Not surprised at all. Is the quality of the content? The curation of the streaming services? Both? Something else?
This only means falling in popularity in the music marketing outlet you are interested in. Or it could simply be yet another New Music Sucks thread.
What gatekeeping? In the current system, anyone can get their music out and up on streaming services. And anyone does. The major labels still act as gatekeepers in a marginalized sense, but since the paradigms have changed, they're hungry for those who make a splash on social media, or who can create trifles that easily slot into multiple playlists. It's not that no one is creating good music. It's that the shelf life of new music is about 24 hours. That's not long enough to sustain a career on the basis of new music. It's continual churn, and real art doesn't have a chance to get discovered at all. Most playlists favor easy variations on a theme, so there's not a lot of chance for discovery there, either. Very little music makes ANY impression outside of a narrow stylistic silo, even if it has some traction. So music is made for silos. And so little music develops broad reach. In light of all this, it's no surprise that new music, siloed and packaged, and with don't-blink-or-you'll-miss-it promotion, is losing popularity.
I'm not sure that I count 18 months as the dividing line between new and old music... but I don't pretend to be in touch with these things
Me neither...but I've thought about this at times and it seems to make sense. There always *was* good/great music and there always will be. It's not about THE MUSIC. It's about societal/cultural mindset. A lot of people on forums such as this one come, or are heavily influenced, by a society which put an incredibly heavy value on music. The love for the music transcended the music itself in ways which today's mind set (generally speaking) can't begin to fathom. While there was always great music, great music was never as much a part of daily life as it was it one certain period which people of our age group are from, directly or indirectly. It was a phase that's over and done with. There's music coming out today that's probably as great as the music from back then....the difference is that "back then" it was like oxygen. Today it's just a part of a multi course meal which is great to have but not essential.
I'd be curious to know how many people on this forum consider a release from 19 months ago "old music."
This is what kills me about the articles about that study. The definition of “old music” is silly. According to the authors of that study, the two most recent Taylor Swift records are considered old
People were done buying the Saturday Night Fever and Grease soundtracks during by the time 1979 rolled around. Or at least sales had cooled off some.
All these “statistics” mean nothing. Maybe during lockdown people bought more music and now less. Maybe increase in petrol prices and inflation affected sales this year. What is the pattern over a longer period? Who produced those figures and what interest do they represent? Just an excuse for yet another thread contrasting new vs, old music
There’s a couple of points to make on that. Older music is much more accessible now than ever before. It’s not like you could waltz into a record store in the 80’s and easily find people demanding ol’ 78’s. Everything is at your fingertips these days from Sousa to the Beatles and beyond; sky is the limit and the younger generation that appreciates older music will take advantage. The other thing is the market is more divided than ever before. Who would have thought Bad Bunny would dominate the America, at least not to the extent he is now. Part of it is the market shrank but there’s also a broader representation with streaming. All walks of the American life have visibility.