Your talking about .01% of popular music nowadays then. Most new music is “original”.
I think you are way off on the percentage. Its less expensive to pay royalties than pay a songwriter/s. Most musicions have old favorite songs they redo. Everyday that I listen to the radio station my son listens to, every 5th or 6th song is a remake. I look at the CDs he buys and sure enough there is always at least one remake on those CDs. Now rap, I don’t know about. But country and any form of Rock leans on old song lyrics way more than .o1% worth.
Look at the charts of pop music. Hardly any of the top 100 are remakes.
Also you still have to pay a songwriter even when doing a remake. You have to pay royaltees and a songwriter.
This opinion is something I find really infuriating, that somehow music has got ‘worse’ over the generations. So you take three average bands and compare them with the BEST that a generation has had to offer and you think that’s a fair comparison? It’s totally wrong and, to me, just displays your ignorance about the creative talents around today.
I’m pretty sure there are some crap acts from the sixties that rival lil Wayne, just I am certain there are modern talents that rival the Rolling Stones or Led Zep.
On topic, hell, on both Topics, Try Sigur Ros, it’s very relaxing and therefore probably not the best for a car journey, but I’ve yet to hear anyone who doesn’t like it:
Kris - in fact, that’s not true. Record companies pay a percentage of sales to the songwriter (or that songwriter’s estate) - it doesn’t matter who wrote the song. You have to record a song that’s in the public domain (which precludes most popular songs) to avoid this. If I record a song that I wrote myself, I still get the percentage - that’s why songs are published. The “royalty” is this fee - the songwriter’s cut.
This one has pretty universal appeal:
Well see, thats not what I learned, learn something new everyday. but, its still does not detract from the fact that I hear remakes every day from groups. Some have more apeal than the original.
You people are terrible at this game. Bruce Springstein? No one under the age of 30 has even heard of Bruce Sprinstein.
Does anybody else here hate Billy Joel? If the only criteria used to determine whether or not somebody is a great musician is their popularity, then I have to disagree with the criteria. I think he has a terrible singing voice, and I don’t think his lyrics are all that profound or inspiring. Not that I’ve listened to all of his songs, because I think his music is cacophonous.
Billy Joel was a decent suggestion. He’s one of the best pop songwriters of all time and a hell of a piano player.
How on earth has no one mentioned Bob Marley yet? We have Billy Idol and Bruce Sprinstein which many demographics stay clear from. No one has mentioned Bob marley Legend though?
You never said they all had to be familiar with the album/artist; the goal is to find music they might all like, right? I mean, that’s part of the challenge, satisfying such a diverse group. I’m guessing your businessman isn’t up on T-Pain or Boys Like Girls. I was just looking for music that could be enjoyed by any of them.
Rush.
Who said anything about TPain or Boys Like Girls? People are listing somewhat diverse acts that some demographics ignore like the plague.
A group of shallow MTV kids are going on a road trip and one of them accidently slips in a Springstein album. No way in hell its staying in any longer than 20 seconds.
Rush is another abysmal selection. That band caters to a very select audience and no one else.
anything by weird al yankovich
-Imp
Philip Glass
Jackson 5.
You know, Maynard - if the trip lasts more than forty minutes, maybe you could ask each passenger for their favorite. Then, there is the radio.
Is it really that important? No one on the trip is open to a new experience? Are they all that self-centered?
It’s only music.
Maybe you could actually converse.
Bwahahaha. Good one Faust.
Crime and Punishment audiobook.
Critique of pure reason audiobook
Nice.