To answer the original question, what this thread IS about! THE TITLE

1. Because there is more of it and more access to it. If we had only 5 electronic music records those 5 would be seen as amazing, by those into it. Because we have millions those 5 now look mediocre.

2. Times change, music changes, what once was seen as good is now seen as bad. You think it sucks, others don't. (dare i say it, TASTE)! Music today is more about quick rotation, fast transitions (yeah i'm not into that either) early electronic music was about long drawn out build ups. We loved those long drawn out build up, today they SUCK! The ADHD generation yeah but that is who they are, there fore it don't suck to them but it sucks to you.

3. to the points raised not in the title but in your opening post (edit: not in opening post, most of my reply were to other things you had said in your first few posts). Market Share, marketing, hype, manipulated by the industry. They sold more back then doesn't prove that today music mainly sucks where as before it didn't

4. a lot of modern electronic music always sucked, a lot of every style of music always sucked, it's not new.

FINALLY! yes your right no act will probably sell as many albums as these greats as you mentioned. In 10 years from now i doubt musicians will even sell albums. That don't make them any less great! that don't mean they suck!

These are the points i've been making over and over and they are very on topic to what you have started. it's because you won't accept them you are throwing them out seeing them as....

I should of probably focused more on the points in your first post than the next few you made.

You use windows as an example... well you'll notice that somewhere else i said you don't see the bigger picture. I'll go again...

The new windows are better, yet you say they are not.
The old windows need constant attention to stay as you mentioned them.
The poor windows of today are people being miss sold what look like the superior windows (now their is a point that could open up reflected back to music) but aren't.

High quality new windows are far superior than high quality windows of the past. It's just harder to tell the difference at first glance between the quality of new windows to those who don't know the difference! (make the connection to music there) Are more window sales people trying to force theses inferior windows on us than the ferior ones, who knows. The problem here lies in science, as it can tell us exactly what windows are superior outside of preferring wood over plastic and metal, where as MUSIC isn't a matter of what is more scientifically musical!!! Music IS only a preference it can never be above that! One song isn't more superior than another apart from with in the boundaries of what the current time deems as superior, BOOM!

It's clear to be you're just grasping for as many opposing arguments to debate as you can. As I said, if you're unable to see that the issue exists, you're not prepared to discuss it. The windows example was not meant to get in the way of the musical discussion. The fact that you're now trying to debate an issue with newly farmed vs. old hardwood as a construction material, an issue which is very widely accepted by the construction industry, and morph it into yet another argument just shows me that you're just bored and trolling for a pissing match (as well as uninformed on a topic like material science that is a matter of science and fact and not opinion). Next. I'm not going to argue just for the sake of argument.

You do have a point about the "electronic" portion of the title being a bit misleading, so I have modified that to more accurately reflect some of the ideas I've put forth here. I had been listening to classic trance at the time I originally created the thread, so electronic music was on my mind, but really the bigger issue spans all genres.

change the word window, to music and you might see why i posted that.

The problem with this debate is you haven't yet been able to convince me that todays music sucks more than it did before and out side of taste (yes i know but that's my point). And it is only you and many others like you who think that it sucks. it is your opinion and you are dead right, todays music does suck... TO YOU!!!

I'm not saying that you are wrong see you are the glass is half empty, other who oppose your view are the glass is half full. i am neither the glass is half empty or full, the glass can never be empty. The music does suck and doesn't suck at the same time. I will merely keep pointing out points that are trying to paint a bigger picture to your understanding, to open you up but all you seek is to close your self to support your opinion. if you were here saying why everything was amazing i'd most likely be pointing out why it sucked.

I've understood your point multiple times, yet you think i haven't, have you understood mine?

The question you should ask yourself is, why does most modern electronic music suck to you. Especially when Electronic music is at it's highest popularity it has ever been and DJ fronted festivals like TomorrowLand are seeing the biggest turn outs ever, bigger than what many bands achieved in the past. They actually self capped it's ticket sales for safety issues. I do also realise you revoked your 'electronic' from that so my comment there not so relevant. Personally I hate many of the new DJ's mixing styles, i think it sucks but the kids love it...

Perhaps the kids of tomorrow will view some guy plucking the strings on a guitar as sucking in comparison to pushing multi coloured pads on some techno gadget. What sucks and doesn't is down to opinion and that is the argument I am trying to defend. You have yet to convince me that it can be anything but. I totally understand your points but you don't see mine!

I think the desire to argue is interchangeable across many topics, it's just that I don't care to argue any of them.

Why start the debate then... You mentioned windows then I used some thoughts to contrast your statement. it's like any one puts anything that opens up your ideas you just close it down more, even chucking the original idea out the window, once it has turned against you.

I even showed you a hint how you could use my comments on the window to support your argument, not mine but you failed to pick it up. All this sucking music could be inferior products hiding behind a similar song that is amazing but people not in the know, using shite ipod head phones, can't tell the difference. The cheap window copying off the expensive one, they appear the same but on further inspection one clearly sucks.

Did you start the thread in hope every one would agree with you, then we'd all go on to have a good old winge on what these kids are doing today with no skill at all. Every one chatting how good things were in the past.

Well, things were good in the past and thing are good now. Things sucked in the past and things suck now. I believe we know more now so over all the highest quality today, is better than the highest quality of the past. REGARDLESS TO TASTE!!! LOL!!!!!

It was never intended to be a debate, it was intended to encourage an intelligent discussion regarding the causes. Instead it just attracted those looking for flame wars and such.

No, I started the thread with hopeless optimism about the level of douche baggery in the world thinking something good will come of it. I've already admitted multiple times it was a mistake. See a repeating pattern here? Statements made multiple times, never quite being absorbed. At these raves you grew up with, was there much recreational drug use? Just curious.

mitchemasha, perhaps in another thread another day we can find something to talk about, but for the purposes of the current thread I'm putting you in *IGNORED* mode. The main reason is primarily due to a promise I privately made to Timo a while back, and also due to the fact that, as I said I don't care to participate in debates where the opposition doesn't even believe the issue on the table exists in the first place. I don't have a problem with you personally outside of your behavior in this thread, so who knows maybe we will discuss something another day. And as always, feel free to vent as much as you want in my thread -- you may even get lucky and find others who will join you in the quest to troll for a pissing match, it's just that I reserve the right to ignore it all, and I will. You seem to be in a bit of a conflict with regard to deciding whether your time is valuable enough to not be wasted here, but I am free and clear of that conflict, so as I said, consider yourself ignored in this thread.

The Fact YOU had to make that promise previously proves something doesn't it. I haven't been offensive to you or made any sly digs. I have made all valid points towards the discussion but it appears your only willing to hear the words you want to hear anything else isn't allowed to be in the discussion or an opinion.

My VINYL ADDICTION saved me from drugs so to that comment, NO. I even quit smoking to buy more records. At the raves i needed a straight head as it was usually my equipment.

As for this Calvin Harris you had never heard off he made $66 million in a year. FWM tour beat him by only 1 million grossing $67 million but that spreads out over a lot more people. See i'm willing to bring more than OPINION to the debate. Will he be earning that much in ten years time, I doubt but we just don't know yet.

I will consider myself ignored, which for you is a shame as i'm probably the only person here who would take the debate with you to an actual level of substance. Although it might get heated at times!!! My inner circle of friends know this quite well and we love it!

Ok, sort of on-topic, I watched this video about 4 times after I posted that (which was the first time I had searched for it in years). One of the things that makes Lindsey Buckingham great was that his playing style was so recognizable, that even if he was playing a song you had never heard before, you would probably recognize the sound and say "that sounds like Buckingham", yet simultaneously no two tracks ever sounded too similar (as they often do from today's popular stars). In terms of his playing style, since he almost never used a guitar pick and played with his bare fingers, it seems you need to have the exact same fingerprints hitting the strings of a guitar that was tuned with the exact same wrists to truly achieve or imitate the Buckingham sound.

There are certain musical elements that are just not reproducible by an imposter, and his playing style is one of them. That is the pinnacle of what an artist should be -- original and creative.

Electronic dance music and modern pop will probably never be able compare to this, because given a certain combination of MIDI, samples (if we allow that cheat factor in at all), and synth parameters, technically anything electronic is reproducible. I'm as much a synth head as anyone reading this, but I know when to pay respect to the masters versus identifying those with delusions of grandeur. I never intended this thread to be about Fleetwood Mac, and maybe I will morph it into discussions of other bands as needed over time, but when I watch the talent of people like Buckingham, I'm just fucking humbled.

If you've never seen him describe some of the mixing and audio engineering techniques he used on some of the old Fleetwood Mac LPs, it is an amazing journey into the history of audio production, and somewhat staggering/ humbling to gain insight into the level of talent it takes to achieve record sales that keep on going 30 or 40 years later, even when those came after struggle to sell a single crappy MP3 on iTunes or whatever.

It's amazing that after all these decades, Fleetwood Mac's record sales still stay on the charts. There's a reason for that. Do you really think anyone will be talking about Katy Perry or Justin Bieber in 30 years, much less remember who they are, or buying their recordings?

What's worse, do you think the current generation of musical noobs even cares that anyone would recognize their work in 30 years? Many of them will change their own music genre as fast as many change underwear in order to sell records, stay in the limelight, and be able to continue to feed their addiction for attention. That's why they are there, they want attention, to be loved by the public (and if they can't be loved, they will take negative attention as a supplement). Longevity is not even a thought in their mind, they care about right now and today.

Screw actual musicianship, it's not needed with computers right? Screw using your brain when you can Google something and look it up later. Screw learning something from someone more knowledgeable on a topic when you can just be a douche and argue it because you're bored and need some sport in your life. Why bother?

Some fun homework: working from the following list, take note of the ones that are multiple-decades old, yet still on the list. Also take note of the noobs. Make a mental bet with yourself regarding which parts of that list will look very different 10 or 20 years from now, versus which artists will still be on it. Compare notes with yourself 20 years from now.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/li...-the-rich-list

Just a side note, I'd probably rather do prison time than listen to Justin Timberlake's music, but I am fully aware of the difference between personal musical preference and talent recognition. The guy is actually massively talented. I watched him on Saturday Night Live, and realized he has a very broad skillset that is spread across "pop music", dancing-boy-band-stuff, but more importantly to me he is reasonably good at comedic acting. Do not misunderstand me for a minute I respect the guy. He is very good at what he does. But what he does is spread so thinly across so many different media types that to compare him to some of the musical artists I've named in this thread is an absolute fucking joke. I think he is a smart enough guy that he would probably agree with me. He is not trying to be the next Tom Petty, he is trying to keep his cheese-mug in the limelight as long as can. Nothing wrong with that. He is making a shitload of money doing it and I do respect that, but a music legend he is not. Obviously he understands this, unlike his fans. That's why he is diversifying and trying to get into acting (or already has I guess).

But the bottom line is that if you're making a few dozen-million and still trying to figure out which skill you're best at, you're probably not one of the greatest musical talents of all time. Maybe overall performer? Social Media Icon? Paparazzi Bait? Perhaps. Not musical talents though.