For some reason, at least amongst most Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, there is a perception that the music of their generation is vastly superior to that of my generation, Generation Y.  This idea irks me to no end. Believe it or not, my generation is not entirely made up of lazy, talentless hacks who get by with their parents’ money.  I understand, however, why the previous generations might think this.  They grew up in the ’60s and ’70s, during the onset of Rock and Roll.  Music was not new, but what it meant in their lives, particularly their teens years, was like never before.  It had become less a form of entertainment and more of an expression of what they were feeling.  The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Aretha Franklin and Marvin Gaye, all supremely talented artists of the era, have a profound influence on many artists in music today.

Those born in the ’80s and ’90s (me and my friends) grew up during the time of “pop” and alternative music, both terms that are a bit difficult to accurately define.  Record labels began pushing their artists to have a broader appeal.  The Britney Spears  and Madonnas of the world gained millions of fans all around the world and sold tons of records.  When history looks back on those decades, the largest acts are probably going to be what is considered the music of my generation.

Therein lies the problem, and why I think my parents’ generation has it wrong.  In the ’60s, the most popular groups happened to be the most talented and best musicians.  No one can argue that the Beatles weren’t talented, and they gained a fanatical following because of it.  In that era, the top of the pyramid of musical talent also happened to produce the most popular bands.  I think that is very different now.  There are loads of very talented artists and bands that don’t have millions of followers, but thousands.

The most popular and high profiles acts of today, in general, are less focused on talent and more focused on broad, commercial appeal.  That’s not meant as a knock.  I view Britney Spears, for example, as a great entertainer, but probably not a great musician.  I think the distinction between the two is the main difference of the two generations.  Their generation had great musicians as popular acts, we have great entertainers.  To find the great musicians of our generation, one must dig a little bit deeper than what is considered mainstream.  There are HUNDREDS of phenomenal artists that may not get the publicity of the teeny bopper crowd, like Miley Cyrus, or the loyalty of the older crowd, such as Bruce Springsteen, but are there none-the-less, producing great music year in and year out.   Just because they don’t get their picture in the gossip magazines every week or don’t sell a lot of records doesn’t mean they don’t deserve to be considered in the conversation.  Great music is still being made, you just have to find it.