What do you think our grandchildren will think of our music today?

I can only relate my experience with my grandchildren (three of them are adults already), they like all sorts of music and don’t have any specific favorites. They enjoy show music, rock and roll, country, “modern’ and jazz equally.

i don’t care, just as long as they stay off the damn lawn!

I like music from my grandparents’ era, although I don’t personally connect to it.

I cannot see some of our music being as long lasting as some of the music from my grandparents era. They had Elvis, we have Lady GaGa…

Music it’s made with the same elements today. Our taste is different if we compare side by side, but it need to be a composition to work as a pattern of a melody creation. I think old people will think young people are crazy as young people will think old people are crazy. It’s not the music evolution…. it’s taste.

I hope they are disgusted <—warning.. that is really bad. and NSFW

@jp – ugh. That is bad.

They’ll have to go backward several decades from today to find good music. When they do, they will eventually sample music from the 70’s and say, “All those musicians and musical groups back then sure had their shit together. That’s some damn fine music.”

I think some of it will definitely be remembered well. No one thinks the current “new music” will be remembered, but some it definitely will.

God only knows what sort of music my grandchildren will have, that’s at least 25 years from now…I don’t know what they’ll think of the music nowadays, I hope they know it’s no reflection upon me lol

what are they saying, granddaddy?

@johnpowell – I so did not like that song. I think maybe some of the indie rock stuff of today will become classics, but not a song like that one. Absolute shite, that was.

I always think, what are going to be the songs in the nursing homes of 2045? I can just see some oldster shuffling along to “Sweet Child O’ Mine” or “Faith”. And then I laugh. And then I remember, I’m going to be humming M-E-T-H-O-D O-F L-O-V-E, so I need to shut up. Eh, people young enough to be my kids sample Steely Dan, which is my parents’ generation. I think we’ll be OK.

So much music today is a product of marketing and not talent, I doubt anyone will remember it as more than a footnote. But I would like it if our grandchildren felt about Radiohead the same way this generation feels about Pink Floyd

@Capt_Bloth Agreed.

Well, my kids discovered my Queen albums and love them as much as me, so I am not sure on this one. It seems the lines have been blurred a bit. My Dad loved Perry Como and Jim Reeves, who I tolerated, but never could really like very much. That does not seem to be the same today. Not sure what is at work here.

Well like Maxine the Great says “Do you realize in about 40 years we’ll have thousands of old ladies running around with tattoos? and—rap music will be the golden oldies! (Now that’s scary)”

I’m 22 (turning 23) and I personally like a lot of “old music”, like jazz, some classic, funk etc. but I figure the way I listen to it today is in a different context than what people heard when it came out at the time. People always connect music to events happening at the time they are exposed to it. Something that future generations of listeners will “miss”. If I dig up an old record from a second hand store, I see it as “old” and thus listen to it differently already.

I am into a lot of Electronic music genres, which have profound qualities and richness. There is also a large underground community connected to it along with parties and regular meet-up.
If my grandchildren would one day find my old records in the attic, they would miss all that was around me and that music.
Maybe they’ll think it’s total noisy crap that I listened to… but they won’t have the same spirit and motivation to do the things me and my generation do at this day ‘n age. They will have different problems, different virtues and different goals.

Then there is “timeless music” which will speak to almost every generation to come.

I’m 26 yrs old and I can care less about our modern music. I personally like very little music from the 90s through today. I’m more into classic rock and jazz. I love the Beatles and if my grandchildren have any sense of good music I’m sure they’ll appreciate our classic stuff. Sometimes I feel that I was born in the wrong era. I guess some of the modern stuff will eventually go on to be classics as well, I just haven’t really heard anything that’s worth it yet.

Some our grandchildren will hate it, some will love it. I always assumed everyone was like me as it related to music. I liked what was around when I was growing up, but I had a deep appreciation for what came before it, what inspired it, and what inspired that, and what inspired that before it. And I’ve continued to like new music…I will never stop looking for things that are new, or even new to me. There is plenty of music out there which has been in existence for decades which I’ve never heard which I’m sure I’d love. But what I’ve found out is that most people aren’t like me. Most people think their music is the best music, and when they get out of their prime music listening (generally High School) days, if they DO listen to new music, it’s the same general type of music. People don’t by and large seek to broaden their horizons musically, only true audiophiles do so. I think there are a lot of us on Fluther, but I think we’re not in the majority.

And just like there is good music out there today and unspeakably horrible abortions such as what @johnpowell posted, this was true a decade ago when Nirvana created some really revolutionary music, and then 300 other bands tried to sound just like them and created a bunch of music no one will remember. This was true 2 decades ago when Motley Crue put on make up and sang about girls and sex and partying, suddenly every band put on makeup and sang about sex and girls and partying. In the 70s everyone ripped off Zeppelin. In the 60s everyone ripped off the Beatles. In the 50s everyone ripped off Elvis. But who do we remember? The originals. That music will always live on because it’s good music. And in the future, the good music of today will resonate with people who love and appreciate music, while the bad music will be forgotten along with the For Squirrels’, the Baltimoras and the Fabulous Poodles’ of yesteryear, while the vast majority will listen to what’s popular and really just allow themselves to be oblivious to anything that doesn’t sound like what they like.

@johnpowell

God, I am so sick of that 12-year-old-boy-on-PCP scream that pervades emo and screamo. It’s god-awful.

@johnpowell and @DominicX – the fucking robot voice is what pisses me off, I mean, get an original fucking idea. Why does EVERY SINGLE SONG these days have to have the robot voice? It pisses me off, because I never thought I’d bitch about the music the younger people were listening to, and it’s really not like that…I just want someone to, oh, I don’t know, do something ORIGINAL for a change.

@dalepetrie

Every song has the auto-tune sound because that’s the fad right now. Ever listened to ‘80s music? Every song has the same beat, from all different genres. It all uses the same drums and same beat. It’s just what’s popular and so bands that didn’t use it before (like the Black Eyed Peas) are joining the bandwagon. I hope it passes soon, but that doesn’t mean I don’t like any music with it. T-Pain was the one who started it and I like plenty of his music. But, it’ll be gone soon as are most fads.

Yes, exactly, see my previous answer…I grew up in the 80s and like I said, the music my peers listened to was all patterned on Motley Crue. And then in college in the early 90s, for years after Kurt Cobain died, EVERYTHING sounded like Nirvana. I know it’s the fad, and it always pisses me off, it’s just that most fads are based on something good, this fad is based on sounding like a robot…I mean, that was cliched in the 1970s.

@dalepetrie

Well, that’s just a matter of opinion. Personally, I don’t think the sound is that bad. The only thing I don’t like is that almost anyone can become a singer with auto-tune.

Well, all I can say to that is, the people who talked in monotone robot voices when I was a kid some 30+ years ago were regarded as the “special” kids. Not that it sounds bad per se, I liked Kanye’s song that used it in spite of it, and I like the new Black Eyed Peas in spite of it, but where’s the talent? Where’s the innovation? Where’s anything to set robot voice a in one song apart from robot voice b in another song. I like different artists because each one brings something unique of themselves to their art. If they all try to sound like everyone else, it’s defeats the purpose, it masks their talent, it’s lazy, it’s cliched and frankly it sounds just like the stupid kids did 30 years ago when they were pretending to be the robot from Lost in Space.

Intelligent and interesting music will still be appreciated.

They will be loving the music of the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s passing right over the first half of the 21st century.

I hope that the good will float to the top of the pile, in every genre. Music changes, and tastes change, but the power of a really good song should continue. Whether it’s country or rap (neither of which is a genre I personally love), a powerful song, even if it has nothing to do with anything, will carry on, if only because I will keep requesting it from DJs all across the country. I’ll be proud to play my music for my grandchildren, and if they don’t like it, screw ‘em! young whippersnappers

@ChazMaz – not a fan of anything since the 80s? Interesting….

well ‘today’, we have a helluva lot more artists, and a lot more of a variety, i think. so i really can’t imagine what they would say about ‘our music’, since there’s such an awfully large amount of it. i don’t necessarily think that the artists who are famous are all the best though. so it really can go either way.

Pretty much after the 80’s we have had nothing but one hit wonders and booty call songs.
The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, ELO, Chicago, Elvis, And the list goes on.
These individuals were unique and original. And, as much as having songs that were sexual. (it is part of life) It was not the meat and potatoes of their craft. The groups of today make their money not only for the sake of money. Apparent in their music videos all that bling bling . But, exploit sex (not a surprise) and eagerly and openly re-constitute the music of the past to have success.

Not to say there have not been some talent since the 80’s. There has been some. But nothing as consistent and as pure as what once was.

@ChazMaz – I think you might just need to look harder to find the gems in the 90s and the 00s than you had to before that. There is plenty in music, including believe it or not rap music which is not simply about sex and money and bling. And music that celebrates the vacuous parts of life existed even in the 1950s, it’s just that they were a hell of a lot more subtle. I mean, if that’s your biggest complaint, even if the music is not for you, look no further than Nirvana. They, along with all the other so-called ‘grunge’ bands of the early 90s, took music away from the ‘hair metal’ bands of the late 80s who sang about sex, drugs and rock and roll, and actually SAID something with their music. I would dare say that Nirvana changed rock and roll forever in a way every bit as significant as the Beatles (who are by the way the single most important rock band that will ever exist in my opinion). Essentially, what they did, was via appreciating the music of the underground scene over the previous 20 years…the stuff that the VAST majority of people had never heard, they took this type of music and turned it into something a bit more catchy and thus commercially viable (in addition to having something to say). That made people sit up and listen, and to become curious about new music and music they’d overlooked. And as a result, today it doesn’t matter what kind of music you listen to, someone is making new music you will like. We’ve got everything from Fleet Foxes to Slipknot and everything in between these days…if you can’t find something with that amount of variety out there all under the broad umbrella of rock and roll, you just ain’t tryin’ brother.

I said, “Not to say there have not been some talent since the 80’s. ”

No question with that talent there has and will always be variety.

But as much as I do like Nirvana, comparing them as influential as the Beatles is ridiculous.
I know where you are coming from. But way off target. And that was my point.
Times have changes. That freedom and influence of past band are lost for ever.
Don’t get confused with influence and creativity. There was a time you had it both and it rocked the world. Crossed all barriers.

@ChazMaz – The Pixies. De La Soul. Radiohead. A Tribe Called Quest. Wilco. Jeff Buckley. Arcade Fire. All from the 90s and 00s. It’s not just all just booty bass and vocoders. But you have to seek out the good stuff. Top 40 radio isn’t playing everything that’s out there.

@dalepetrie – Fleet Foxes are awesome. I like that whole Animal Collective/Grizzly Bear/Department of Eagles/Fleet Foxes/Avey Tare grouping of bands. The musicianship of these bands are fantastic.

Yes, I love my rock music. I’m gonna be 90-something, and if it’s good, I’ll be shaking my cane along with it. :D

@ChazMaz – I think you’re missing the longview on Nirvana to be honest. Cobain’s vigil was no less significant than Lennon’s. Sure, their career was not as long and sure they didn’t sell as many records, but for me it’s about span of future influence. I truly believe they not only put forth a body of work which was highly influential, but one which will continue to be highly influential, and I also believe they, much as did the Beatles, changed the way popular culture looked at rock and roll. Before the Beatles, bands didn’t write their own music. Bands did not evolve musically, they did not change over time. Bands did not say anything worth being said. Just prior to Nirvana, music had reached a cultural and creative impass much like what was seen in the late 50s and early 60s. Remember, hair metal was king…and it was people like Desmond Child and Richard Marx sitting behind the scenes pumping out tunes for the day’s hitmakers in the same way that Holland Dozier Holland and Carole King did in the early days of rock and roll. And even when bands were supposedly writing their own music, they were borrowing liberally from each others’ sounds….everyone sounded exactly the same. For a while, every new lipstick laden hair metal band had to have a name starting with W (Warrant, Winger, White Lion, Whitesnake, etc.). These bands never reached out and tried anything new…they recycled the same old themes of sex, drugs, rock and roll and girls…girls…girls. Just like everyone wanted to be Elvis in 1957, everyone wanted to be Motley Crue in 1987. They weren’t saying anything, they weren’t branching out, they weren’t evolving. Nirvana renewed what the Beatles showed us, by looking simultaneously forwards and backwards, as did the Beatles, as did Elvis. I dare say in 40 years, you will find as many bands listing Nirvana as an influence as the Beatles.

A few years ago, my kids were going to Ozzfest. Now, they are copying my Bob Dylan and Beatle CDs.

@filmfann – it’s all good, I’ve been to 3 Ozzfests AND I have the entire Dylan and Beatles discographies on my Zune.