Give us something new

Just a few years ago, it was rap-rock, "sample everything you can get your hands on" rap, hardcore and boy bands. The early and mid-1990s were ruled by the grunge movement, gangsta rap, the resurgence of country music and, thank God, a minor electric blues revival. Power pop and hair bands topped the charts in the late 1980s. \nEvery few years seems to spawn a new sound. But for the past three years, the only band that even comes close to these in widespread popularity appears to be the Dave Matthews Band, and (I say this at the risk of being lynched by mobs of angry frat boys) the musicians certainly don't seem to point to any new exciting sounds. To call today's music scene stagnate seems to be an understatement. Strangely enough, nothing in the past few years has really emerged as a dominant musical force. What will be tomorrow's pop music?\nThere was a time when we could look into the past and combine elements of other genres to invent the next style. Have we exhausted all the possibilities already? Maybe we're not looking back far enough. Maybe neo-baroque-based funk will really have the kids running to the store. And I'm dying to hear P. Diddy sample from a Bach fugue and spice it up with some raga influences.\nPopular music genres seem to go out of style quicker than clothes from the Gap. Maybe this means the problem is in the quality of the music that becomes popular. With the expansion of pop music into almost every imaginable facet of life, it's no wonder why styles change so quickly. Music grows into more of a business than an art. The record companies realize this, make a few clones and tell us it's what we want to hear. I know it's irresponsible to place all the blame on the record companies, but anyone who tries to market Oasis as the next Beatles has to be Lucifer.\nMuch of the blame rests on relentless advertising. Everything has a soundtrack to it now. Television shows advertise for the music played during each episode. Every leisure activity becomes a new market ready to be exploited, and music videos and commercials become interchangeable. MTV has somehow managed to lower its standards consistently for the past 10 years or so while maintaining a fan base that has to be aware of the modern equivalent of payola.\nBecause emerging styles tend to grow from contempt of the previous trends, it's usually a good bet that the new style will aim sonically for the opposite extreme. The problem now is that there is no form to counteract. Musicians can't counteract today's music because it's too bland to define. This leaves songwriters with nothing to say about their culture. There is nothing to play off of. No personalities to shout against. Springsteen is too old to be wild and the only thing Madonna could do to shock anyone would be to shut up.\nThere are a couple of solutions. We have to decide what's going to be big. That means taking an active role in finding out what bands or musicians we really like and supporting them. It might even mean crafting our own style. We'll have to find something to complain about or clever new ways to complain about the same old problems. I can think of a few that never got around to being fixed: overproduction and "corporate" music are more rampant than ever. \nAt least when this sort of thing happened in the 1970s and 1980s competent musicianship could almost always be counted on. If the lyrics sucked, at least the music was interesting because it was often played by virtuosos or well-trained studio musicians who understood taste. New recording tools, effects and techniques exploded into new planes of expression. It's clear that the past plays an important role, but musicians need to be daring enough to explore new timbres and feels instead of relying on gimmicks. It's a thankless job because the pioneers rarely get the credit for their innovations.\nIt's hard to predict exactly what the new sound will be, but it's clear that we're ready for something to happen. If nothing else, we can always depend on a blues revival.