
Is Pop Music Evolving, or Is It Just Getting Louder? (2012) - ryan_j_naughton
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-pop-music-evolving-or-is-it-just-getting-louder/
======
nicolas_t
The original article in Scientific American is much better
[https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-pop-
mus...](https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-pop-music-
evolving-or-is-it-just-getting-louder/)

The author of the article highlights a potential bias with this study which is
worth pointing out:

 _But I did wonder if there was a selection bias in play here. The Million
Song Dataset, huge as it is, may not provide a representative slice of pop
music, especially for old songs. Its contents are heavily weighted to modern
music: the database contains only 2,650 songs released between 1955 and 1959,
but nearly two orders of magnitude more—177,808 songs—released between 2005
and 2009. That’s because it draws on what’s popular now, as well as what has
been digitized and made available for download. And the songs of yesteryear
that people enjoy today (as oldies) may not be the same ones that people
enjoyed when those songs first came out._

~~~
p1necone
Yeah - this could potentially be a huge bias. Songs that are top 40 hits for a
month or so and songs that have staying power to be memorable 40 years from
now are probably not quite the same category.

It also echoes my (baseless) assumption that the main reason that we have this
idea that music a few decades ago or more was somehow "better" is that
anything that wasn't at least above average is completely forgotten by now
i.e. survivorship bias.

~~~
okonomiyaki3000
That's true. Terrible songs (like Sylk-E Fyne's "Romeo and Juliet") are
completely forgotten very soon while the really good songs are never gonna
give you up, never gonna let you down, never gonna run around and desert you.

~~~
mwilliaams
People are really still doing this? I can't stand the fact that back in 1998,
The Undertaker threw Mankind off Hell In A Cell, and plummeted sixteen feet
through an announcer's table.

~~~
okonomiyaki3000
It was done to make a point in a clever way. I think you should appreciate the
level of skill it takes to RickRoll Hacker News and not get voted off
immediately.

~~~
TylerE
If you have to point out how clever something is, it was not, in fact, clever.

~~~
okonomiyaki3000
No. You're thinking of jokes.

------
turc1656
What I have personally noticed over the last 15 years or so is the move away
from melody and towards chord progressions and layering. This has the effect
of producing more complex music (many times courtesy of modern digital
technology) but nevertheless music that generally is forgettable. When I have
my family in the car on the weekends and I'm forced to listen to the radio,
I'm amazed at the lack of melody in most songs as well as the same
progression, structure, and timbre between songs. They are so similar it's
extremely difficult to recall which song is which if you take away the vocals.
I think modern pop has attempted to replace instrumental melody with a sort of
vocal melody that stands out for easy identification. This, I presume, is
because of the nature of modern pop. Many "artists" are solo performers who
have a brand to sell so the people writing songs for them make it such that
the song is built to bolster the brand/image rather than attempting to
structure the song in the best way musically.

The switch away from melody is also extremely present in soundtracks. Think
about John Williams who, in my opinion, is the "master of melody". Every time
he creates a soundtrack there are instantly recognizable melodies and motifs.
Just reading the following words - Harry Potter, Jaws, Star Wars, Superman,
Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, The Godfather - and you could probably hum any
of those melodies on command. Or at least you could instantly identify it if
you heard it. Contrast that with someone like Hans Zimmer (who is excellent,
BTW). But he's a more "modern" composer, right? And if you look at his stuff
you'll see that he's basically a "master of timbre", which is why someone like
Hans Zimmer stands out in the modern era where, as the article states, timbral
variety has gone down. In fact, I would argue that some of Zimmer's best work
are the ones where he actually combines his timbral mastery with melody.
Things like Gladiator and Pirates of the Caribbean.

------
grawprog
I see it as more of the same corporate 'streamlining' that's gone into other
media. Much like movies and video games, pop music is being produced for a
mass international audience. I've got friends in Indonesia and the Philippines
that know more about modern American pop music, movies and video games than I
do. Other than what comes on the radio at work I have no idea what's really
popular these days.

That being said. I've heard lots of great modern music being produced you just
have to look for it. Kinda like the way some of the best video games I've seen
being made these days aren't giant AAA games with huge a Dev staff and budget,
but small indie games with one or a few developers seem to be the real leaders
in game innovation these days, a lot of the 'good' music being made isn't the
stuff that comes on the radio or hits the top song lists of Spotify or
whatever the kids use these days.

Loudness is kind of ridiculous these days though. But, I've noticed a big
difference in songs I listen to that are intended to be released on vinyl(this
still happens) vs songs that are intended for digital or CD release. The vinyl
tracks are far less compressed, have moredynamic range, and are 'quieter',
even for dance type tunes, than the digital ones, which have peaked red lots
without any kind of amplification and their waveforms are basically just one
big blob from start to finish. Compression and normalization have kinda
wrecked the quality of a lot of music. One of Metallica's newer albums
suffered from that badly, the song's weren't terrible but the mastering made
them sound like shit. Then there's autotune...but that's a whole other pile of
bullshit right there.

~~~
DiabloD3
Death Magnetic, released a decade ago.

Famous for being so bad, Guitar Hero's development team asked for the original
unmastered files, was granted their request, and then properly mastered them
just so they could be included in the game without destroying the experience.

Guitar Hero's version of Death Magnetic was apparently pirated more times than
rips of the authentic release. It was heavily praised for being a more clear,
detailed mix, that didn't shove highs under the bus for muddy lows and
generally ruined vocals.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Nfqpr3ygSg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Nfqpr3ygSg)
for a comparison on the least ruined song on the album, that the author volume
matched for the video. The original release had to be decreased 14dB to match
the level of the GH3 release for this comparison.

------
projectramo
Quickly read the article for evidence that popular music peaked with Motley
Crue’s Theater Of Pain (1985) album but it appears that this article had also
failed me.

------
Skunkleton
Not to say that I think modern pop is anything special, but how do these three
categories of measurements correlate? How do you compare something like Dr.
Dre's 2001 to Led Zeppelin 3 with only these measurements? I would imagine
that 2001 would rank lower on these metrics, but I don't think anyone would
describe it as "worse".

~~~
sologoub
I suspect you need a different measure for the vocals, as opposed “music”
itself.

The sounds other than vocal part of Dr Dre’s album probably wouldn’t really
stand on their own and much is quite repetitive (as noted in the study).

Led Zeppelin Immigrant Song can definitely be enjoyed without the vocals,
though the vocals really make it recognizable.

Similarly, there are quite a few rock songs that have been made into pretty
interesting orchestra pieces.

Would be interesting to see if there any hip hop masterpieces that have been
arranged for classical music.

~~~
dagw
The TV series Westworld had a scene where they had Shogun era musicians
playing a Wu Tang Clan song on traditional Japanese instruments.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__DEAK3AinM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__DEAK3AinM)

------
ChainOfFools
it's almost as if this is, on a highly sped up time frame, a process similar
to that which yields stable traditions in different regionall forms of
artistic representation, but without the kind of natural propagation
boundaries that would normally contain the spread of a tradition to within a
narrow geographical and cultural region.

We, by which I mean the Western world as influenced by pop music in the era of
widespread mass communication, are settling on a common collective cultural
music motif, and this cannot help but be a bit of a race to the complexity
floor in order for it to be sufficiently widespread and stabilized.

~~~
hnzix
Needs more autotune and wobble bass bro.

~~~
milemi
Not to mention the cowbell.

------
bobthepanda
Sure, if your "proof" is measured in some arbitrary metric.

A few of questions to consider:

\- Are timbre, pitch, and volume the only good metrics to measure song quality
in? What about lyrics? What about themes? What about instruments? etc.

\- Are variations in these three metrics necessary or sufficient for there to
be quality in music?

~~~
screye
Well lyrics and instruments certainly haven't gotten better. Drum machines and
electronic effects have taken over for instruments and lyrics are about as
shallow as they can be right now.

~~~
Retra
Lyrics for popular music were always shallow. It's no worse today.

~~~
lodi
Well today's lyrics are worse in at least one objective way: number of unique
words.

In the "good old days" you could at least count on a verse, chorus, different
verse, chorus, etc. structure. Then at some point they were doing "chorus,
chorus, chorus, bridge, chorus...". Soon we'll be lucky to get more than a
repeated sentence fragment.

Case in point:
[https://www.google.ca/search?q=turn+down+for+what+lyrics](https://www.google.ca/search?q=turn+down+for+what+lyrics)

Or this gem:
[https://www.google.ca/search?q=watch+me+whip+lyrics](https://www.google.ca/search?q=watch+me+whip+lyrics)

~~~
grasshopperpurp
>Well today's lyrics are worse in at least one objective way: number of unique
words.

That's not a good metric.

~~~
wruza
Right. I occasionally hear local word-rich rap and it is low quality lyrics
overall. In particular, it’s like they explain every line with ten more lines,
as if their listener was an idiot who cannot read between these.

If I looked for a good metric, I would probably take min(word per meaning and
touch), but that would raise a question on what ‘meaning and touch’ is.
Nonetheless, good lyrics always seem to be un/under-spoken or sharp cut.

~~~
grasshopperpurp
Yes! In poetry, William Carlos Williams is a great example. In music, Lou Reed
and Randy Newman are good examples.

------
Zarath
Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I have a feeling it's because the primary
demographic of music listener is getting younger and younger. With streaming
platforms like Spotify and Youtube, I imagine that teenagers and even young
children have a huge sway over what the music industry produces and represent
an increasing fraction of their revenue. Not to mention businesses are likely
using music more than ever (it plays over the speakers on planes when boarding
and de-planing, in stores, restaurants, gyms, etc.) and they all try really
really hard to avoid something that is offensive, which usually means lowest
common denominator, plain vanilla garbage. That being said, I really wonder
about their database. They are certainly including more than just pop using
that many pieces of music.

I pretty much disagree with any premise that music is getting worse, in
general. Pop music, maybe, but the sheer quantity and variety of amazing work
out there can't be understated. I've found so many life changing works of
music that have been produced after 2000 and continue finding them all the
time. Anyone saying music is getting worse either isn't looking in the right
place, or is stuck in their ways.

~~~
jackhack
You're not wrong. Adults have an ability to discern crap from talent. Children
don't know the difference, and will buy what's pushed at them. This is very
different from the 1940s, 1950s, where a record (and phonograph, speakers,
amplifier) was expensive and music was primarily purchased by adults. The
demographic shift is rather profound -- where the average age used to be in
the high 30s/low 40s, to today, where it is teenagers.

I don't agree that pop music is becoming more vanilla and less offensive. In
fact I think it's demonstrably quite the opposite -- much more vulgar and
crude. Just a few moments spent with modern "music videos" should dispel any
notion of bland, inoffensive art.

------
sehugg
"Everyone knows rock attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact!" \--
Homer Simpson, "Homerpalooza"

~~~
Scarblac
Yes, but then it turned out Phil actually sang that music better than Peter so
there can be some disagreement over the exact year.

~~~
jacquesm
> Yes, but then it turned out Phil actually sang that music better than Peter

It did? Apparently there can't be only disagreement over the year.

------
toomanybeersies
A well set equaliser (for your specific speakers/headphones) goes a long way
towards reversing this problem. Or at least it feels like it to me.

I've started using eqMac2 [1] on my Macbook for equalising my headphones. The
difference between non-eq sound and my profile is night and day. Without the
equaliser it sounds like I'm listening to music through a swimming pool.

I have to say though, nothing beats music with proper dynamic range being
pumped through a >$10,000 speaker system in a room that's been properly fitted
for the acoustics. There's a new nightclub that's opened in my city, where the
owner has spent a lot of time and money getting the sound system set up
properly. He has an absolute banging Funktion One system [2], with properly
designed room with all the correct dampening and stuff. The difference between
that and a generic setup with no design is absolutely night and day. You can
stand in the middle of the dance floor with the music absolutely cranking and
still hold a conversation. As much as I do love techno, I really want to see
them put some Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd through the system.

With proper sound systems like a Funktion One and high quality music, you
don't just hear the music, you can feel the music. It's absolutely phenomenal.

[1] [https://github.com/nodeful/eqMac2](https://github.com/nodeful/eqMac2)

[2] [https://www.funktion-one.com/](https://www.funktion-one.com/)

~~~
spiralx
As much as I love a room with a properly fitted and tuned Funktion One system
playing techno at a level where I can feel the bass in every part of my body,
that pretty much is the sweet spot for F1 rigs, so you might be disappointed
with how they sound playing other types of music.

[http://www.jumble.blue/en/what-nobody-tells-you-and-
admits-a...](http://www.jumble.blue/en/what-nobody-tells-you-and-admits-about-
funktion-one/)

~~~
toomanybeersies
Great read, thanks.

I haven't listened to enough psy-trance on F1 systems to really make a
comment, but it's something I'll definitely think about next time I'm at a
psy-trance thing with F1 speakers.

~~~
spiralx
In my experience with smaller outdoor psy-trance parties they've tended to go
with Opus rigs, but when I've been to the Ozora Festival in Hungary where they
might have ten thousand people dancing in a valley, it's the sort of long-
throw J-rigs the article talks about.

------
msvan
This conclusion may have held in 2012, but the loudness wars are ending with
loudness normalization being enabled by default on most streaming platforms,
which is what most music is mastered for these days.

------
aston
Louder is not really worse when it comes to music. In fact, try turning up
whatever you're listening to right now--it'll actually sound better!

The loudness wars (mass application of massive compression that reduces
dynamic range) are the music equivalent of adding salt to savory foods. People
like it better even though it's technically "worse".

~~~
mchahn
Wow. Can't disagree more. Compressed audio only sounds better on crappy
speakers. Maybe they are common with phones.

~~~
userbinator
The effect of loudness on perception is well-documented in several studies and
used to much advantage by audiophile snake-oil peddlers.

~~~
p1necone
Loudness yes, but increased loudness that necessitates compression, where the
compression is the negative is what is being talked about here.

------
Steko
Alternate title: pop music responds to consumer preferences for louder music
with less jarring timbre and pitch transitions

------
kazagistar
Pop music isn't nearly as important now. As music is cheaper to make and
produce, and more and more artists and fans live in niches and subcultures,
the only people who listen to pop are the people who don't care enough to
discern their more specific tastes. Why would it be any surprise then that pop
trends towards a boring inoffensive middle?

------
afro88
I’d be interested to see a follow up on this. Spotify and Apple both encourage
a form of mastering that doesn’t reward loudness. Apple has that soundcheck
thing, Spotify as well (not sure what they call it). I’m sure this has had a
not so insignificant effect on the loudness war.

~~~
KozmoNau7
I don't think Spotify has a specific word for it, just "Normalize volume",
with an option to set it to quiet, normal or loud.

There's a clear difference between well-produced songs and over-compressed
songs. The over-compressed ones tend to be much quieter, because the
normalizer goes by average volume instead of peaks. So well-produced songs get
to go "over" for some amount of the song, to give room for dynamics.

------
grasshopperpurp
It's always interesting to see certain types try to discuss art. Since James
Brown, music has been trending toward an emphasis on rhythm, with melody and
harmony playing a more pragmatic role - rather than the inverse. This article
doesn't even mention rhythm.

Ringo Starr was a mediocre drummer, yet many claim the Beatles are the best
band ever (a stupid claim to make about any band, but here we are).

Most pop music will be bad, because art is hard. There are different ways to
make art work. There are different ways to make music work. The more dogmatic
you are about what makes art and music good, the more you'll miss out on great
stuff, the more you'll limit yourself.

The combination of Future and Metro Boomin is just as exciting (to me) as the
combination of Jagger and Richards or Lennon and McCartney.

------
CPLX
That headline makes about as much sense one that says “art proves science” or
“objective facts prove subjective points”.

------
djcjr
Science only disproves.

------
the_cat_kittles
premise is fuckin stupid. you cant pick metrics willy nilly and use them to
justify. impressions has two chords, still a brilliant song. lack of textural
variety means a solo piano piece sucks i guess? no. you are just an opinion in
search of evidence. sorry, try again.

~~~
sbuttgereit
Uhh... that completely misses the point.

Sure Impressions only has two chords... but Giant Steps, another Coltrane tune
essentially has 5 chords every three bars and modulates in that time as well.
They're very different charts by the same artist. And even with Impressions
they really didn't play it safe nor did they play it straight dorian in the
solos either (much less so than Miles did with the same two chords). Depending
on which recording of Impressions you're referring to, I wouldn't call Eric
Dolphy's bass clarinet on "India" a common timbral choice either and on the
same album as Impressions.

The point was over a large body of work there is much more homogeneity today
than there use to be. While we can bicker about their data and study approach,
the gist of their conclusion is not necessary invalid or stupid. Maybe their
methods are...

[edit for clarity] Before anyone thinking about it jumps on my case... yes I
know Giant Steps is 16 bars with four bar phrases or "stanzas" if you
prefer... but to my ears the fourth bar in each group, while structurally
important overall, functions more as embellishment and transition
harmonically, melodically, and (a bit less so) rhythmically setting up the
next phrase... the first three bars in each group are really the focus and
point. (sorry had to get that off my chest).

~~~
the_cat_kittles
no you miss the point, which is that you cant arbitrarily choose metrics of
quality and decide “more is better”. i played giant steps in 7 and added a bar
of f# aug... guess im better than coltrane!

