|
|
 |
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 12, 2018 - 12:15 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
OnyaBirri
(Member)
|
I listen to a lot of downtempo electronica. It's interesting to note that even newer tracks are either sampling or recreating funk drumbeats from as early as the late-1960s.
Add to this the fact that many tracks also sample or use Brasilian and Afro-Cuban rhythms, which IMO have a timeless quality. (Those Afro-Cuban rhythms go back centuries.)
Given these examples, when I think about the longevity of popular music, I wonder about the degree to which certain rhythms will contribute to a given track feeling either dated or timeless.
I also wonder about the degree to which recording fidelity has contributed or will contribute to pop music longevity. Today, there are kids who listen to pop music from the 1960s and 1970s, during which time hi-fi recording had been developed and was more or less perfected. By contrast, very few kids in the 1970s were listening to pop music recorded on Edison cylinders. To what degree did the primitive recording quality make those songs seem dated, and how much was attributed to the music itself?
It's virtually impossible to answer these questions. Recorded pop music has been around only for so long. Eddie Cantor, Gene Austin, and Al Jolson were huge stars in their day, and are now all but forgotten. At the same time, Sinatra, the Beatles, James Brown, Curtis Mayfield, and Led Zeppelin seem to have staying power.
It will be interesting to see if, in another 50 or 100 years, we have certain records that have become popular standards in the way that we now have songs that are standards.
Just some random musings on my day off from work.
|
|
|
|
