I’m sorry, but Rick is correct, ultimately and essentially. The points about capturing performances versus creating them, and having to play the part rather than fixing the part in editing, etc. is very underrated and under-appreciated in terms of its overall effect on all aspects of the musical arts. Today, we’re mainly hearing tuned, beat detective’d, actually phony, facsimiles of musical performances. They make it “sound natural,” except they don’t, but they try to actually fool you that it is. That says a lot. And, this is exponentially getting worse, soon hitting an asymptote of complete and utter fakery. Sure, there are, ironically, more and more incredibly talented KZbin sensations that presumably (although can we be sure?) seem to play better and more technically proficient than ever heretofore. Yet, although this is a real and notable point of exception to Beato’s basic argument, seeming to contradict it, these incredibly technical feats are, essentially and certainly commercially, mere parlor tricks. These videos rarely add up to something truly artistically valued by society long term (for example, like the Beatles, Bach or Motown). Meanwhile, the music being consumed, discussed and seemingly valued (for just one example, being performed on SNL and other mass media) is the kind of music that is exactly this studio manufactured pablum. The issue is certainly far more complex than all this radical reductionism but, as sad as it is, Beato is, overall, the most correct of the lot here-even if his quantitative analysis is quite simplistic and poorly done, as in his video 2. Yes, Rick’s description is basically correct, even if his prescription, as parodied here by this videographer (and also poorly argued), is extremely depressing and even fatalistic. The alternative view, as expressed by this video, is unfortunately too negative towards the ultimate truth that Beato, perhaps admittedly, stumbles upon-yet is plainly true. That said, the videographer’s specific critique of current music criticism itself is very on-point and offers thoughtful perspectives. To come to a more effective synthesis of all of the best parts of these various arguments (versus just saying both men are wrong, as the title of this video proclaims) would surely have to begin again at first principles of aesthetics generally and how music, be it ancient or modern, should be best judged-and by what criteria. It seems that by mistakenly siloing various trends and eras of music, and the technologies that always are constitutive of the making of that music (and.art itself), we all too easily get sidetracked and rabbit-holed by pet theories, genre-specify issues and current obsessions that may not apply overall, through all musical space and time. A redo may be in order to first posit these many issues and general principles in a proper ontological order. Thereafter, more specific arguments and, finally, conclusions may be drawn that stand the test of that musical space and time as well as the more niche-y and specific technological concerns that plague all particular eras and genres within the musical conversation. In the end, I still believe, regardless of his specific argumentation, that Beato has a great deal to offer in terms of his “sad but true” concern for the present and possibly future situation. Admittedly, my favoring of this perspective is likely because I also see a rather fatalistic future for humanity itself and the epoch of cosmological history that features our ascent, development and ultimate demise, likely at the hands of our own digital progeny. It may be reassuring to see every period as equally misunderstood by the old farts of that period. However, at this juncture of “progress”, it seems that a special exception to that previous symmetry of generational nostalgia is arguably correct to invoke. The fact is that we are at a tipping point in terms of virtually all aspects of the human project. The effect of this on music will take a similar shape, as it will in general, when humanity and then musicians and music lovers become more and more abstracted from their/the musical creation, due to the increasing “artificial intelligence” of technology itself that is used and increasingly relied upon to create most music (and all else) moving forward. The sheer power of this technology, as it evolves forward, will make it less and less possible to retain the underlying, raw and compelling, human element that underlies all musical creation. The proof of all this is easy to measure even if one were to simply take a look at and listen for the sound of the recorded and even “performed” human voice today. When and if you start to hear the human voice on recordings and live performances start to retrograde back to unadulterated, untuned, raw (and actually somewhat out of tune) singing, please call me. Then you will start to have an argument that pulls the rug out on Beato. Until then, there is no argument against the Beato truism that asserts that the human element is increasingly missing. The technology of Ai, that we are experiencing right now, is literally parasitic on the pure human aspect, although it may further certain practical ends. It is subsuming her and it is forcing cyborgism, musical and otherwise. When we once again seize reasonable human control, let me know. I’m, at least currently, pessimistic. And things will only trend in this same “cyborg direction”, more and more, faster and faster. It is what it is, as they say. But to argue something else, citing the false equivalency and assumed repetition of each generation’s predictable cynicism, is to live in denial of the obvious truth that the Beato video’s title spells out in black white. This is not a subjective feeling but rather an objective reality that, if one only opens her ears to listen, becomes readily apparent, obvious and impossible to credibly deny.

Coming from an older generation, I see pop music significantly declining in the 1990s and after. Most of the heavy metal was, well, too heavy. But what left me cold is that most of the Rap was just bad poetry and not very musical. Perhaps it goes back to the afternoon local TV dance shows, where a teen girl would "review" a song with "it has a good beat and you can dance to it..." Admittedly, I have much more sophisticated musical taste these days -- starting in the 1990s, I discovered "classical" music which gave me a completely revised consideration of "good" music. Though there is still a considerable amount of "pop" and "country" music that I enjoy.

13:22 Because noise and music were terms that came before these ideas were proposed. In fact, we may initially come up with different terms for things that turn out to be the same thing. It is also not saying they are equivalent i.e. noise is music but music is not noise (example: playing a piano is music, but music is not playing a piano). Why would we say that noise and music is the same thing? For me, the important bit is expanding our notion of music. The history of music was a long history of expanding what music could be. And, in my opinion, every single time the domain of music was expanded we got better, more interesting music. I will not imply that anytime someone records the sounds of New York City it is a great piece of art, but what I will say is that allowing ourselves to consider it as music allows us to use these sounds to create interesting sounds (example: Adams - On the transmigration of souls). Or that we might create interesting soundscapes. Another important bit is the love of sound in general. This clip from John Cage explains it quite well: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ppSrn39tlrhpars&ab_channel=jdavidm This is why one of my favourite pieces of music is 4 33, it explains this all by simply having no music written. There's a reason Cage called it the most important piece of music, just like in math where one of the most important objects is the empty set. Maybe you say that this is all well and good, but we should not call it music. Here is the great tragedy, we will simply argue over the meaning of an ambiguous term. This 'sound art' will continue to exist and be enjoyed. What should we call it, if not music?

11:35 "Noise without any sort of repetition is not music" Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on the works of John Cage, like 4 33 or Music of changes? Personally, I would rate these as some of the best music (or most important music) I have ever 'listened' to, as they challenged my idea of what music could be. They allowed me to accept that essentially any organization of sound could be music, and allowed me to be much more open minded going into anything I'm listening to / doing. Also, I would like to point out that the perfect ping, as performed in that clip, does indeed have repetition. The Costas array only ensures that the interval between any two notes is distinct, but this does not take into account octaves. Indeed, some interval (m2,M2,m3,...,m7,M7,P8) must appear more than once (by pigeonhole principle, there are (88 C 2) intervals between the notes, but only 12 intervals to be picked from). Aside from that, every note is played on a piano (repetition in choice of instrument). High notes interrupt low notes, like punctuation. Now, these repetitions are subtle, but they are repetitions I have noticed. I don't think organizing sound without repetition is possible, unless you only played one sound. Personally, I would say good music is interesting, enjoyable, or accomplishes the goal of the composer / performer / listener (i may find music made for a commercial boring, but if it accomplishes the goal of filling the silence while being as ignorable as possible, then it's good for that purpose). But this is strictly focused on the listening aspect of music, whereas you seem to define good music focusing on how music affects us and our lives. In any case, definitely an interesting way of thinking of music, but ultimately still very subjective, it seems.

all music is terrible honestly

I would really veer away from calling your taste in music "objective", even if you think it is so. Just try to err on the side of being humble so as to not get a bunch of people in your comments calling you wrong instead of engaging with your content.

Ok but where do i find the good music (new)

Touches on a fascinating topic Does not elaborate

Radiohead shirt im immediatly subscribing

Pop music really fell off when the ensemble disappeared and everything became a boring rock band with the same boring 4 chords and same boring 4 instruments. Harmonical/Rhythmic complexity, GONE! Non-degenerate lyrics, GONE! Timbral diversity, GONE! Rock music really was the fall-off for Western Music ☹

Do you have a link for your playlist?

You so stupid.

This should be your channel trailer. Make it the first video everyone sees upon going to your channel page. It's a great introduction to what it looks like you are going to be talking on the channel. I subscribed upon reaching the end of it when you explained how you were going to continue the channel going forward.

TLDW: The day the music died was in fact ____________________________.

Dear ChatGPT, Can you watch this video for me and extract the information about which day the music died?

The Church is the only band you need.

so you're telling me you really did convince yourself that your criterias are qUiTe oBjEcTiVe. man, it must feel great actually thinking that.

Damn, I was looking forward to a set of criteria for critical analysis, such as song progression, the quality of the lyricism as a form of poetics (are the verses full of cliches?), and how the melody plays off of them. How instruments and vocals are integrated into the mix to emphasize different aspects. Does it sound generic, or rely on gimmicks? Is the focus more on the sound, the musicality, or the lyricism? But rather, we get some pop psychology about what kind of energy is good or bad for us with almost nothing at all to do with the artistic qualities of a piece of music.

I still believe that plenty of good music is being released all the time, it is just rarely ever popular music, and that you have to go looking for it to find it instead of just putting on Spotify’s daily most popular mix

I'm a little perplexed. I've seen your other video on "What makes music good", but I didn't understand the exact criteria other than "it should be good for your intellectual health". The food analogy, to me, doesn't work because with food we can scientifically measure the effect that some nutrients have on us, while with music we can't (unless there are studies proving that some specific musical characteristic are objectively harmful. In that case let me know!). Finally, I think that, as much as we try to be objective, what makes a song good is always mostly subjective. For example, I really don't like the sound of 80s music so I could say that too much reverb/delay on a voice is an objective flaw because it makes the sound unclear and distracting. It's not so different than saying that too much autotune on the voice is objectively bad because it makes the voice robotic and lifeless (which I also think is true). So hats off for putting together this playlist, but for now I'm a bit confused. If, in the future, you will say rigourously what your criteria are I will carefully listen to you!

"I found the day music actually died." Ok well then tell us about that instead of yapping about nothing for 7 minutes, jesus christ

Fascinating question, Jon. Totally coincidentally, I had recently watched a KZbin video titled "most popular song each month since january 1980", and was vaguely pondering a similar question. After seeing your video, I went back and rewatched that video with more focus, trying to pinpoint an exact moment. I can't say for sure this is the day music *died*, but I think the day the doctor delivered a terminal prognosis that pop music was on its deathbed was in 2018 when Childish Gambino's "This Is America" became a hit. If not then, then perhaps in 2020 with Cardi B's "WAP". Eagerly looking forward to hearing your answer to the question.

1. Why are we always talking just about pop, just about rock? I mean the definition of pop music has literally changed over the years and rock is just past its mainstream prime (idk much about the alternative or underground rock scene but I will assume that there are amazing records still being released). This will eventually happen to all genres. 2. Why are we talking about songs and not albums? I think albums were always more important to true music lovers. Sometimes listening to the whole album gives you a totally different perspective on some songs. Example for me is Apple by Charli. Like the song is good but at it's core it's a simple, poppy, catchy tune with nothing too special to offer. But if you listen to the whole album I think it elevates it because it's different from the rest of the album which makes it more fresh in a way (I hope this makes sense). 3. Why the hell are we looking at the Spotify trending tracks, Billboard top 100, Hot 100 whatever? Like idk, go to the RYM charts (for an example... Or AOTY) where people rate albums and give reviews (hundreds, thousands of ratings and hundreds of reviwes, this isn't some underground type stuff): those are people who actually care. Today we just live in an era that allows super casual music listeners that don't go too deep and that's fine but it will affect what songs are the most popular. Some people don't care about the chord structure, the complexity, the lyrics, the albums etc. They like the "vibe" and again: that's fine, but you are not a true fan. So these kind of people ruin the statistics... by a lot it seems because there are people who make videos about how the music is dying (which results in one of the most embarrassing videos by a respected content creator: Rick Beato's stupid ignorant rant). The only thing that changed is the way how we consume music, not the quality of music (maybe it did change a little bit but not nearly as much as you guys are all saying) CONCLUSION: Look at albums and look into lists made by using user ratings (or critic scores from AOTY, I'd argue that user scores are slightly better but still). Once you do that and still think that music today is worse than it used to be: go ahead and call music dead ig... I hope it didn't seem like I hate the video, it's decent, these are just some of my frustrations I have with this type of videos in general. Peace. EDIT: some grammatical errors, even tho I'm sure there are still many, hope this is at least readable, not a native speaker so yeah.

So what day was it? 😂

I remember it as grunge being on the radio nonstop... then the Bush/Blur/Oasis thing .. then the Spice Girls/Backstreet Boys era kicked off. All in the space of a year or so and other than bits and pieces here and there I've never heard any truly good new music since.

Nice shirt. You mention that there is still some good pop music. I wonder how we might distinguish classes of pop. Rufus Wainwright or Ben Folds, say, are pop artists, but they're not anyone Rick Beato is criticizing as mindless pop. You mention the "Spotify Top 20" or something. But I always find it tough to include the term "pop" in any description of the kind of music I listen to most when people ask me. If I say "pop," most will think I'm talking something within any list Apple Music might create for "Sunday Fun Vibes" or whatever, with Arianna Grande songs and then many others I never heard of. How do you describe the likes of Rufus Wainwright (his pop, not operas) or Ben Folds, Feist, etc. versus the clubby, ricky-ticky drum loop, autotune, shallow-lyric top 20 stuff? Is it just that, "Top 20 pop"? And then, even if I can make clear I don't like that, how do I refer to the more sophisticated although not classical (i.e. accessible, popular) stuff? Thanks! Nice shirt.

looking forward to this series. PLEASE do not make it into youtube shorts

problem with this, is your seperation of good and bad music is still formed from your own opinion, your own context, your own experience

Rick beato occasionally checks out and goes through the Spotify top ten. And 99% of the time its cringe. Dip into any top 10 in the 60s 70s and 80s and you'll find much better quality with classics here there and everywhere. I cant see much or any music in the new millennium passing the test of time. Music has become as disposable as anything else in our new society.

Kids value video games over music. If they listen to music its as background music to when they are playing games. 40 years ago we talked about music because that's all we had. The kids today barely talk to each other at all even if they are in the same room. The consumption of music has changed as has the production of music. There was plenty of bad music in the past but the good for me any way filtered through. The players of today have plenty of technique but no feel or emotion. You cant dance to the new dance music and you cant head bang to the new rock music. All that is left is pop and rap and both are bad in their own ways.

My «idol» is Elton John. He loves to listen to, and explore new music to make him feel young. If he can, then I can try the same. Music talks to me, but I need to learn it’s language to manage to appreciate it. Too many lose the will to do that.

You don’t get why some people think noise should be considered music? How about because they have been continuously told that art is whatever the artist says it is, and they have bought that nonsense.

11:00 Ehhh, still much better than Reggaeton

I think Ricks worst augment is to think that popularity has anything to do with quality.

If you can’t see or admit that music has gotten less sincere, you’re fooling yourself.

"Good modern music never reaches the mainstream". That's the Beatos point that none of these guys catch. Please guys, listen more.

It's really good advice. I feel like if we use our emotions to guide us towards songs that we might not have taken a chance on before could now turn that song into our next favorite. I like revisiting artists i might not have felt before and now my library has grown so much because I'm in a different place with a different mindset. Awesome stuff, man.😌🤙

hi

What? If this is meant to be anti-hip-hop or anti-metal I don’t get your argument. If my environment is bad for me, why not listen to music that sympathizes with me during hard times? When I feel hopeless, Curtis Mayfield’s “Move On Up” sounds like bullshit (and I think that song is a 10/10). I think the idea that art ought to be “healthy” is absurd. Ever since we’ve been drawing on caves art has been humanity’s way of reflecting on our situations. Listening to music that’s sad doesn’t make people feel hopeless, feelings of hopelessness drive people to music that reflects that.

Never gona give you up Never gona say good bye... Is good anh healthy song

Nerd

music is always getting worse, it's an age thing.

I wonder what music would be gatekeepy more than others.

I'll stick to deathcore, tech death and pornogrind, thank you very much

It's really an Ouroboros kinda situation, because we do choose what to listen to based on our mental state, but simultaneously the music DEFINITELY shapes the way we interpret our feelings. It's like venting to someone vs keeping it to yourself - human emotions are way too complex to fully express them with words, so by telling someone how you feel you somewhat lock yourself in that single line of thought, making it more real in a way. I love this kind of dilemmas, that one's especially interesting since the music is a huge part of my life and I have definitely felt it's influence on my mood many times. Though I do believe that the answer is deterministic - there's no point in thinking over and over again about who's influencing who - if it happens, there wasn't a way of avoiding it. I say - listen to whatever your mind and soul want. By avoiding it there's an equal chance of doing yourself a disservice.

Instruments Disorder - The Gerogerigegege

Do we choose music based on our mental state? Or does the music we choose (for other reasons) affect our mental state? Or is there a combination of both phenomena, in a sort of feedback loop happening?

TW: Discussion of Self-Harm please do not read if that’s something that upsets you. I know exactly what you mean, there was this crack rock steady song by the infested called “The Right to Die”. Super Raw recording style but it was so upbeat and poppy, it reminded you of early blink-182 or the 2000s pop-punk scene in general it sounded so inviting. The vocals were really hard to understand though. Anyways, the topic they sung about was something that STILL shakes me to my core, they were advocating for assisted Suicide in their song. That if an individual truly felt like their time was up and that they couldn’t bear the pain of living anymore, (granted they were probably talking about people with severe medical conditions practically bed-ridden but still) that it was the duty of any loved one to "off" them. I was mortified when I finally knew what the song was about, as someone who has had life threatening conditions and had been in severe pain in the hospital, with no hope of recovery, only to come out the other side perfectly healthy. I was mortified. I could only IMAGINE what my mother's life would be like if she had granted me and my brother "mercy killings" because we were born with life threatening medical anomalies. Needless to say I stopped listening, if you guys find that song in anyone of my playlists, please tell me and I'll take it off.

Im just gonna say it Fed Up - Ghostmane

Agreed. Thought this for a while. I've been addicted since I was 5. 🎼🎵🎶🙂