear in the zeitgeist, does it mean pop culture has actually slowed down its development, because in 1970 was any music from 1920 being played on the radio or found in pop culture? I don't think so.

I've had those same thoughts. For example, the time span between the 1927 Yankees and the 1968 Tigers is shorter than from the 1968 Tigers to now. So I'm now my grandfather, blathering on about the Swingin' A's or seeing Hank Aaron's 715th on TV.

The reality is probably more that there are still so many of us Boomers out there. We've influenced all aspects of society for the past 60 years, and popular music is definitely a key touchstone of all our shared experiences. No matter where in the country we lived or the demographics, chances were good that we heard and purchased the same hit songs in San Francisco, Detroit, Miami and parts unknown.

I find I have more shared experiences -- same music, same clothes, same yearbooks, same proms -- with someone from North Carolina or New Hampshire who graduated from high school in 1976 than I do with my sister who is 10 years younger than me.

Even into the 1980s, with the rise of MTV, Night Tracks, New Wave and the Second British Invasion, I'd say that was still the case. After that, music (and radio formats) fractured into sub-genres that rarely crossed over. Popular music is still popular to the current generation but it has less influence because radio no longer is the only avenue for music listening.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

I've also thought about it. Radio has experienced a very sad and public demise similar to newspapers. It hasn't seemed to be discussed as much, not that one hospice patient is less deserving than the other.

 

[I Should Coco]

Something else is different with young people in regard to music — at least, in this dad's observation of his kids (now ages 21 and 19) and their friends.

They are all about individual songs, but not artists. Certainly not albums. And their exposure to those songs, obviously, is through social media and online sources. It could be a song, a movie, a YouTube video clip ... all online entertainment, indistinguishable from each other.

When most of us were younger, we'd hear a new song on the radio first. We might ask a friend about that artist or group, and maybe they had the LP, cashette or CD and let us borrow it. Listening to this music, reading the liner notes, scanning Rolling Stone for information about the artist — it was an active experience. Maybe that would prompt us to by the single or album ourselves, or tickets to the artist's concert.

This middle-aged fogey is glad his kids have access to so much information, all the time. But he's also glad he grew up in the pre-Internet era. Waiting and anticipating made things more fun.

 

[Mngwa]

The legion of BTS stans would disagree with you.

 

[I Should Coco]

That's the boy band from South Korea, right? The 1D of the 2020s.

 

[Neutral Corner]

20 million albums sold in less than seven years. That's a lot, especially given that people don't buy albums much anymore.

Bless the K-pop kids. They're the ones who screwed up Trump's big rally in Tulsa, the one where the staff and Ben Carson caught Covid. There were like 100,000 people who signed up for e-tickets. Trump had this big outdoor overflow seating for all the extra bodies, and it turned out that the K-pop kids had trolled them by making reservations. Overflow was empty and the hall was half full. That was the one where you got the photo of dejected Trump getting off the helicopter with his tie undone.

There was a lot of chatter/organizing among that fandom about getting the young'uns out to vote, and the numbers are much much bigger in that group this year.

 

[Oggiedoggie]

20 million albums sold in less than seven years. That's a lot, especially given that people don't buy albums much anymore.

Bless the K-pop kids. They're the ones who screwed up Trump's big rally in Tulsa, the one where the staff and Ben Carson caught Covid. There were like 100,000 people who signed up for e-tickets. Trump had this big outdoor overflow seating for all the extra bodies, and it turned out that the K-pop kids had trolled them by making reservations. Overflow was empty and the hall was half full. That was the one where you got the photo of dejected Trump getting off the helicopter with his tie undone.

There was a lot of chatter/organizing among that fandom about getting the young'uns out to vote, and the numbers are much much bigger in that group this year.

Ben Carson or Herman Cain?

 

[Neutral Corner]

D'oh.

Dead, brain dead, I was close.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

— it was an active experience.

Yes. That was the thing. If you really liked something back then, you had to go out to discover more about it. It wasn't going to knock on the door.

And if you knew ship on the spot, you just knew it. There was no equivalent of the Library of Alexandria in the palm of one's hand.

I have no doubt we are living in the best time relative to ease and comfort, but that was one of the nice things of that bygone period.

 

[Sam Mills 51]

Something else is different with young people in regard to music — at least, in this dad's observation of his kids (now ages 21 and 19) and their friends.

They are all about individual songs, but not artists. Certainly not albums. And their exposure to those songs, obviously, is through social media and online sources. It could be a song, a movie, a YouTube video clip ... all online entertainment, indistinguishable from each other.

When most of us were younger, we'd hear a new song on the radio first. We might ask a friend about that artist or group, and maybe they had the LP, cashette or CD and let us borrow it. Listening to this music, reading the liner notes, scanning Rolling Stone for information about the artist — it was an active experience. Maybe that would prompt us to by the single or album ourselves, or tickets to the artist's concert.

This middle-aged fogey is glad his kids have access to so much information, all the time. But he's also glad he grew up in the pre-Internet era. Waiting and anticipating made things more fun.

One of the big problems is it's now about a hit, something that can be quickly downloaded, processed (in more ways than one) and moving on to something else.

It doesn't give a musician/group any chance to practice, develop and evolve. How many musicians/bands had "meh" initial releases and went on to become something special? These days, if you're not the latest thing immediately, you're yesterday's news.

This gives musicians/groups no chance to find its identity, no chance for trial and error to find out what works and what doesn't. Forget those who actually have overall concepts, tracks that last longer than three minutes or – GASP! – any shred of actual musical talent. And forget this idea of multiple albums, multiple standout ideas and an actual career. Make it three minutes, make it gimmicky as hell, come up with a serious hook and get ready to be put in the rearview mirror as quickly as you were put into the spotlight.

 

[I Should Coco]

So you're saying today's generation (of fans and, certainly, the music business) wouldn't appreciate "Supper's Ready" or some other prog rock clashics?

There are a few groups and artists still working those corners (Tame Impala comes to mind), but mostly what Sam Mills says is true. For better or worse.

 

[Sam Mills 51]

So you're saying today's generation (of fans and, certainly, the music business) wouldn't appreciate "Supper's Ready" or some other prog rock clashics?

A track taking up a whole side of vinyl? What a waste. Complete waste of time. Or something like, according to the so-called modern experts.

The same sorts would probably listen to the first minute of "Firth of Fifth" and wonder where the lyrics are. Great example of meh lyrics, but serious musical chops. And that wouldn't be tolerated by the downloadable sorts, either.

Wonder if they also would crap on "Kashmir," much less "One For The Vine"?

Not at all saying that everything needs to be 10 minutes long, with multiple key changes, including some in minor, and non-4/4 time sigs. It's a tricky balance ... some will do so just because they can and that's just as dumb as boilerplate three-minute stuff with the snare always clanging on three.

Straightforward and stripped down works wonders for some ... see: James Taylor. But others need a little more time, patience and a label that won't automatically toss it after three tracks or, goodness forbid, one album. How many might have been memorable if given some room to find themselves, their voice and their audience?