Why does most new music suck?


Ok I will have some exclusions to my statement. I'm not talking about classical or jazz. My comment is mostly pointed to rock and pop releases. Don't even get me started on rap.... I don't consider it music. I will admit that I'm an old foggy but come on, where are some talented new groups? I grew up with the Beatles, Who, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Hendrix etc. I sample a lot of new music and the recordings are terrible. The engineers should be fired for producing over compressed shrill garbage. The talent seems to be lost or doesn't exist. I have turned to some folk/country or blues music. It really is a sad state of affairs....Oh my god, I'm turning into my parents.
goose
I think the reason is most of the folks who log on here are old. Me included. And we can't take changing tastes.

BTW, I always shudder at things like this, meaning why are humans so judgmental. Why are we?

Its just a matter of taste, that's all. At least that's my belief. But setting current artists up for a fall, where is the value or humanity in that? I suspect Nat Cole would respect Bruce.
Rpeluso,
I am 61, and am very open and willing to find good new music from any source, but I have to admit that a lot of what I hear recommended here and through other printed sources turns out to be very musically disappointing for me when I go to Youtube to have a listen.
Another example would be the bands that appear on CBS Sunday Morning. Every week I hold out hope that I will discover a new artist that really moves me, only to find a band of 4 or 5 thirty somethings, who seem to be very nice people, making music that sounds strangely similar to the band that played the week before.
There is the old quote attributed to Duke Ellington, I believe: "There are two kinds of music.....good, and bad". I've also seen it ending as "good, and the other kind". But that doesn't really help, as different people put the same music in the two opposite groups. One man's good is another man's bad.

Jazz musicians dismissed The Beatles in '63 (or so said Jeff Hamilton, Diana Krall's drummer, at a drummer seminar I attended about ten years ago) because they weren't virtuoso musicians, apparently not knowing that being a virtuoso musician is not what is required to make good music of the type The Beatles were making, any more than being able to compose like Bach (or write a song as good as did John, Paul, & George) is a skill required to make good Jazz music.
Mapman, another way to say that is that the Beatles music spoiled us to the point that we have no use for most of today's music. It's partly a matter of quality.
Anyone here read, "The Song Machine, Inside the Hit Factory" by John Seabrook? Apparently modern pop is created much like Muzak was. " Painstakingly crafted to tweak the brain's delight in melody, rhythm, and repetition, these songs are highly processed products. Seabrook visits specialized teams composing songs in digital labs with new "track-and-hook" techniques."

There's a reason they sound alike, and unsatisfying.