Why does all new pop music sound the same?

No, not really. I accept the world as it is. Reality is the reality. Not what I think. Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, I still think it is infinitely more interesting and relevant than whether expensive wire is better than cheap wire. That’s tiring. Have a drink.  I'm having one.  

@chayro agreed on this being way more interesting and socially enlightening than whether Cable B produces less deeptwitch crosstalk when paired with Widget C, and I’m not trying to shut anyone down or prove someone wrong just to be a troll.

For the record, this discussion seems limited to contemporary pop, so I’ll leave jazz, country, and the burgeoning and quite widespread folk-rock genre out for the moment.

I’m not saying that "today’s music" doesn’t reek of formula and over-production; much of it does. And I know that top producers and topliners will, like a fussing and flapping entourage, be summoned to surround a hot artist like Ariana Grande and Rihanna or Sam Smith, etc., and infuse their prodigious sonic and lyric talents into their clients’ equally prodigious stage and vocal talents.

(Much like Quincy Jones, George Martin, Mutt Lange, Berry Gordy, and a host of others did for the music of many A-list artists of the 60’s and 70’s.

And much like Carole King, Kris Kristofferson, and a bunch of others all sat in those little offices, churning out hits for the stars of the decade.)

Just as I know the whole shtick of "the same two guys" writing all the hit songs

https://nypost.com/2015/10/04/your-favorite-song-on-the-radio-was-probably-written-by-these-two/

But to write off an entire zeitgeist of music as simply insipid and sounding all the same is equivalent to admitting an inability or a reluctance (or a simple lack of care) to keep up with ever-changing music.

Also, to use an arbitrary "formally trained" label as a metric of what’s legit in the "contemporary music scene" seems out of touch. Every decade has its share of formally trained, talented, and respected artists alongside self-taught, talented, and respected artists. Here’re some formally trained, talented, and respected (as in, having received musical training, though not necessarily 'classically trained') artists of today who write their own tunes:

Nicki Minaj
Adele
Katy Perry
Bruno Mars
Justin Timberlake
Phish
Demi Lovato
Imagine Dragons
The XX
Drake
Linkin Park

Here’re some NOT formally trained, but talented and respected artists of 2-3 (or 5) decades ago who also wrote their own tunes:

Rush
Motley Crue
Tears for Fears
Heart
The Beatles
Madonna


Now, I’ll agree that, for example, when I browse through the Tidal Discovery charts, I barely recognize 90% of the artists on there. Are they legit? Many probably are, just not in a genre or style I listen to. And yes, a lot of them are flashes in the pan, much like much of the shite we listened to in the 70’s, 80’s, and beyond. For confirmation, browse the Billboard charts for any year in those decades and try to see things without the misty rose-tint of nostalgia. If any decades were formulaic, the 50’s and the 80’s were just as bad as anything today. Or how about the 2000’s - with all the rap-rock and boy bands everywhere?

Oddly enough, while electric guitar sales have been steadily declining for years now, acoustic guitar sales are actually increasing thanks, in part, to teenage girls (yes, you heard it right - teenage girls), learning guitar thanks to their hero, Taylor Swift. Who, incidentally, writes and produces many of her own songs.

Generally speaking, talking about modern cables is more interesting than talking about modern music. But there are exceptions. Listen to some Mongolian rock and rap music, as an example.
Also, just because someone is old doesn't mean he is rigid and sclerotic. In fact, I find most younger people incredibly stupid ignorant and underdeveloped. Generation of digital imbeciles. But not all of them, thank you.

After further deliberation on the subject, I think my final thought on this (and that's only because I don't feel like thinking about it anymore) is that, IMO, the "top 40" of the 60s and 70's was more varied in nature than the current music being played on stations like WKTU, which I listen to a lot more than I want to for reasons that have no relevance to this discussion.  Time marches on, music marches on - sometimes for the better, sometimes not.  Peace to all.  

chayro

... IMO, the "top 40" of the 60s and 70's was more varied in nature than the current music being played on stations like WKTU, which I listen to ...

That's certainly true, but it reflects the changes in radio broadcasting and corporate ownership as much as the change in popular music.

Because the ownership caps on radio stations were lifted - allowing giants such as iHeart (Clear Channel), Cumulus and Citadel to own hundreds of stations and "clusters" in many markets, formats fragmented. There is simply no reason for a corporate owner to compete with itself in a given market. The days of innovative station owners such as Gordon McClendon and Todd Storz are long gone. And the huge debt acquired as the radio consolidators started buying stations means they can't afford to take a chance with programming.