Simon - gt3 is my channel for Kylie. I've nothing against her recent output, it just doesn't thrill me, especially considering the resources pumped into it and the great fanfares with which it's ushered into the world. That's arguably an influence on my feelings towards the music but it didn't stop me liking "Can't Get You Out Of My Head". Really, though, we're getting right down here to differing tastes.

As, er, indeed, has already been mentioned.

You're all miles off.

It was when Mike Williams got arrested post-Katrina.

Actually - and not to Carmodise - but it all went wrong when the UK dropped out of the ERM in 1992. Don't laugh, I can prove it's true, using words and things.

OK, let's hear it...

I guess I'm the only person who prefers I Should Be So Lucky to recent Kylie then? In general I'd agree with wingco - fitfully good.

If pop music is actually fucked then I'd say it happened when the 'make sure they all have shiny teeth and can dance urban' criterion apparently became absolute. It's hard to see where the next Adam Ant will come from. But great records still come out - I thought Umbrella was lovelyyyy.

delicatemoth wrote:

QUOTE:
I guess I'm the only person who prefers I Should Be So Lucky to recent Kylie then? In general I'd agree with wingco - fitfully good.

If pop music is actually fucked then I'd say it happened when the 'make sure they all have shiny teeth and can dance urban' criterion apparently became absolute. It's hard to see where the next Adam Ant will come from. But great records still come out - I thought Umbrella was lovelyyyy.

It's not absolute any more. The fightback has been underway for a while. There's loads of great autonomous, anti-conformist pop around (with the crucial point being that it's actually POP rather than indie), like Robyn, Alphabeat, The Ting Tings, Black Kids etc.

QUOTE:
Alphabeat

Mentalist.

Apropos of which, I heard about this the other day.

Purves Grundy wrote:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Alphabeat

Mentalist.

I'm never, ever taking any lip on musical matters from a Fields Of The Nephilim fan.

The idea of a turning point in pop where the music got terrible, i.e. the point at which "we were all fucked" is kind of nebulous. It's always been pretty bad. We live in a world where 20,000 people are willing to pay $200 to see Madonna live while 200 people show up to watch Broadcast at $15.

Pop music has gradually gotten worse in the past coupe of decades, as a result of media consolidation and the triumph of tabloid culture on all content delivery platforms (TV, cable, radio, internet). However the difference now is that regardless of how bad mainstream music gets, there are now avenues open for people to explore and enjoy very high quality current and older musical content.

That's all true, but the question wan't when did it all go wrong but when did you know it had all gone wrong. That's why I said that the moment for me was when a housemate of mine in Colorado was bigging-up Jamiroqui as groundbreaking and earthshattering and then put them on the stereo. That's when I knew we'd hit a dead end.

linus wrote:

QUOTE:
We live in a world where 20,000 people are willing to pay $200 to see Madonna live while 200 people show up to watch Broadcast at $15.

Oh come on. What does that prove?

OK, SR, it's something like this. In the years prior to 1992, recession-riven years, you had a whole raft of ragingly, life affirmingly despondent bands, from the Manics, Radiohead, MBV etc in this country, to the likes of the Pixies and Nirvana on the other side of the pond striking a ringing chord over here. Britain's leaving the ERM was the cue for a long period of economic fairweather in the UK - the "untroubled times" of the 1990s. The first hint of a newfound cocksureness, antithetical to the likes of Edwards or Yorke, was the birth of Loaded, This was swiftly followed by Britpop, whose mood was sanguine and retro a subconscious effort to emulate the Never Had It So Good moment of the mid-60s, culminating in 1966. Wilson, The Beatles and Blair were all seen to be part of the same, radical yet patirotic upward thrust, which also included a few arty types and fashionistas; in 1996, Blair, Oasis and Gazza's England, abetted by the likes of Chris Evans, formed a similar triumvirate, with again a few arty types and fashionistas thrown into the mix.

Of course, the moment turned sour in both the 60s and the 90s and there the parallels break down a bit. What's happened since the mid-90s, despite numerous good to great bands, great records, is that rock music has ceased to evolve sonically (MBV in 1991 remains un-exceeded). No one in popworld wants that any more. The marketing and accounting people who have assumed control of the stuff they simply used to market and account for don't want that any more. That aggressive conservatism I referred to earlier on is a by-product of economically comfortable times, which in this country at least, produce marketing hegemonies tapping into a generally docile and sated market, dulled by mild prosperity. It's not so much a "harsh reality" as a soft reality. This has been the state of things for many years and while recession might be around the corner and may produce some sort of cultural response, it's been so bloody long since rock and pop had any countercultural component that today's young 'uns have probably lost any idea of that connection - most of them were only just born when such a connection still existed.