I was thinking the other day how a subgenre would pop up, have a big influence on the greater culture at large and then quickly "die." And by "die" I mean that mass culture left it behind and it was left to the diehard fans.

The easiest example for me is '77 era punk. For many people "punk" began with the Sex Pistols and died with them. Of course, this is not really what happened at all and please don't derail this into a talk about punk origins in the comments. But punk never "died," it just wasn't popular anymore and then post-punk happened. Post-punk didn't stay popular for long and was kind of forgotten about until bands like Franz Ferdinand and The Strokes revisited it.

Post-punk led to goth and gave us New Order, which gave us the Stone Roses and other awesome UK music. Here in the US, punk led to hardcore. HC never was commercially viable but punk and HC both gave us "college rock" (best example is Husker Du for that turn) which was later dubbed "alternative." Then along came "Grunge" which was an extremely short-lived genre when you go back and look at it.

The point of all that, is that these subgenres of rock did not stay popular for long in the grand scheme of things. Sure, we'll never stop hearing that mopey Pearl Jam song about Jeremy on the radio, but there aren't new headlining grunge acts.

You can also apply this to thrash. It took nearly a decade for thrash to peak out, only to be killed off in popularity by grunge, other alternative music and the 90s punk revival. Nu Metal was also very short-lived as far as mass appeal.

You can apply this to other music, but I'm writing about what I know to not sound ignorant. Even with my limited knowledge of rap, I can tell that styles of rap have come on gone. I no longer see threads complaining about mumble rap. I don't think the Master P style of rap has any prominence anymore.

Anyway, the Internet in its current state has changed the dynamic a bit. There's not much mass music consumption as there was in the past. People are siloed in their niches. Radio stations are not looking for the next big thing, they are stubbornly force feeding us old music or trying desperately to convince us that new corporate sounding schlock is worth getting excited over. They are not looking for the next Nirvana or Dr. Dre, they are going to play the same shit forever.

Even if a genre is generally unpopular, a global audience that is super into it exists and can support a genre in ways not thought of possible in the past. If punk started today it's doubtful that it would ever "die" but it likely never hit the charts anyway.

How is this going to shape music going forward? Will we have more or less innovation? Is there now way too many genres for anyone to pay attention to? Does this mean that there's going to be more bands that mix up genres and don't stick to anything because maybe that puts their band on more playlists? Will new genres rise and fall without most people knowing? Does this mean bands can stay static and not change with the times like in the past?

Whether it's the male loneliness epidemic, the concerns surrounding the manosphere, or the desire for positive role models, I've found myself thinking a lot about contemporary masculinity these days. As someone very passionate about music, I've thought a lot about it from that standpoint as well. But today I was thinking about positive masculinity and its reflection within music. It was quite an enlightening experience as it made me realize how it feels like an anomaly of sorts. It doesn't seem to be in a lot of top 40 pop hits for example compared to, say, love songs. Nonetheless, they do exist and paint quite the interesting picture.

The catalyst of sorts for me was remembering The Rolling Stones demo “I’d Much Rather Be with the Boys”, a Richards/Oldham composition (an already eclectic combo) that was allegedly axed by the rest of the band for being too homoerotic. I can see that angle, but I nonetheless find something wholesome about its "bros before hoes" mantra. A lot of Stones originals that followed were similar complaints of women who'd done the narrator wrong, but finding strength and peace with one's friends is a different direction, one that I'm sure many boys and men can relate to.

Here I am
With the gang, I don't care where you are
Because I'd much rather be with the boys
Than be with you

To get the inevitable out of the way, yes, “The Boys are Back in Town” is probably the gold standard for this. You could argue semantics about elements of hooliganism that could be considered toxic ("The drink will flow and the blood will spill"), but there's a pure joy to the camaraderie that's inexplicably infectious. Phil Lynott at some point considered calling it "GI Joe is Back in Town", picturing the returning hero to be a soldier returning from the Vietnam War. It makes the desire for a night on the town with your pals all the more alluring. Though anachronistic to this interpretation, I always found that this passage...

The nights are gettin' warmer, it won't be long
Won't be long 'til summer comes
Now that the boys are here again

...absolutely nails the excitement of summer vacation nearing the corner, more time to spend with your grade school mates. Cool stuff. But Lynott was no one-trick pony. He himself is an interesting yin-yang when it comes to masculinity, the leather-bound tough guy champing at the bit for a fight juxtaposed against a guy who'd write mellow odes to his baby girl. He was an illustration that both of these sides can coexist. But particularly as a black man myself, I always loved that Phil went out of his way to explore black masculinity as well, whether it's upping the brothers in Thin Lizzy's ethereal "Fight or Fall", or penning the wonderfully anthemic "Ode to a Black Man".

As I said earlier, I've been fascinated by how music can be helpful for young men, whether it's providing a sense of community or just blowing off some steam. And The Replacements succinctly write about this in their song “Something to Dü”. I wouldn't be surprised if Paul Westerberg had himself and the rest of the others in mind when he wrote it.

Delivering noise
Real tough boys
What else have I got?

Half-priced drugs
Stolen guitars
What else is new

Oasis's “D’yer Wanna Be a Spaceman?” continues one of Noel Gallagher's favorite leitmotifs: the end of innocence and the tension between dreams and reality. This time around though, he examines this from the standpoint of old friends, reminiscing over what was then and what is now...

I haven’t seen your face ’round since I was a kid
You’re bringing back those memories of the things that we did
You’re hanging round and climbing trees pretending to fly
Do you wanna be a spaceman and live in the sky

It's worth noting too that Noel's favorite line in "Live Forever" is "we see things they'll never see" which to him evoked a secret shared between one and their childhood friend. I find that quite lovely. Oasis themselves remind me of other bands like The Who and The Beach Boys who had a notable male contingent in their audience and thus had plenty of material that addressed them.

There's an unofficial tradition of "riding around with the boys killing time" anthems. “Me and the Boys” by NRBQ, "I Get Around" by The Beach Boys, "Back of a Car" and "In the Street" by Big Star all come to mind here. In terms of big-upping the homies, there's "With a Little Help from My Friends" by The Beatles and "Me and My Friends" by The Red Hot Chili Peppers. Songs about men also being in awe of men are their own kettle of fish: "David Watts" and "Johnny Thunder" by The Kinks are two fun examples, particularly as both figures are both on opposite ends of the spectrum, but each of their tributes are just as genuine.

I hinted at this earlier, but the analysis and deconstruction of masculinity color a lot of The Who's discography, but I think a fitting example here would be their song "Tattoo", about two brothers trying to figure out where they fit in ("What makes a man a man?") and deciding to get tattoos as a means of seeing where that leads them. I find the dynamic between the brothers quite lovely and there's many other little details that make it fully dimensional, like "Our old man didn't like our appearance, he said that only women wear long hair", illustrating the generation gap between boomers and their parents, the latter utterly baffled by the former's flirtations with androgyny, thus circling back to that initial question: what makes a man a man?

I'm curious to hear any other artists or works that others pick up on! As usual, thanks in advance.

That shared experience. The internet was supposed to bring us together. But it divided us even more. Yeah it paved the way for smaller creators and gave everybody a voice. But at what cost? It’s not even the internets fault. It’s the algorithms. Now we don’t have big cultural events anymore. I was born in 2003 so the monoculture I remember is Gangnam style & Pokémon go. The last big event that really seemed the deal for monoculture is avengers endgame. Yes there’s been monoculture moments in the 2020s but it’s far and few. Like squid game & Barbiheimer. It felt like a sense of togetherness. Everybody was going to the theater/watching squid game. Everybody was talking about it the next day. I feel like we can have both. It’s just algorithms ruined everything. We will never have another Elvis or the Beatles. Not because there won’t come somebody more talented but because we don’t habe that shared experience for somebody like that to rise. I feel that’s what we need right now a. Unifier. We’re so divided by our algorithms I hope something, someone comes along the way where we seperate our differences for a moment in time and unite on this one particular thing. And that makes me sad. I could talk with somebody and they ask me “have you heard of XYZ?” Never heard of it. Only to find out they have millions of people who know about them. Our true last gripe with it is Taylor Swift. Love her or hate her most people know of her. But even she isn’t a unifying force. I know people say this gave a lot of peoples voice but cmon now? That’s revealed that humans are a bunch of idiots. Because these influencers and what not did not need a voice. I just wish we could have both you know? The only thing that I can think of that everybody knows is sports and politics. Which is ironic because they divide us even more.

Hey everyone! I’m dropping a new single soon, and I’d love for you to check out my music and everything I’ve been working on. I’ve put a lot of heart and effort into my songs, and I’m really excited to share this new project with you all. Stay tuned for the release date, and don’t forget to follow my channel and support me on this journey. Your support truly means the world to me—thank you so much! https://www.youtube.com/@talontillard?si=v8ocY_QsEeRHNr5p

In this hypothetical scenario you are treated to a live performance by any singer you choose living or dead but unfortunately you don't get to choose the song they'll sing for you.

The genie will choose the song completely at random it could be anything from an old folk song to the Tin Pan Alley era, 50s Rock, 2010s Hip Hop, 2020s Pop etc.

The singer won't talk to you they'll simply perform the song and that's your lot. Who do you choose that is most likely to give a good performance when the style of song could be any genre?

I would choose Sam Cooke I think he just has it all as a vocalist the purity of tone and intonation to sing a jazz standard like Ella Fitzgerald could, while also being able to handle something much heavier in a way perhaps Ella couldn't. Who would your choice be?

I've realized I organize my Spotify in a way that I don't see many people doing. Instead of making playlists based on moods or genres, I have one huge playlist that contains every song I like. Then, I also have individual playlists for each artist, named after the artist where I keep only the songs I like from them. So if I want to listen to everything I play the main playlist. If I'm in the mood for a specific artist, I just open their playlist.

I think this works well because I'm much more of an artist listener than a mood listener. I usually decide who I want to hear rather than what vibe I want.
Does anyone else organize their Spotify like this? What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of this system? Have you tried it before, or do you prefer mood/genre playlists? I'd love to hear how other people organize their playlists.

No, Oasis did not ACTUALLY dethrone The Beatles “Sargent Pepper” for best selling studio album. Anyone with half a brain knows that’s a lie; Oasis are not even half as popular as The Beatles.

And yet, that is the claim being circulated! Why? Because Wonderwall went viral during the World Cup, that translates to that one Oasis (which hardly anyone has actually bought since the 90s) suddenly surging and topping the all time sales chart.

It’s absurd that one popular streaming song can count towards (and artificially increase) sales for a full album.

These supposed sales figures are absolutely fraudulent and music charts are completely out of touch with what music people are really listening to. Just look at the Top 10 and see how many songs you actually recognize.

How do other people feel about it?

Let me specify - I am not talking ambient music; something you play in the background, I mean the type of music you need to experience without distractions

It took me becoming a University student, learning my privilage and reaching class consciousness, to finally find pleasure in the more difficult pieces of music, slowly I found myself listening to longer and longer songs, stopped making my own albums and started consuming music more as an experience.

I found myself jumping from Pink Floyds Dark Side Of The Moon and my favorite Animals to the amazing Yes albums such as Close To The Edge and Relayer, but I still feel like I am quite a normie when it comes to experiencing music.

What I have been leading up to this entire time, is that I am not sure how long will it take me to develop enough to fully enjoy masterpieces without vocals. One of these would be Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas to The Heaven. I tried giving it a listen and I fucking love it, like it is so good. But I am unable to listen to it casually like to the many progressive rock albums I do everyday. Then there is Atom Heart Mother from Pink Floyd, which I again love, but was unable to listen to more than few times.

This is really frustrating, because I know I am missing something and I know my path is leading up to this. I feel like music without vocals is the natural step forward to me. In my head I see it as something much more complex, because of how hard the meaning is to grasp compared to albums with vocals.

honestly i had no idea people do this religiously

i know this is rreally stupid of me to say but i just assumed playlists were always the way to go? probably because ive only ever used Spotify. recently ive been listening to albums in full and trying to expand my music taste, but for those who listen to albums in full, why? it seems like such a new concept to me somehow. what if you don’t like some of the songs on the album? what’s the benefit of listening to albums in full? i wanna understand because i think i need to appreciate music way more and using services like Spotify doesn’t really allow me to do that