Has the Meaning of the Music Changed

[TMinthePM]

My brother sent me a short video he made to accompany a recording of Surfing' USA. You know, guys paddling about, riding the curl, etc. But the sound track was not the original 1963 recording, but something much nearer to now. Mike's "old voice" is not what it used to be. But then, neither am I. And I got this odd feeling, not quite nostalgia.

nos·tal·gi·a  (nŏ-stăl′jə, nə-)
n.
1. A bittersweet longing for things, persons, or situations of the past.
2. The condition of being homesick; homesickness.

No, that's not it.

What I mean is that, while the art, the recordings, are locked in and will always sound exactly the same, we our culture and society change, and with that our relationship to the art it has produced.

So, while hearing old Mike did not inspire me to head on out to the beach this morning, it did impart a sense of life-affirmation in despite the piling up of the years.

Hearing him sing When I Grow Up during the 50th evoked another response - a weird inversion of meaning not nostalgic but ruminative.

[KDS]

I really don't think music is treated like art these days.  The mainstream music industry is producing stars, not artists.

It seems like it's treated as something to dance to, or something to have playing in your ear buds while you're jogging. 

I think the album as an artform is all but dead.  The days of people buying an album, taking it home, looking at the artwork, and listening intently seem to be over. 

I really think that the uprise of Mp3 as a valid form of media is the main reason.  Instead of buying an album, one hears a song, and they just go online and download said song.  No more sifting through an entire album to find that hidden deep cut gem. 

[rickymyfataar]

Can you share the video here? I would like to see it

[rab2591]

What I mean is that, while the art, the recordings, are locked in and will always sound exactly the same, we our culture and society change, and with that our relationship to the art it has produced.

I've noticed that my perceptions of these songs have evolved over time. I got back into listening to the Beach Boys (about 10 years ago) because it drew me back to my childhood where I spend a lot of time on the beach. It made me remember the harmonies I loved that I'd hear via the Beach Boys greatest hits cassette tape that I listened to when I was a kid.

Now I've forgotten the feeling of that connection and listen to the music for a different reason; not for nostalgia but for pure enjoyment of what the music is. I'm sure at some point my connection to this music will revert back to the influenced feeling of nostalgia for one reason or another.

As for society changing my perception of the music; I think the hipster/media outlook on this music ("Brian is a genius!") is one reason why I peered more deeply into the songs and helped me develop a newfound understanding of the music. Society's outlook on music may change my perception yet again depending on the influence that society/culture have on me in the future.

[TMinthePM]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4RSmusDfzg

[the captain]

The meaning of music--all music, not just the Beach Boys--always changes. It inevitably changes for one person over time because that person becomes someone else (hopefully): older, wiser, more experienced, whatever. It inevitably changes as it passes the ears of different people because a 15-year-old in 2017 can't possibly take the same meaning that a 15-year-old in 1967 would, just due to context. I'd actually go further and say music has no inherent meaning whatsoever, and all its meaning depends on the listener. Often the creator would know the listeners (more or less) and so s/he can create music for those listeners to result in something like a shared experience, but even then the experience (and thus meaning) is presumably a little different for everyone.

This is also why KDS and I have disagreed ad nauseum--and I think I'm safe in saying he and I can respectfully just leave it at that gentlemanly disagreement--about modern versus older music, and how it will be remembered. I think older people can't possibly experience modern music in the way it's being experienced by the generation it is by and for. So what I may reject as transient trash (just like my grandparents did Elvis Presley and my parents did GnR, Beastie Boys, De La Soul, or Bon Jovi, all of which either still exist with followings or, in the case of Beastie Boys, are still respected), a different generation may connect with deeply, and their shared experience will also most likely grow and change over time. They will revisit their music later with whatever other angles they have, etc., and that's fine. It isn't about quality so much as what was the soundtrack to your life, or in the case of popular music, shared lives.

So yes, the meaning of the music has changed, and will change, always, for everyone (except maybe mentally/emotionally stunted people).

[rab2591]

Well put, Captain.

That 15 year olds in 2017 can still find deep meaning in this Beach Boys music from the 1960s is amazing - though I guess not surprising. At one Brian Wilson concert a little over a year ago, an older person close to the band asked me and a friend how we got into The Beach Boys, specifically Brian Wilson. She was really inquisitive as to why we younger people were so interested in this older music. I forget what I told her at the time, but I'll never forget her happiness about a newer generation picking up the torch for this band.

No matter what era I'm sure there will always be some people who will find meaning in this music.

[SurfRapGrungeFiend]

The key word here is EVOLVE

[TMinthePM]

Try this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XoOV8dfM1I

[TMinthePM]

The meaning of the music has "evolved." I like that.

[Magic Transistor Radio]

I really don't think music is treated like art these days.  The mainstream music industry is producing stars, not artists.

It seems like it's treated as something to dance to, or something to have playing in your ear buds while you're jogging. 

I think the album as an artform is all but dead.  The days of people buying an album, taking it home, looking at the artwork, and listening intently seem to be over. 

I really think that the uprise of Mp3 as a valid form of media is the main reason.  Instead of buying an album, one hears a song, and they just go online and download said song.  No more sifting through an entire album to find that hidden deep cut gem. 

Over all I think you are correct. But there is still an indie movement that respects the art of the album. A friend of mine also in his late 30s made fun of me for still having cds and dvds. I also make itunes playlists and all, and some bands only have a few songs worthy to get. But if I respect an artist and they put out good albums I will by the cd.

[Magic Transistor Radio]

I would like to recommend some modern artists I think are album worthy.
Beach House, Fleet Foxes, Princess Chelsea, Radar Bros, to name a few.

[rab2591]

I would like to recommend some modern artists I think are album worthy.
Beach House, Fleet Foxes, Princess Chelsea, Radar Bros, to name a few.

I'm looking for some new music; if it's not too much trouble could you delve into what albums I should look at from the bands you listed?

[the captain]

For those interested in new music, some of us discuss a wide variety of it pretty regularly in the General Music forum. Nothing for '17 up yet but there's quite a bit in 2016 we've noted. I did a pretty robust year-end playlist, for example, that would offer some suggestions, and many others have suggested music as well. For the curious, check it out.

[guitarfool2002]

Pop music is where it was in the late 50's and early to mid 60's in terms of single songs versus albums. The kids in the 60's could afford to buy a 45rpm of a song they heard on the radio for 59 cents or whatever...versus 3 to 4 dollars for an album. Albums were for sophisticated listeners who could afford it, in those days. Or, for kids whose parents could either afford to buy them albums or kids who got them as gifts. The single was the driving force of pop music, and it was geared toward teenagers - That is where the Beach Boys fit, that was their demographic in '63. It was when the Beach Boys, Beatles, etc began making albums that were cohesive versus being collections of songs, or when their albums actually began to be appreciated as cohesive works along the lines of Sinatra, Dylan, etc...that the album became an event rather than a listening party where the group of friends would convene in someone's house carrying cases of 45's to listen.

What happened is the wrong mindset got into the process of delivering this music and selling it, and those who were calling the shots began meddling with key parts of the process start to finish instead of "letting the kids do what they want as long as it sells".

What the internet did, unfortunately, is water things down to the point where so much really good music and artists have to rely on the same delivery systems that the big money can manipulate and control as they see fit to boost their artists and make money for their investors. And it is a rigged system.

In short, nothing has changed.

What really hasn't changed - and what is sad - is the realization that 45 years ago a single cost 99 cents and the artist got less than a penny per unit sold. Now - in 2017 - a single song costs between 99 cents and 1.29, and the artist still gets less than a penny (if that) on every download or sale.

Nothing has changed, we only get older and perhaps more cynical over certain things.

[Juice Brohnston]

And what about format? Neil Young has a new album out, Peace Trail. Generally it is not getting great reviews, and sales have fallen right off after a week. But as a Neil fan, I think this collection may have a chance to really connect with me personally. But I haven't downloaded it yet, as I think I need to get a physical copy and treat it as an 'album' For me it seems like I am synching more with new releases when I buy it as a physical purchase and not a download. Don't know why. In relation to that though is the fact that I have already listened to most of the tracks on you tube. I like what I hear, but it's not like jamming that cassette in your car stereo for the first time on the way home from the record store after spending 5 minutes trying to get the case out of it's wrapping. Can format change meaning?

[KDS]

And what about format? Neil Young has a new album out, Peace Trail. Generally it is not getting great reviews, and sales have fallen right off after a week. But as a Neil fan, I think this collection may have a chance to really connect with me personally. But I haven't downloaded it yet, as I think I need to get a physical copy and treat it as an 'album' For me it seems like I am synching more with new releases when I buy it as a physical purchase and not a download. Don't know why. In relation to that though is the fact that I have already listened to most of the tracks on you tube. I like what I hear, but it's not like jamming that cassette in your car stereo for the first time on the way home from the record store after spending 5 minutes trying to get the case out of it's wrapping. Can format change meaning?

I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel like I own a song that I downloaded.  But, if I can hold a CD in my hold while listening to it, it feels more real. 

[maggie]

I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel like I own a song that I downloaded.  But, if I can hold a CD in my hold while listening to it, it feels more real. 

You're not in the minority, or at least you shouldn't be. Legally speaking, you don't actually own a song you've downloaded. All you paid for was a license to access the file for as long as the provider allows you to. If people think they "own" their iTunes library, they should check out the Terms of Service.

[KDS]

I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel like I own a song that I downloaded.  But, if I can hold a CD in my hold while listening to it, it feels more real. 

You're not in the minority, or at least you shouldn't be. Legally speaking, you don't actually own a song you've downloaded. All you paid for was a license to access the file for as long as the provider allows you to. If people think they "own" their iTunes library, they should check out the Terms of Service.

That's an interesting point I didn't think about.

I know in my hometown - Baltimore - there are actually still two record stores that still do quite well.  This is encouraging as box stores over the past few years have greatly shrunk their CD selection. 

[rab2591]

I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel like I own a song that I downloaded.  But, if I can hold a CD in my hold while listening to it, it feels more real. 

You're not in the minority, or at least you shouldn't be. Legally speaking, you don't actually own a song you've downloaded. All you paid for was a license to access the file for as long as the provider allows you to. If people think they "own" their iTunes library, they should check out the Terms of Service.

That's an interesting point I didn't think about.

I know in my hometown - Baltimore - there are actually still two record stores that still do quite well.  This is encouraging as box stores over the past few years have greatly shrunk their CD selection. 

I subscribe to Apple Music (much like Spotify); though it is a wonderful service to have to listen to any kind of music wherever you are, I don't at all feel like I own the music (and I don't) and I totally know what you mean: holding the 5 CD 2 LP 2 45 SMiLE boxset is a physical and real thing - it's definitely my music that no one can take away from me. But if I stop paying for Apple Music this month my whole music collection on iTunes is erased.

There's a place for each medium: I love listening to my vinyls when I can give music my full attention, I listen to CDs in the car, and when I'm away from home I have the opportunity to listen to whatever album/song I want with Apple Music. We live in a great time where all of this is possible.

[KDS]

I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel like I own a song that I downloaded.  But, if I can hold a CD in my hold while listening to it, it feels more real. 

You're not in the minority, or at least you shouldn't be. Legally speaking, you don't actually own a song you've downloaded. All you paid for was a license to access the file for as long as the provider allows you to. If people think they "own" their iTunes library, they should check out the Terms of Service.

That's an interesting point I didn't think about.

I know in my hometown - Baltimore - there are actually still two record stores that still do quite well.  This is encouraging as box stores over the past few years have greatly shrunk their CD selection. 

I subscribe to Apple Music (much like Spotify); though it is a wonderful service to have to listen to any kind of music wherever you are, I don't at all feel like I own the music (and I don't) and I totally know what you mean: holding the 5 CD 2 LP 2 45 SMiLE boxset is a physical and real thing - it's definitely my music that no one can take away from me. But if I stop paying for Apple Music this month my whole music collection on iTunes is erased.

There's a place for each medium: I love listening to my vinyls when I can give music my full attention, I listen to CDs in the car, and when I'm away from home I have the opportunity to listen to whatever album/song I want with Apple Music. We live in a great time where all of this is possible.

I do like the fact that you can use the internet or apps to try out music.  When I first heard murmurs about the band Ghost, I thought well, it's probably hype because of their outfits, or another retro sounding band with no songs.  I listened to three or four songs on YouTube, and was hooked.  So, I wound up getting their debut CD, and have bought every CD (their full lengths and EPs) since.