[Sing4me88]

Liking repetition is hardly a barometer of educational ability..... nor is it a sign of lazy or substandard songwriting. Hook/ear worms are just as allusive in songwriting today than ever surely. They get people reved up and dancing etc just as much as a nice harmony touches the right spot for others and stirs their feelings. One isn't greater than the other - both are an incredible talent. Yes Dylan, Simon etc can write amazing and 'great' songs but can they get thousands of people in a night club in Amsterdam yelling out the 'hook' to a 130+ bpm song layered with synth ear worm after synth ear worm??? Probably not. Those who do the latter are surely 'great' in their own, admittedly, different way....

And it's not a straw person argument by any stretch of the imagination. It's questioning the elitist premise of the argument by pointing out that I (and many many others  know) like modern songwriters but we aren't stupid.

[tone]

I don't think anyone's calling you or other listeners stupid - at least I don't think STC is and I know I'm not. What I am saying is that pop in this century is musically simpler than pop in the 60s-90s, which I find less interesting.

With regard to the ability to string a lot of 'ear worms' together constituting greatness, I beg to differ from you here. An earworm isn't necessarily a great piece of music. It might be, it might not be. Saturday Night by Whigfield is an earworm, but it's not a great song. Abba on the other hand had some great songs that were full of earworms.

The crux of my argument here is this: popularity does not equate with greatness.

Look at the art world. Many 'great' artists were completely ignored, ridiculed or misunderstood during their lives and never made a penny.

Leonard Cohen was (according to the critics) the next James Joyce, but his novels didn't sell. So he became a songwriter instead.

Calvin Harris may be regarded by future generations as a genius. I happen to think he won't.

[Sing4me88]

I think we're actually orientating towards a common, or at least similar, position but from dichotomous ends of a spectrum perhaps. What I'm trying to argue I guess is that there's many forms of 'greatness' - greatness can be complex like the kind of music written by the writers you've mentioned but greatness can also be simple and non-complex like some of the music of the people I've mentioned. I like to appreciate the greatness is both styles whether one is more commercially viable than the other or not but I can't abide by the argument that there are no great songwriters today simply because songwriting is easier, less developed, less complex. I guess I'm wondering that if popularity doesn't define greatness what does? Memorability? Some sportspeople have had great single performances and been remembered as greats because of that. Others have had howlers and been remembered for that - does they fact they're remembered make them 'great'? How much you, I, [insert anyone's name here] like them? Well in that case every and anyone has a claim to greatness I guess.

[tone]

I think you nailed it. Greatness seems to be tied into an enduring popularity, one that feeds into the culture. We'll have to wait another 30+ years to know who today's greats are I suppose.

[MartynRich]

I can't argue with any of that STC, nor would I want to. For me greatness is when a song grabs me by the scruff of the neck and makes feel something. It doesn't matter when or where it was made, nor what genre it's in.

[delb0y]

There's great song-writing happening out there these days, no question. In fact there's so much more of it, so many more ways for it to be released, so many more channels and vehicles and platforms, much of it probably gets lost, or only picked up by a few people.

This is interesting:

The other thing I find very common in those north of 35 is,they stop seeking out new music and only listen to what they liked in their youth,so that demographic wouldn't have a scooby doo if there are good new songs out there or not.

I'm kind of guilty as charged. But it's not because I don't give a Scooby, it's simply because there are only so many hours in the day. Every album I buy means slightly less listening time in my future for something else, after all, I don't only listen to an album once. By the time one gets into one's fifties one owns a lot of albums, CDs, downloads. I'm not going to give up listening to Dylan or CCR or John Prine or Kristofferson or Paul Simon or The Beatles or any of the people that I already love just on the off-chance there'll be something good out there. I do listen to the wireless enough to stumble across new people - Jeffrey Foucault, Darryl Scott, Harry Manx all spring to mind recently - but I'm not going actively looking for it. I suspect I won't listen again to all the albums that I already have in my collection - which is quite sad really.

[Helena4]

The other thing I find very common in those north of 35 is,they stop seeking out new music and only listen to what they liked in their youth,so that demographic wouldn't have a scooby doo if there are good new songs out there or not.

This is totally true. Why is this done? Please listen to some modern music, people. Even if you just stick to genres you already like, the idea of being a songwriter in the current age but yet dismissing all songwriters in the current age (even though they're pros and you're not) is ludicrous. Being older doesn't give you the excuse to be lazy in searching out new music (when music is your passion, you should always be looking, that's non negotiable) - you can be lazy as a young person too and stick to the charts, or what your friends listen to etc - being unadventurous with music is not about age its about laziness.

Harsh much? Sorry. I think I made a bit of a dramatic turn around on this thread - but as much as I see where the sentiment comes from... I find it rather important to keep up with current music, and rather ignorant not to. I will help you though. Here are some great ways I find new music:

This guy reviews new albums coming out. I find his videos quite entertaining and he knows a lot about music. He has a playlist of reviews of favourite albums and organises reviews into genres too, so its very helpful:

The NME is now free and you can pick it up in a few places including  HMV and Topman I beleive. The writing is pretty bland, but I skip through it quickly and pick out artists to look up that look sort of interesting.

BBC Radio 1 Breakfast Show. You can listen to a bit while eating breakfast, or going to work and it's not much of a sacrifice or a commitment. But it will keep you up to date with the general pop goings on (and some random more alternative stuff they will suddenly throw in just to keep it interesting - I think it's a very well done playlist, usually better than most radio shows that just make me sick of everything). And if you miss it but still wanna listen - you can use iplayer! The shows in the evening are pretty odd. The one when I was coming back from school was just awful... Annie Mac's show is after that and has some interesting EDM if your ever feeling curious, but Breakfast is a nice bet to get a good overview of what's currently popular, and some little interesting tit bits they're trying to turn people on to.

Total Guitar Magazine is fun to read for guitar stuff. Nice full tabs of songs at the end and all. Lots of excercises, but also will do band interviews, and a page on up and coming bands. I have found some really enjoyable stuff there.

I haven't tried Radio 6 Music... but I've heard that some of my more alternative bands I found through the above sources have been on there...

Actually look for stuff. Search up "best new indie bands 2015". I did that in July. Find the baby bands that you can see for under £10 before they get on the radio at all. That's great fun. And follow them on facebook. Then sort of follow facebooks reccomendations based on those bands. Oh and talking about facebook get the "bands in town" app on facebook. Make sure you give it a list of all your fav bands and it will tell you when they're doing gigs in your area. But ALSO, it will give you gig reccomendations based on things that are similar - NEW BANDS. And talking about gigs - look at some cool small venues near you and look at whats on.

Oh and when you get turned on to these bands and you go to buy their stuff - check your Amazon reccomendations when the stuffs in your basket.

All of those are good ways to find new stuff. You should invest some time. It's an investment in expanding your musical horizons, which I think should be important to songwriters. In this internet age with all these resources, there's no excuse.

[PopTodd]

Please listen to some modern music, people. Even if you just stick to genres you already like, the idea of being a songwriter in the current age but yet dismissing all songwriters in the current age (even though they're pros and you're not) is ludicrous. Being older doesn't give you the excuse to be lazy in searching out new music (when music is your passion, you should always be looking, that's non negotiable) - you can be lazy as a young person too and stick to the charts, or what your friends listen to etc - being unadventurous with music is not about age its about laziness.

AMEN!

[delb0y]

Wow.

It's not difficult to find new stuff - it's quite easy. But the key thing is this - say I have 45 minutes to listen to an album; do I listen to an album I love, that means something to me, that moves me, that takes me back to a good time, a sad time, or maybe even creates a new special time, that inspires me to write or learn to play the guitar better, that I know has stood the test of time (for me personally, and quite probably millions of others), or a hundred other positive things that I can guarantee? Or do I risk those 45 minutes on something that might do none of the above?

I probably have a thousand albums in my collection that I know are worthy of my 45 minutes. I'm sure there are a million albums that I don't have that would also be worthy. But I'm also damn sure there are a hundred million that aren't.

So how do I spend my 45 minutes? Stick or twist?

Another factor, as I alluded to above, is that there are probably not enough 45 minute listening blocks in the rest of my life to properly listen to all the albums again that I already own. I hate the thought that I might never sit down and listen to Axis Bold as Love or The Allman Brothers at Fillmore East or Highway 61 Revisited or The Village Green Appreciation Society again. That's not something I going to trade anything I might read about in the NME or hear on Radio 1 for.

But as I also alluded to above - I do listen to new artists, I do "discover" new albums and acts. I have the balance just right (for me - albeit, clearly not for you) - there are a few radio shows, some YouTube journeys, and a bunch of musical friends and bandmates that keep me in new material. I go and watch a lot of live gigs. I know a whole host of songwriters - that's what we do, we support each other, we sit down and we share people (old and new) we've discovered, and we trade songs, and we go to open mics and acoustic nights. That's why I said I know great song-writing is still alive and well. I don't see how that's dismissing all songwriters in the current age - but hey ho.

Sorry for being so lazy and ludicrous!  

Oh, and the answer is, I stick nine times out of ten and twist once. It's a good ratio. For me. But then I only do this stuff for fun.

[tone]

I think it's worth pointing out something that the under 25's probably fail to appreciate about the over 35's and that's pressures on time.

When you get to your mid 30s you suddenly have a whole lot less time to spend on everything, because your partner and kids have expanded (not literally!) to fill pretty much every available gap. Of course, some people stick to the music they liked when they were 17, but then some people stick to the EVERYTHING they liked when they were 17, and never widen their horizons. It's not an age thing per se, it's a temperament thing.

Personally, I'm always listening to new music, but I'm sorry to report that less than 1% of it is ever likely to be played on radio 1. In fact, if it wasn't for my strange fascination with Die Antwoord, that would be 0% :p New music for me is about exploring what I like, not wading through what I don't. That's not to say I don't stretch myself; I do. But I generally dislike the vast amounts of compression, quantisation and tuning on EVERY DAMN INSTRUMENT AND VOICE in much pop music, particularly the electronic stuff. With all the humanity stripped away, it's not only bland, but the compression literally hurts my ears after a while. It's like listening to metal all over again.

So while I agree that finding new music is important, I don't think it has to be 'new' as in what the radio 1 producers decide is exciting. It can be Debussy or Duke Ellington or Die Antwoord. Just because it may have been composed 100 years ago doesn't stop it being new to me

[tina m]

die antwoord are fabulous! thanks tone for reminding me of a  modern band i do realy like

i have listened to a awful lot of music in my life & you do get to a point where you think 'ive heard all this before & better & im fed up wasting all this time trying to stay up to date when i just dont like most of  it any more'

[Sing4me88]

I'm gonna give a shout out to Against the Current as a modern but lesser known band. I came across them a good while back through initially seeing their cover of the 1975 Chocolate on YouTube and got into a lot of their covers and I'm digging their original songs now.

Also, I think there should be more appreciation for the lyric writing in modern pop music. People may not like the production, style etc but the lyric writing in some of them is exceptional and as good as the 'greats' and may I add without trying to offend anyone of a standard that many on here would give their right arm for. Yes some of it is repetitive and repeats the hook quite a bit but songs like 'Cold Water' and 'Closer' are very well crafted lyrically even if some don't rate the music/production.

[Buc McMaster]

Being 64, I grew up listening to the songs from what some have pointed to as a golden age that has passed.  But it seems to me the folks that grew up listening in the 20s and 30s would think that was the golden age of songwriting.  The bottom line is it's all subjective, tied to our points of reference for what's a great song and what's not.  For example, when I compare Simons' 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover with Princes' 1999......well.....there's no comparison there at all for me.  But both were major hits and widely accepted as great songs.

I don't listen to nor buy any music anymore, old or new, and haven't for many years.  The only tunes I hear are the soundtracks of TV commercials and what songs I listen to posted here.  No radio, no CDs, no iTunes downloads.  Nothing.  Why is that?  I dunno.  I really don't think I'm missing out on anything spectacular........do you?

[Helena4]

Well I'm glad at least Pop Todd agrees with me haha.

I do get that as the laziest student on Earth with no sense of priority I spend far too much time on these things. Though I wasn't saying to listen to whole albums of random things. Just pick up one of the sources on occasion, look up a song from an artist. Skip through a few, see if you like the vibe. When you find a vibe you do like - then maybe you can try an album. Looking up a couple songs takes like 15 minutes. And as I said, as a young person I can do the same thing whenI decide to listen to an album. I could listen to a Smiths album AGAIN or I can make myself listen to something from one of the other bands I've heard of from one of the sources. It seems like an annoying sacrifice to me too. I do it though, and eventually I find something that I want to listen to over and over. And the experience was worth it.

But yes I sympathise that I have more time. Just the fact that you can only do less of something, doesn't mean you shouldn't do it at all.

Personally, I'm always listening to new music, but I'm sorry to report that less than 1% of it is ever likely to be played on radio 1. In fact, if it wasn't for my strange fascination with Die Antwoord, that would be 0% :p New music for me is about exploring what I like, not wading through what I don't. That's not to say I don't stretch myself; I do. But I generally dislike the vast amounts of compression, quantisation and tuning on EVERY DAMN INSTRUMENT AND VOICE in much pop music, particularly the electronic stuff. With all the humanity stripped away, it's not only bland, but the compression literally hurts my ears after a while. It's like listening to metal all over again.

Haha Radio 1 is not admittedly where I find my favourite new bands. I have some songs I enjoy there, so I think its good fun, but mostly I feel that its just important to keep in the loop. It's like market research. That's why its like 3rd on my list. I haven't actually tuned in all summer... It's really just something I do when going to school. But as you can see from my long list (which does leave out things), there are so many ways that do not involve Radio 1.

OMG though I agree with the over production of everything in modern music. Its bloody stifling. So many songs I hear that just feel like they are drowning under this artifical haze that seeming to make my bloody brain hazy cos I don't seem to be able to distinguish any personality in the music through it. I have bands I've liked be ruined by getting "better" producers... like, fuck I liked their imperfections - they are not robots, stop that! There are times that I am enjoying the smoothness of modern tracks... and then there are times where I just want to rampage into studios across the world and smash their computers over the head with a giant 80s mixer desk and scream "are we humans? or are we dance music machines?!". Though its not just dance music it happens in lots of genres. But there are also bands who make modern production sound very human - they obvously have producers who understand that having everything blend into each other because its so fucking compressed that its practically one thing is not at all sonically interesting. I enjoy these bands and there are plenty of them too.

Don't diss the whole genre of metal though. Metal can be really enjoyable and certainly emotive. plenty of people get metal wrong though. Metalheads get so obsessed about speed... speed does not equal quality. So yeah theres plenty of sucky metal for that reason. But there's some metal I enjoy. I'd never write off a genre.

So while I agree that finding new music is important, I don't think it has to be 'new' as in what the radio 1 producers decide is exciting. It can be Debussy or Duke Ellington or Die Antwoord. Just because it may have been composed 100 years ago doesn't stop it being new to me

I also agree with this. I do this a lot too.

Being 64, I grew up listening to the songs from what some have pointed to as a golden age that has passed.  But it seems to me the folks that grew up listening in the 20s and 30s would think that was the golden age of songwriting.  The bottom line is it's all subjective, tied to our points of reference for what's a great song and what's not.  For example, when I compare Simons' 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover with Princes' 1999......well.....there's no comparison there at all for me.  But both were major hits and widely accepted as great songs.

I don't listen to nor buy any music anymore, old or new, and haven't for many years.  The only tunes I hear are the soundtracks of TV commercials and what songs I listen to posted here.  No radio, no CDs, no iTunes downloads.  Nothing.  Why is that?  I dunno.  I really don't think I'm missing out on anything spectacular........do you?

Yes you have missed everything.

This just seems like a miserable existence for a songwriter. How can you say you love music, so much that you spend your time making music and yet you won't listen to it? That is not love.

....................What is love? Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me.... that's in my head now  

Anyway, yep it's definitely subjective. I'm sure people who were 35 in the 80s had loved 60s classics but hated everything about the 80s. But there was so much good there.

[diademgrove]

Over the past 7 days I've listened to two Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds albums, two Kate Bush albums (missed how good she was first time around), and the new albums by P J Harvey and Sigur Ros. Every once in a while I force myself to listen to the top 10. Some of it I like, most of it I don't.

For me music comes into two categories. Music I like and music I don't. The categories are not set in stone because, as Kate Bush illustrates, some people move from one category to the other over time.

There are some modern songs that I think are definitely in the great song category. Little Talks by Of Monsters and Men is one, PJ Harvey The Orange Monkey is another.

Taylor Swift, even though I'm not personally keen, is a great songwriter who will stand the tests of time.

Keith