• RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    My mom talked about staying up late to hear the black radio station because everything on the radio was so boring. She ran away from home to see Elvis!

    You live in a different world, with streaming, you can listen to so much music. I can remember before that - we at least had community radio with volunteer DJs who played different stuff but top 40 radio literally played about 40 songs on repeat.

    I suppose your grandkids will also consider whatever you think shocking music to be boring too

  • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Same reason as why wheels aren’t very impressive today, but they probably were the shit for quite a while in Sumer back then. Things don’t seem as impressive, or as [any other adjective], when they have been around for a long time and people have gotten used to them.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    chuck berry, buddy holly, elvis, jerry lee lewis, johnny cash, richie valens. It was not all unremarkable and doubly so for the time. If you include the ones coming out of the end of the 50’s you got smokey robinson and aretha franklin which have some stuff I just love. Im not a big elvis or cash fan but there are a few songs. One thing funny about elvis for me is I like a lot of remakes of his songs with a bit of modern flare from modern artists.

  • EvilTankieSupreme@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Everyone is wrong here.

    “Groovy” was a term that black people used to describe their music, so when white people claimed Rock And Roll they decided to steal the verbiage too, even if it didn’t really fit.

    White mediocrity put on a pedestal. A tale as old as time.

  • hypnicjerk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    why is an oasis seen as the quenchiest shit in the desert when it’s just averagely refreshing elsewhere?

  • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    You grew up in a world where Rock’n’Roll already existed. They liked it because it didn’t before and it took a while to slap a label on it. You grew up in a world where people bought music or paid to stream. When Rock’n’Roll started sheet music was the big seller. They had just introduced vinyl as a medium. You are exposed to all sorts of music today. Back in the 1940s US, predominantly, white people listened to white people music and black people listened to black people music. It’s only when some white people saw the black music was better and then unabashedly copied it for the more economically impactful white audience that this became a hit. It’s not just the quality of the music; it’s the culture and the change within it that came with it. It’s a big package.

    I remember listening to Nirvana’s Smells Like Teen Spirit when out came out thinking this was the roughest rock could ever go. ~30 years later it sounds rather tame. That’s the way our musical ears work. We tend to have a hardcore recency bias.

    • Manticore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      When Rock’n’Roll started sheet music was the big seller. They had just introduced vinyl as a medium.

      You’ve got the right idea, but I’d like to clear up this timeline a little. While LPs and 45s made from vinyl were still new at the dawn of Rock’n’Roll, recorded music had already been commercially available for about 50 years in the form of lacquer and shellac 78s and cylinders. Recorded music sales actually surpassed sheet music way back in the mid 1920s. A lot of the pre-rock recorded music was classical, traditional, or tame popular jazz like foxtrots which, like you pointed out, was a major contrast to Rock’n’Roll in the world of “white people music.”

      Another part of what made Rock’n’Roll different from the perspective of commercial success was that it was targeted at teenagers. It was a relatively new idea in the post-war years by companies like Coca-Cola to target products and advertising directly to kids and hook lifelong customers early on.

    • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      When Smells Like Teen Spirit came out there was already far harder shit. Nirvana was never heavy at all.

      • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I’m just gonna chime in here and say that around that time I thought Offspring’s Smash was the hardest shit ever

      • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m sure there was harder rock in existence. My point wasn’t they were objectively the hardest. It was that our perception of music changes over time.

        • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 day ago

          I remember listening to Nirvana’s Smells Like Teen Spirit when out came out thinking this was the roughest rock could ever go.

          ☝️

          Those were your exact words…

          • village604@adultswim.fan
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Your reading comprehension is the problem here, not what they said.

            The context of the comment was that rock was something people hadn’t experienced before, and that those perceptions changed with more exposure to the genre.

            When they first heard Nirvana, their opinion was that it was hard rock, because it was the hardest rock they had heard by that point.

            It’s a subjective recounting of their opinion when hearing something new, not an objective classification of Nirvana as hard rock.

          • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yes, they are. Me thinking something in the early 90s and it being objectively so at the time are not the same thing. I’ve already let 90s me know that you think my opinion was wrong.

  • whaleross@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Because of normalisation. The more you experience anything, the less spectacular it becomes.

    Teenage kicks in particular needs something that is amped up from what was before. Hence evolution of music and culture has always been driven by youth and keeps pushing the limits of what is doable and eventually what is normal.