Why does most new music suck?

The WHAT has happened to music is easy to SEE / HEAR. The problem is discovering the WHY.

In the visual arts, we have gone from the Sistine Chapel.. Mona Lisa... Dutch Masters.. French Impressionist, to a Soup Can.
And now they just throw the paint at the canvas. And people go gaga and pay real money for it.

Have they forgotten how to paint? Do they have the talent to paint?
The great works are forged all the time. They even fool the experts. So the talent to do the art is there, maybe it's just the creativity and vision that is missing.
The skill set and training / education is top tier, they just aren't able to connect with humanity on a mass scale.

Many of today's music 'artist', have all become niche players. Each with their small group of followers / fans.

The decline is national. Cosby, Playhouse 90, All in the Family, etc... to, The Real Housewives of 'reality' TV!!

We are in a state of artistic decline. Music is not spared.

There is some hope. European Governments will use tax money to encourage, create and preserve their great art and artists. While here, we continue under the mistaken belief that people CAN BE, and have a RIGHT to be, whatever they WANT to be.

And everybody wants to be, The Stones or Miles or Dylan or etc..... And don't forget the GREED! Which is the root of it all.

Get Mingus while you can!! :)

Cheers

Who do you think you are? God? Only He is infinite. If there is somewhere further to go, it is He that will light the way. Otherwise, use your math skills, quantum science, geometry, etc. to calculate your limited existence and face it!

Acman3, I hear you. But it is what it is. You can't deny it. You can only try. What's the big deal? It doesn't change anything else. It's still all fun. So carry on.

Rok, it doesn't change the truth. Give me an alternative.

I find the definition of "progress" as presented above to be typical of the way that "progressives" often justify a stance. The definition, as presented above, is conveniently incomplete. Here is the complete definition:

++++n
1. Movement, as toward a goal; advance.
2. Development or growth: students who show progress.
3. Steady improvement, as of a society or civilization: a believer in human progress. See Synonyms at development.
4. A ceremonial journey made by a sovereign through his or her realm.
intr.v. pro·gress (pr-grs) pro·gressed, pro·gress·ing, pro·gress·es
1. To advance; proceed: Work on the new building progressed at a rapid rate.
2. To advance toward a higher or better stage; improve steadily: as medical technology progresses.
3. To increase in scope or severity, as a disease taking an unfavorable course.++++

Notice two key aspects of the complete definition that were omitted:

++++Steady improvement++++

++++To advance toward a higher or better stage; improve steadily++++

I realize that "better" can be considered to be subjective, but then we return to the issue of standards; a good thing.

No one (not I, anyway) is looking for acquiescence re what is good music or what sounds good. Everyone is free to like what they like ((Duh!), these discussions are a great way to share ideas, and serve to minimize complacency and hopefully inspire others to rethink their viewpoints.

****For me, the gear makes it possible to get lost in music and if it's great music, all the better.****

I find it interesting that the music should be presented as taking the back seat to the gear. Good sound is great and it can be a lot of fun to enjoy it simply for the sake of good sound. If that is one's goal, that's great. But, personally, I would be much more inclined to consider someone's viewpoints on the music if the music is always in the front seat.