You can call me a curmudgeon for saying that rock and pop music today are dreadful compared to that of their years of apogee (yes, my teenage years!), but you’d have to call Rick Beato a curmudgeon as well. And he knows a ton about music, being a musician himself, a producer, a music analyst, and a teacher. So he surely has more musical cred than I. Nevertheless, we generally share opinions about music, in particular the view modern rock and pop is tedious, repetitive, and boring. And I’ll argue strenuously that it’s not just because I like the music of my youth, and other generations like the music of their youth. Nope, metrics like musical complexity, the frequency of autotuning, and so on support the decline of rock and pop.
In the ten-minute video below, Beato compares the Beatles with Taylor Swift, and you can guess who comes off worse. (The “kids” may disagree, but they also are largely ignorant of the Beatles.) I have to say that I’ve listened to a fair amount of Taylor Swift, trying arduously to find out what it is about her music that’s made her the world’s biggest pop sensation. It can’t be her tunes, which are unmemorable, so perhaps it’s her lyrics about the bad guys she’s been involved with—something that surely resonates with her (mostly) female fans.
In this video Beato reacts to a 2024 NYT article (archived here) that discussed whether Taylor Swift is bigger now than the Beatles were in the past. That article concludes that both were huge and, if you use the right metrics, Swift can be seen as even bigger than the Beatles:
The length of Swift’s career has allowed her into the Beatles’ vaunted ballpark by giving her the chance to evolve her sound, grow her loyal audience and take full advantage of technological advances.
Yet as wild as it is for the Beatles to have accomplished so much in so little time, Swift’s longevity might be considered equally impressive in pop music, which often overvalues the new and — especially among female artists — the young.
Swift is of course still active, so we can’t measure something that I consider important: will their music be listened to twenty years hence? And how will it be regarded several decades after Swift or the Beatles stopped making music? We’ll have to wait, of course, for the answers to those questions, and I’ll be underground.
However, in this video, Beato details his experiences with Swift, having attended a number of her concerts and having a deep acquaintance with her music, as he has with the Beatles. But Beato is concentrating on quality, not sales or chart position. He notes that many of Taylor Swift’s melodies were written by a large number of people who change over time, compared to only three for the Beatles (Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison). And it shows in the lame melodies (Beato likes Swift’s lyrics better than “her” tunes.) Further, Swift’s instrumentation itself was largely produced and performed \ by people other than Swift—something that, says Beato, is simply “how pop music is made” these days.
Although one would think that the Beatles don’t need to be extolled by Beato, since he’s done it so many times before, but he does mention great melodies of Beatles songs like “Lady Madonna,” or “I am the Walrus.” (I could mention a gazillion more.) In contrast to Swift, he argues, the Beatles did not repeat ideas, and “they came up with all those ideas themselves.” He winds up calling Swift a “content creator”, who picks the brains of other people when she wants to change her music.
Beato asks for comments on his opinion, and I welcome yours below. But I doubt I’ll change my opinion that rock and pop music peaked several decades ago, and has gone downhill ever since. Swift’s immense popularity only proves that.
I have never heard a Taylor Swift song that comes close to the quality of this Beatles classic, and it isn’t all that complex compared to their later work. George Martin’s interpolation at 1:42, however, is a piece of genius:
The song was recorded on 18 October 1965, and it was complete except for the instrumental bridge. At that time, Lennon had not decided what instrument to use, but he subsequently asked George Martin to play a piano solo, suggesting “something Baroque-sounding”. Martin wrote a Bach-influenced piece that he found he could not play at the song’s tempo. On 22 October, the solo was recorded with the tape running at half speed, so when played back at normal pace the piano was twice as fast and an octave higher, solving the performance challenge and also giving the solo a unique timbre, reminiscent of a harpsichord.
I have not heard much of Taylor Swift, and am not inclined to make any effort to do so. I quite agree about In My Life. Second only to The Two of Us.
Oh man – latest thought I had was :
You know what – forget it.
Instead – how ’bout this tune – came up the past few days :
For No One (1966) : https://youtu.be/hgJ7dmr_ysU?si=JziAiOBzQilHT9aJ
PCC(E) highlighted this once – indelible.
🎼🎶
Sorry, but comments like these are largely opaque. Could you be clearer about what you mean? Thanks.
I’m saying in a talking-out-loud way I want to share all these thoughts that have popped into mind on the topic but stopped myself, and instead decided to ‘bump’ this post and the tune – as a positive contribution to The Beatles enthusiasm :
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/08/11/for-no-one-2/
Because amazingly, For No One popped in my head the other day – makes a great pairing IMHO with In My Life.
I confess I haven’t watched the video (nor have I ever knowingly listened to anything by Taylor Swift), but it seems that the only basis for comparison here is in sales. There has been a number of magnificent songwriters since The Beatles (among them Harry Nilsson, Pete Ham, Andy Partridge, Paddy McAloon, Jackie Leven, Leonard Cohen, Ron Mael…), but even THEY can’t really compete with The Fabs.
Good to see you mention Pete Ham! “Day After Day” is a gorgeous song with a gorgeous solo by George Harrison.
You didn’t mention Elvis Costello, who has written more than a few great songs. “Poor Fractured Atlas” is a favorite. I love the opening line: “He’s out in the woods with his squirrel gun to try to recapture his anger.” I’m sure Beato loves this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAxqaVSgPes
As for XTC, you mentioned Andy Partridge. But how about Colin Moulding’s songs? Here’s one of the last songs he wrote as a member of XTC. I suspect Beato would love the piano part, which has some unusual chord changes. Very Beatlesque!
As for the Beatles, I can’t decide what my favorite Lennon or Lennon-led song is. It might be “Rain.” But for McCartney and Harrison, respectively, the songs would be “Penny Lane” and “Here Comes the Sun.”
I’m a Badfinger nut for sure. Wish You Were Here is one of my all-time fave albums (And Head First should not be underrated). Costello had a remarkable early run, but I feel he eventually stretched himself a bit thin stylistically. Colin was great too, but less prolific and less challenging than Andy. Jeez I could (and sometimes do) go on all day about great songwriting, but I just better stop now before temptation gets the best of me.
I’m with you on Badfinger’s Wish You Were Here. It’s easily one of the best albums from the 1970s. (And the story about why the album was pulled from the stores shortly after its release is awful, and it was a move that apparently led to Ham’s suicide.)
By the way, another great album from 1974 (same year as Wish You Were Here) is Stackridge’s The Man in the Bowler Hat (released in the States as Pinafore Days). The album was produced by George Martin! Here’s a song from it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7W4ZbsJy2Y
Yeah, it might be fair to say that Costello has stretched himself thin. I won’t disagree with that. Lots of good songs though on Imperial Bedroom and Brutal Youth.
Huge Stackridge fan! And guess what: I’m featured in the Korgis recent video for the song “Coffee in New York” drinking…coffee in New York. Long story but I gave them the song title. Love the Stackridge/Korgis/anything with James Warren axis. I really must stop now to abide by website policy! (Can’t believe I get to wax swooningly about Stackridge here at Jerry’s page).
PS Imperial Bedroom is his zenith.
https://youtu.be/-30YaiR0vM4?si=_IscW93yRze5JuAD
You are correct, Jerry. Even my children and nieces and nephews have been caught listening to and greatly enjoying 60s – early 90s rock, and to the extent they were ever into Taylor Swift, it was not because of her music.
Yes there was a lot of dreck produced in the olden times, but the best of today’s music does not come close to the best of the golden era of rock (60s/70s). Hard to see Taylor Swift having the same staying power as The Beatles…
If you listen today to some of the early Beatles albums, you’ll notice they are formulaic and not that interesting. It wasn’t until later that they started experimenting and the music became what it is that we think of when we say the word. “Beatles”!
I understand Taylor Swift’s primary audience is teen and preteen women. I’ve never been one of those and can’t imagine what it is they find interesting especially in Taylor Swift’s music. I’m going to argue that it’s like trying to compare apples and bananas.
Besides, we old guys have to feel superior in at least one way, because it’s all we got!!
Well, not entirely true. The Beatles in their early years were most definitely doing some unorthodox things for some of their songs. “I Want to Hold Your Hand,” for example, has some unusual chord changes, unusual, that is, for a pop song from 1963. Everybody sat up and noticed that song, even Bob Dylan!
And then there’s “All My Loving,” which swings with a rhythmic intricacy that you won’t find in any Elvis Presley or Chuck Berry song from that time.
As for Taylor Swift, I recall liking a couple of her early country-ish songs, but I don’t remember right now what they were.
I’ve been listening a fair amount of “early” Beatles lately (pre-Revolver). While many of the song lyrics are in a pop vein, nearly always there is interesting stuff going on musically. It seems to me that they way their songs start and end is usually very inventive, and then there are always cool little tricks happening in the middle somewhere.
Here’s an email I recently wrote to some friends about “I Feel Fine,” for example. Sorry for the length of this post!
“Here is an analysis of the musical influences that contributed to the creation of The Beatles’ “I Feel Fine.” You can really hear how the riff in “Watch Your Step” was modified to become the guitar line in “I Feel Fine” that we are all familiar with. The explanation of the feedback that famously opens the song is also illuminating, as often these unique flourishes get attributed to mere accidents when actually there was a lot of experimentation done to get it just right.
Finally, I liked this perceptive quote about the trailblazing spirit in art from Brian Eno:
“Whatever you now find weird, ugly, uncomfortable and nasty about a new medium will surely become its signature…It’s the sound of failure: so much modern art is the sound of things going out of control, of a medium pushing to its limits and breaking apart. The distorted guitar sound is the sound of something too loud for the medium supposed to carry it. The blues singer with the cracked voice is the sound of an emotional cry too powerful for the throat that releases it.”
LS
https://open.substack.com/pub/ianleslie/p/a-deep-dive-into-i-feel-fine?r=4ciwk&utm_medium=ios
Most pop music today is awful. OTOH, there’s always an underground of creative music. The death of radio makes it harder to find a mass audience. Nonetheless we have Angine de Poitrine going viral on social media with their weird micro-tonal math music.
Long live weirdoes.
Hey Harold: I like this tip/video… sounds a bit like Tool’s 10,000 days. In re. Swift, she seems to me like a much watered-down Madonna. I think Madonna compares favorably to the Beatles in terms of longevity and versatility? And then there’s Michael Jackson. I think at least up until the internet era, much good music was still being made, that won broad popularity. The situation now is that the good music just finds its niche audiences.
I’ve been sharing their stuff around. I don’t know why I like it. Really I don’t.
Neither one is as big as Bing Crosby was: records, radio, movies, television. With regard to Swift vs. Beatles, there’s no doubt that the Beatles were a more significant influence in their day.
Beatles, Taylor Swift, eh? Sharing your demographic, it’s like, yeah sure, Beatles were — and are — truly special.
But what could have prepare me for the rise of emotion and feeling brought by the linked video of “In My Life”? This song has bubbled in my mind recently, an artifact of age and circumstances, and thanks so much.
I don’t mind Taylor so much, since her stuff is still better than most of the pop music on the radio. That is a sad statement.
But a favorite moment of mine is where she tried to sing a duet with the great Stevie Nicks, and it did not go well for Taylor (based on the look Stevie gave her):
https://www.instagram.com/reels/DDiN3DyTon1/
OMG, Swift was HORRIBLE in that “duet”. She is singing off key!
I lived through the Beatles heyday. I also lived in Key West for 11 years around the turn of the century. I mention these facts because I just heard that Hard Rock Cafe Key West will be closing soon. That’s one place everyone who visited me wanted to go to. Not anymore, apparently. True, not everyone who went to Hard Rock was a Beatles fan–but a lot were!
Could it be that we are witnessing the end of the rock and roll era?
Perhaps the end of the Rock & Roll era as we* know it, but I don’t think Rock & Roll is in any danger. There are lots of young bands out there ranging from hardcore punk to head-scratching microtonal funk (see the Angine de Poitrine video above). But it isn’t mainstream anymore, if mainstream even means anything anymore. You have to know where to find it. Songs by many may get millions of views on Youtube but you are very unlikely to ever hear them on the radio, unless you have a really cool radio station in your area that caters to new rock music.
We as in boomers and the following 1 or 2 generations that grew up listening to the Rock & Roll of the 50s through 90s, and when radio was the main source of music.
I’d like to share two YouTube videos. One from Rick Beato, (very much on point), and the other from Adam Neely. The second one is long, but it is worth the watch.
Rick Beato:
https://youtu.be/dyfrmPruT4s?si=baLTfT8wycGK_JdG
Adam Neely:
https://youtu.be/U8dcFhF0Dlk?si=esSHbtYFtrbN2mRL
By coincidence I watched a Rick Beato clip last night where he talked about a “Superstars of the 70s” compilation album that came out in 1973, which included a huge range of material from Seals & Crofts to Black Sabbath. His point was that many of those songs are still regularly streamed on Spotify and other services, and that young people on his staff still know almost all of them. At the end he wonders how many songs from the last three or four years will still be remembered 53 years from now (2079!).
Someone I trust for these things told me that Paul can’t read music. If I didn’t trust him so much, I’d find that hard to believe.
Without question, the Beatles were in a whole different dimension than today’s pop music. But don’t forget George Martin! He was an integral part. The guys would tell George what kind of sound they wanted and trust George Martin (or the engineers…the doubling harp on “She’s Leaving Home” is an example) to find it. The “Bach trumpet” on “Penny Lane” e.g. was all George Martin.
No, he can’t read music.
None of the Beatles could read music. Neither could Hendrix, Joni Mitchell, Bob Dylan, Eric Clapton…lots of legends.
Yes, the Beatles were much better than and other popular musicians – the only band that comes close is Jefferson Airplane / Starship.
I’ve read that Taylor Swift was named after James Taylor…and I much prefer his melodies, voice, lyrics, and guitar playing to hers. Not to mention the various voices and instruments that often accompanied him.
Think I’ll stop here, as my list could go beyond the limit of the Roolz.
It would be interesting to understand why we generally become unimpressed with new music after out late twenties. I certainly experienced that, but it hasn’t stopped me exploring more deeply into the genres that do interest me. For example, I had been unaware of Davy Graham until recently:
It’s not just music. Most people tend to stick with the things they grew up with, whether or not they liked them at the time and whether or not they like them now. The extreme version is “I have to know what is in the charts so that I know what to like”. But there is a lot of good music before and after one’s youth, even for those whose youth was in the 1960s and 1970s. It is fair to say, though, that good music after about 1980 didn’t have the cultural impact of good music in the 1960s and 1970s. On the other hand, most of those impacted by it in the 1960s and 1970s have left that far behind.
I wonder how true that really is? Certainly not true for me, but I must admit it does seem true for many people.
Beato hit it out of the park with this video on how key changes make popular music interesting and exciting.
Classic artists of ~50-60 years ago used multiple key changes in their music which made it sensational.
In the last 20 years or so, key changes either are absent or sparse which explains why most “contemporary” popular music including Taylor Swift sounds boring and “greyge” to the ears of us older curmudgeons.
“The “kids” may disagree, but they also are largely ignorant of the Beatles.”
This reminded me of listening to an interview with a member of an Australian girl group a few years back. The interviewer noted that the group’s songs were written largely by the interviewee and another member of the group, and asked if they saw themselves in the Lennon and McCartney role.
‘I’m not sure’, she replied, ‘I don’t know who they are’!
Taylor Swift has written some quite good songs (“the last great American dynasty”) in my opinion. I have actually been to two TS concerts. I have never been in a TS concert. I was the DD (Designated Driver). Overall, I think you are bit too hard on TS.