Can songs age poorly? Why or why not?

[dangerDoge]

There are plenty of lists out there on the internet of movies that didn't age well, whether from outdated special effects or just themes that are weird by today's standards. My question is to you, can songs age the same way? In other words, do trends of one generation of music make a song sound good in one time period, and then when the generation ends, the song becomes lackluster, especially to those who didn't live through the time period?

Inspired by my ipod on shuffle, and Rio by Duran Duran popped up. The song is about "80s" as I can think of.

[GoodManDave]

I think if there’s something that has overwhelmingly changed in the public’s ideas of what right and wrong is, then in some ways, it’s aged poorly (at least at the time), but I’m not really thinking of very many.

I know that around the holiday season, some people freak out about “Baby, it’s cold outside.” But that’s a misunderstanding about what’s going on (say what’s in this drink?) yet people love it when Cardi B sings a song about eating her ass or *ck the cops or whatever...

I would say that a few Disney and WB songs have aged poorly, just because most of the USA’s ideas of what racism is have changed. “We are Siamese” is very uncomfortable for a lot of people...

But certain sounds become dated, perhaps, but a lot of the songs themselves still work. The concepts in many songs still work overall (love, etc). With an update, they might not be so out of place. And retro can be cool, too.

Psycho is a favorite film... yet most of my friends will not watch it because “pppfffft. It’s in black and white.” Yet it’s still a decent horror movie or thriller.

Most art can have that sort of feel.

[NearlyNapping]

Yes. Some artists and songs age better than others. Look how many young people like Led Zeppelin. It's going on three generations now. The Doors is similar. The ones that didn't age well are the ones most young people have never heard of.

Or go back further in time and look at a song like "What A Wonderful World" by Louis Armstrong. It has a timeless quality about it.

There are also all kinds of traditional songs that continue to get recorded generation after generation.

Styles from a given period is a different matter. I think music styles tend to be popular only in a certain period. The music itself might stay popular over time, but using an old style in a new song doesn't usually work.

The weird thing about nostalgia is that it doesn't have to be good. Sometimes you get nostalgic about a song just because you haven't heard it in ages. Then you realize that musically it sucks. Being a nostalgic song isn't the same as it aging well.

[OldSchool_Metalhead]

I prefer old stuff but enjoy some newer bands here and there. I think it depends on the genre when it comes to the aging of songs. Anything more mainstream like pop, easily has songs that outdate faster because since there's many listeners they demand more. Music that is more underground tends to age better and gets certain appreciation by who listens. Now im not saying that this whole thing goes for every or any band though of course.

[Izumiblu]

I think there are some songs that are just classic that stand the test of times.

There are some songs that reflect the culture or the moment in time that don’t carry over very well. They often end up becoming mocked signatures of a fad gone wrong.

[Anonymous]

The fact that Rio is as 80s a song as you can think of is what makes it so great. It helped define that era and it harkens back to when bands—even the fashionable pretty boy heart-throbs of Duran Duran—wrote their own music and played their own instruments. It’s got a catchy pop hook. The bass pops and moves. The loud power chords in the instrumental sections build excitement. The Roland Jupiter synth with the random arpeggiator on it right before the chorus is soooo very 80s. The tune is clearly a product of its time, but that doesn’t mean it has aged poorly.

If you think of more current music, it’s rhythmic but there is little thought going into the melody. If I think of “Shape of You”, for example, it’s utterly boring by comparison. Think of how often the same melodic pattern repeats in “Thank U, Next”. And there is no room for music, for virtuosity. The singer must be babbling the entire time.

With all art, standing the test of time is what makes it great. Most doesn’t and the vast majority of pop music is forgettable, then and now. Of course you’ll always love what you were into when you first awoke to music, but what sticks with you is generally the good stuff. Duran Duran was after that for me, and I still listen to their first 3 records.

If your age is accurate, you weren’t around when Duran Duran was HUGE and the fact that you’re into it says the song *has* aged well.

[FunkyMonkee]

Yeah, some songs might age "badly" but, in most cases, it has a lot to do with who CLAIMS it aged badly. I've heard a lot of people around my age claim the `80's music was a huge pile of shit but, as far as I'm concerned, the only music better than that stuff was the psychedelic era and most of the `60's. Obviously, they weren't listening to the 80's music the way I was or they weren't listening to WHAT I was. They mostly remember the plastic crap that AM pop radio shoved down their throats constantly every day, I liked a lot of the stuff radio almost never played.
"Rio" was a piece of cheese ever since it was recorded! "Hungry Like The Wolf" was the only good song they ever did! MAYBE, "Girls On Film" was okay, too.

[ericclayton]

They made the best James Bond theme song, according to polls. They weren't your typical British syth-pop band, they rocked.

[FunkyMonkee]

@ericclayton Eh! Neither was XTC, Kissing The Pink, The Flying Lizards, The Fixx, The Motors, The Movies, Adam Ant, Gary Numan, Bow Wow Wow, The Plasmatics, Max Werner, Rupert Hine, Big Country, Art Of Noise, Frankie Goes To Hollywood, Madness or Bad Manners, but radio almost completely ignored all of them.

[ericclayton]

I think people think of the worst examples, stuff like the Thompson Twins.

[FunkyMonkee]

@ericclayton What's wrong with The Thompson Twins? I thought they were pretty cool.

[ericclayton]

More about fashion than anything. The British media referred to them as "the three haircuts", for example.

[FunkyMonkee]

@ericclayton I never heard that term, but I'm not British so...
They did at least one record with an artist's conception on the cover of JUST their haircuts so, apparently, they didn't mind being called that. It was just their signature just as much as Ish Kabibble's Moe-haircut was his signature. Once he and Moe Howard combed their hair a different way, you'd never know you were talking to them! They'd just be some guy you bumped into on the street!
I once saw an episode of The Mike Douglas Show where some guy in the audience spoke up to Mike as he was doing his show and nobody knew who the guy was until he combed his hair straight down and everyone suddenly knew it was Moe Howard!

[PastelGoth]

Yes. You remember "Tik Tok" by Ke$ha? That was an amazing song back then. If you listen to it right now its VERY cringy 😂😂😂 I think it's because of the generation and trends is what makes some age and sound poorly

[dangerDoge]

I thought Ke$ha was one of those "guilty pleasure" bands some people still listen to in secret, but I could be mistaken 😂

[PastelGoth]

I got that vibe too 😂😂

[OlderAndWiser]

There are many older songs which refer to calling someone on a pay phone and I suspect that most of your generation have no idea what that means. Of course, there are many protest songs from the Viet Nam war era that will have no meaning to anyone in another 20-30 years.

[MrOracle]

Rio is one of the greatest songs of the 80s. And there isn't a single Yamaha DX-7 sound in it.

If you want 80s music that didn't age well, listen to Janet Jackson's breakthrough album Control. Heck, listen to any New Jack Swing, which Control was an early example of. That style of music was huge for about 5 years, but it sounds so horribly dated that even throwback stations rarely play it.

[purplepoppy]

The problem is a lot of the old stuff wasn't really that good it was just popular at the time. People through the Beatles were good but in reality they were just popular with teen girls who followed them to look cool. Their music had little artistic merit. Good will always be good, bad always bad.

[starfyredragon]

However, when John Lennon got on his own, that was some good music.

[slatyb]

The Beatles music is still quite popular. Paul McCartney is selling out large venues playing mostly Beatles music. You may not like it, but a lot of people do.

[TouchMyMind]

Wow buddy... them fighting words. Duran Duran is a classic.

[dangerDoge]

For the record, I'd like to point out I never actually said Duran Duran aged badly. I just stated the question was inspired by them and the song was very 80s sounding 😛

[LiteSide]

I think there was a time it late 90’s when Auto-Tune was overused. “Believe” by Cher started it. I don’t think any songs with over-used vocal effects age well. Maybe because technology on effects have become more advanced and less cartoonish in post-production.

[CaptainLegal]

Depends on the artist mostly. 2pac, eminem, Michael Jackson etc. Their old songs are just classics. On the other hand Coolio, Ja Rule etc. They just blew, made a hit song and now people barely know them. It's about having talent to win people's hearts not win the masses. All new artists after 2010, mumble rappers, Sheeran, Billie Eilish they all gonna disappear after some years and people will barely remember them.

[Kaazsz]

Sure. The majority of the “Nu-Metal” era was complete utter trash, and upon listening to it again all these years later I’m grossed out that I used to think any of it was good.

[StellarDrift]

I love nostalgia, so no. I mean i still jam to Ace of Base. Takes me back. And Rio just did it for me. Good song. Duran Duran will never die. If a tune has that feel of a time period, and you're a sentimental type then I'd say no. Though no matter what time we're in, some songs just suck.

[Hawky_]

Meh depends on the song. Some songs are classics and never die.. some are popcorn and instantly forgotten. Look at the Stones. They've lasted because they have a body of music that is masterful and continues to be reinvented. It inspires the next generation. Same is true for many musicians but there are plenty of one hit wonders out there..

[slatyb]

Sure. We never know what was really good until ten or twenty years later. Some #1 hits are unlistenable. Some more obscure songs become popular. Billy Joel was dismissed as pop. Note he's seeking out Madison Square Garden every month.

[MarkRet]

Some songs are so good they never age. You have Duran Duran's Rio as aging poorly, but another Duran Duran song aged a lot worse: Girls On Film, because they're singing about a technology that just isn't used anymore.

[Anonymous]

typically I'll say no because if it's good, it'll always be good. Maybe just not appreciated as much at later dates. The only ones that could qualify as aging poorly are ones that sing about things that have totally different meanings now than they did when they were written. The music is still great, but the lyrics can be out of touch with current vocabulary trends.

[Clo917]

Hmm, I'm not sure I'd say 'poorly'. Maybe songs that were more relevant to that time period/culture, whether lyric-wise or beat-wise, so they sound really different than the current trends, but different isn't a bad/poor thing in my opinion.

[SexyAshh]

I love all old music, i think it gets better because you dont hear it played on the radio anymore often.

I can't stand mainstream anything

[LuvAsh]

Yea its called fast food songs. Songs that are only good for the moment and then like 2 months later nobody cares.
Some songs stand the test of time and usually those are the classics

[MoChA69]

yeah we went from Beastie Boys to fucking Taylor Swift

[Liam_Hayden]

Yes, many do, yet many people still listen to big band music and oldies stations are pretty popular so it is not a universal phenomenon.