Has acting and musicianship quality decreased in the cell phone, social media age we live in?

[repoman]

Just a random thought.

 

[Bronzeage]

Maybe, maybe not. Cell phones have been in general use since the mid 1980s. That's not really enough time to make such a judgement. If it were true, what would be the linkage?

 

[repoman]

Distraction, plain and simple.

Also only in the past 10 years has internet browsing been easy and in the past five moreso and now in the past two years these screens are very large with high resolution and the bandwidth gotten very good.

Social media has taken a lot of oxygen out of the room (mental headspace) as well.

 

[prideandfall]

i'm going with no.

acting is at a level beyond what it has ever been before, the performances being put out right now year-to-year are utterly incredible across multiple platforms and genres.

music is a bit more nebulous, it's harder to quantify and it's a much broader spectrum of output to gauge, not to mention how subjective it is.
i can definitively say that the kind of music that i like is not as prevalent anymore and isn't being made as much as it once was, so the overall scope of current music is less interesting to me... but that's based on my personal taste in music, i wouldn't call it a decrease in the quality of music.

 

[another1]

Social media has taken a lot of oxygen out of the room (mental headspace) as well.

Yeah one problem is the amount of material being made. Quality music is made working with a professional recording engineer - in an actual studio. The tablets and notwhats are for practice but nobody seems to understand that. Music is piling up so fast there is no time to enjoy it. The internet is devaluing everything.

Napster days were alright. Trade a beat and tweak it - send it back to be altered some more. Forget about collaborative masterpieces now. Social media is greatly about selfishness and desperation. Now, making decent tunes requires being a complete prostitute. A diseased one. You can see how fast it is spreading if you can do third grade math.

Soon everything will seem sort of empty. People will probably turn back to the classics at that point, because of course there is a deep need for good music. I rarely find a good cd while dumpster-diving in what remains of our real world, and same goes for surfing You Tube for good stuff. It almost isn't worth looking anymore.

 

[Ford]

i'm going with no.

I'm going to agree.

Lately I've been revisiting some of the movies and television from the 70s and early 80s (before the internet) and while it seems like a cliche', we really are living in a "golden age" of dramatic content on the small screen for certain.

As far as music goes, we're still in a transitional period as far as I'm concerned. The ability for artists to make music without the aid of expensive studios has gone at a speed which the creativity hasn't been able to keep up with, but I think there's a time coming where this ability is going to lead to some really amazing music.

The technological advances have been used to create greater superhero shows and EDM music respectively, but I think a point is coming where content creators in both visual and audio are going to go for quality over quantity, and the results will be amazing.

 

[jab]

musicianship yes--going back to the Ipod. acting, no, not that I have noticed

 

[ronburgundy]

I don't see why the quality of acting would go down. As for music, I think the tech advancements cut both ways, increasing the % of music that is crap created by talentless hacks, but also increasing the raw number of highly talented musicians who can make their music available to people.

The personal tastes of DJs and label scouts used to partly determine what got exposure and thus became popular. I suspect most of them had a better ear for quality and talent than the average person. Now, what becomes a viral hit is largely unpredictable and more of a bottom-up social contagion phenomenon. That social contagion favors lowest common denominator music, and thus while more "democratic" probably produces more worthless crap that gets old in week and won't stand the test of time. Also, its now so cheap and easy to put your music out there that more and more people without any real talent or artistic vision are just tossing out crap in the hopes they get rich and famous.

However, that same easy and cheap feature means that more and more people will try their hand at music and thus more people with actual talent will not only wind up discovering that they have it, but the odds of being exposed to obscure talent is much higher. So, while if you just pay attention to the charts, the ratio of gems to vile crap is lower today than 30 years ago. However, if you spend some thoughtful effort searching, you can find a greater number of talented musicians today.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Just a random thought.

This social media age is what 5 to 8 years old? What is the basis for coming to a conclusion at all?

 

[Playball40]

I'm going with no. My kids attend performing and visual arts school and let me tell you, some of these kids are unbelievable musicians (actors and artists too).

 

[rousseau]

Nope. As the world becomes wealthier more people are free enough from poverty to become artists. In fact, the exact opposite is happening: there are so many excellent artists these days that it's next to impossible to make money doing it.

 

[another1]

This social media age is what 5 to 8 years old? What is the basis for coming to a conclusion at all?

Look at how fast it has transformed itself and the people using it for the five to 8 years. I could easily spend a five to 8 years sitting on the toilet without noticing that my lower extremities have gone completely numb. I'd be unable to walk, once the shit finally flushed. But no need to jump to conclusions because it will NEVER flush. Maybe I'll just DIE on the goddamn toilet like a rock star. Everyone else thinks they can be one. Why can't I!

if you spend some thoughtful effort searching, you can find a greater number of talented musicians today.

How much thought should I put into it? Seems like the platforms will have to do the thinking for me eventually. Because math. Too much stuff man. When platforms do the thinking, I'll no better off than I was when I had only a few choices of tapes to buy at (insert name of long gone local record store here). Why sift through garbage and thank a dumpster and the assholes unrinating in it? Should I thank it because it was empty enough to crawl into? How about thanking it for the free distraction? Yeah, the onslaught of needless distraction is such a blessing isn't it?

 

[Underseer]

Why would it m

And given our tendency to lionize the past, how would you even tell one way or the other?

 

[another1]

And given our tendency to lionize the past, how would you even tell one way or the other?

Apparently we can't tell and that should worry you because automation has no place in music, past production and distribution. Of course you need the tech but nah not at this level. Performance should have nothing to do with a phone. What he hell happened? You say we lionize the past and of course that is true. I'd like to preserve a certain present just a little longer before Hell becomes reality. Music is just another symptom of everything being destroyed by robots. Sooner than predicted it WILL happen. They will be inside us and all around really soon. As for the music part - not everyone deserves a guitar. That is why I thought Guitar Hero was created. I was like, whew I'm glad we can get some real players now, because the fake ones will surely get what they mentally desire from a video game. Nope it just makes those doomed children think they can do anything more easily.

Music software on a phone is something that should not be. You should not be allowed to create what is called music so easily. Music should come from pain and sometimes love (so basically all pain). Becoming successful at music with integrity looks something like saving up to buy that shiny guitar and getting calluses while picking it as you pass out every night. Summer of 69 type thing. The guitar can't be played on a cellphone but bet there is an app for it. Not good man. Not good at all. Robots are coming and it may be too late etc etc

All instruments are in Pro Tools and sometimes they sound even realer than real, but what the hell? Where is the pain? Master a software and you can become a star very easily if you can fit into a whore costume and go on You Tube and the rest of those terrible "places". Try it I guarantee there is still a little room left on slut corner. Believe in yourself. But that isn't the point. There is no pain in software. Developing it is probably terribly painful but using it isn't. It is like learning math or doing water color. You can take a class, and not like guitar practice class. Not like guitar practice at all. Very little suffering in it. But you can, and if you can produce enough money to buy the software and learn the math - you're there. You don't even have to pay because you can pirate it. That is not fair. I see very little victory in becoming successful using computers to make music. Especially if you use the easy stuff. It becomes easier every month and yes you should be frightened, if you truly love music. But not frightened for yourself, of course. We'll be dead when this "matters", and that statement applies to everything until the day humanity is in a living state of atrocious deathlessness due to what we allowed that to happen.

"How would you even tell one way or the other" is a disturbing question when asked relating to automation and computer stuff. Think about it man. You can become a star musician without ever touching an instrument. Same deal with having a life you don't even live by use of a computer. Most of the world has already warmed up to it and many are fully ensnared at this point, particularly the youth.

So basically you're allowing an invisible robot to murder kids and destroy reality. I don't want invisible robots killing kids. Their lives are too important because they represent reality when you're dead. You're responsible for Hell on earth if you allow "it" to go advance this rate. This little pocket of history will not be "lionized". It will be completely despised, assuming the future victims of our irresponsibility will have the capacity to place blame with their own thoughts.

 

[ronburgundy]

Just a random thought.

This social media age is what 5 to 8 years old? What is the basis for coming to a conclusion at all?

Social media effects are just an extension/amplification of the effect that the internet and recording technology have been having for decades. And given that most music consumers and most of the chart-topping musicians are under age 30, even a half decade is long enough to notably shift the nature of the music landscape.
In fact, given the clear drastic shift in how musicians record, distribute, and get exposure, and how consumers consume music it would highly improbable for their not to be a notable impact on the way artistic talent is reflected among those getting paid for their music.

Any person with access to an internet connection can create and distribute music directly to any person in the world. In fact, no instruments or any ability to play an instrument is even required (as is true of plenty of well paid DJs. An consumer with internet or cell access can consume anything uploaded to the internet with virtually zero investment, one listen at a time, often for free (even if the musician gets paid indirectly by advertising dollars). IOW, you can get paid for your music without a single person paying for it because they enjoy it, or if a bunch of people find one part of one song you make catchy enough to enjoy for a week but don't like anything else you do, so in the past would never have bought your album.

As I explained in my prior post, these factors combine to make it likely that the % of people trying to make $ off of music that actually have high artistic talent has dropped, but this same "democratization" of music also means that anyone with talent is more able to get their music out there. IOW, the raw number of talented musicians making their stuff available has increased by X amount, but the number of talentless people putting out their stuff (and often making $) has increased by some multiple of X.

Nope. As the world becomes wealthier more people are free enough from poverty to become artists. In fact, the exact opposite is happening: there are so many excellent artists these days that it's next to impossible to make money doing it.

That wrongly assumes that all the additional players in market are "excellent artists". Given all the factors I refer to above, it is likely that the vast majority of additional players competing in the marketplace are notably less talented and with less artistic vision than the average paid musician of the past. And plenty of them are getting paid, since (as I describe above) no one in the world needs to enjoy 99% of what you do to make money off one song that goes viral for a week. The structural changes mean that those putting out "music" for profit are a far more representative sample of the general population of average people.

The effect on music is the same as the effect of journalism, and the "artistry" among "authors". Is the average random blog today "excellent" journalism relative to the average newspaper article of 20 years ago? Is the average piece of fiction posted by any random person online "excellent" storytelling relative to the average book on the shelves of the few libraries that still exist?


Is