You seem to have a bias where the only music that matters to you is Intelligent Dance Music and maybe classical.
I listened to a bit of Ulrich Schnauss while typing this (Blumenthal which played into Clear Day) and…it was aight. I don’t usually listen to dance music, so there’s probably something I’m missing, but the way you talked it up as the only modern music that matters, I was expecting some crazy composition techniques that you’d never hear in anything even remotely pop-adjacent.
notice how Weird Al parodies have more staying power than the songs he’s parodying
I can name one song where I think this is true (Ridin’ Dirty > White and Nerdy.) Seriously I have no idea where this comes from.
Notice how Elvis, the ‘king of rock’ has no staying power?
But what about the Beatles? They have a lot more longevity and aren’t that much younger. Elvis was the king of an embryonic form of Rock and Roll, and in general I don’t think the earliest versions of genres age well. The earliest forms of hip hop are generally seen as being cheesy and having extremely simple flows, and if you try to throw back to them today, you’re seen as making a shallow parody of hip hop, but when you get to the styles that came to prominence in the 90s, the songs are still widely listened to and beloved. Anecdotally I have trouble seeing pre-bebop jazz as jazz. Bebop is what brought in so much of the complexity that we associate with jazz today.
Schnauss doesn’t rewrite the rules and has even gone on record as saying that the techniques used by classical composers for traditional instruments translate very well to making music with electronics. Instead of expecting something that tries to set itself apart as much as possible from what came before, I’m referring to artists that build upon the ideas of the past.
Another artist who you’ve probably never heard of that fits this bill is William Orbit. He’s already bigger than Schnauss and way more recognized because of his collaborations. I guarantee if you haven’t heard of him, you’ve heard a song he’s collaborated on.
Listen to some of his solo stuff: Hello Waveforms, My Oracle Lives Uptown, Strange Cargo 5. He actually ‘recently’ released a new album called The Painter and I highly recommend it. It’s the same concept as with Schnauss. They don’t ignore what came before; they learn from and integrate it into something more.
I think the longevity of the Beatles compared to Elvis coincides with how much younger they are. Sure, they’re not “that much younger,” but the difference seems to linearly relate to their staying power; I’d expect the Beatles to be as relevant as Elvis is now in a few years.
That’s not to say there’s no chance for a brief resurgence of any of their music. Look at how fusion from the 80s made a comeback a few years ago. It didn’t lead or change the direction music is going, but people could still find value in it after the “been there, done that” phase has passed.
You seem to have a bias where the only music that matters to you is Intelligent Dance Music and maybe classical.
I listened to a bit of Ulrich Schnauss while typing this (Blumenthal which played into Clear Day) and…it was aight. I don’t usually listen to dance music, so there’s probably something I’m missing, but the way you talked it up as the only modern music that matters, I was expecting some crazy composition techniques that you’d never hear in anything even remotely pop-adjacent.
I can name one song where I think this is true (Ridin’ Dirty > White and Nerdy.) Seriously I have no idea where this comes from.
But what about the Beatles? They have a lot more longevity and aren’t that much younger. Elvis was the king of an embryonic form of Rock and Roll, and in general I don’t think the earliest versions of genres age well. The earliest forms of hip hop are generally seen as being cheesy and having extremely simple flows, and if you try to throw back to them today, you’re seen as making a shallow parody of hip hop, but when you get to the styles that came to prominence in the 90s, the songs are still widely listened to and beloved. Anecdotally I have trouble seeing pre-bebop jazz as jazz. Bebop is what brought in so much of the complexity that we associate with jazz today.
Thanks for the constructive response.
Schnauss doesn’t rewrite the rules and has even gone on record as saying that the techniques used by classical composers for traditional instruments translate very well to making music with electronics. Instead of expecting something that tries to set itself apart as much as possible from what came before, I’m referring to artists that build upon the ideas of the past.
Another artist who you’ve probably never heard of that fits this bill is William Orbit. He’s already bigger than Schnauss and way more recognized because of his collaborations. I guarantee if you haven’t heard of him, you’ve heard a song he’s collaborated on.
Listen to some of his solo stuff: Hello Waveforms, My Oracle Lives Uptown, Strange Cargo 5. He actually ‘recently’ released a new album called The Painter and I highly recommend it. It’s the same concept as with Schnauss. They don’t ignore what came before; they learn from and integrate it into something more.
I think the longevity of the Beatles compared to Elvis coincides with how much younger they are. Sure, they’re not “that much younger,” but the difference seems to linearly relate to their staying power; I’d expect the Beatles to be as relevant as Elvis is now in a few years.
That’s not to say there’s no chance for a brief resurgence of any of their music. Look at how fusion from the 80s made a comeback a few years ago. It didn’t lead or change the direction music is going, but people could still find value in it after the “been there, done that” phase has passed.