not necessarily, but consumers sure have (thanks to spotify et al)

 

I couldn't say it's a masterpiece but it's definitely HIS masterpiece. And his biggest success. He was 52 years old.

 

No, they don't get worse. After I saw your images: yes, these artists get worse by the day. Normal artists don't. Normal artists get better.

(And I do NOT mean that because there are colored people in the images ... I mean that because the people in the images stand for a mindset, that's not a mindset but organized stupidity and idiocy and mysogynisticy and mental illness.)

 

I don't know if there is a definite answer to that question. Nevertheless, in my opinion there are a lot more reasons why an artist would get worse over time and only a few why he would get better. Getting better takes a lot of work, so in general you won't get better simply by getting older. More experience might be a factor but then again, it will mainly help you to be able to reach the level you are at more consistently, it will not improve your abilities in itself. Plus all the things that have been mentioned already.

 

Loss of Inspiration - Some artists may struggle to maintain the freshness and innovation that defined their early work.
Success can sometimes lead artists to cater to specific audience expectations or rehash past successes, resulting in less creative output.
As artists age, their physical and mental abilities might affect their artistic output.
However, many artists continue to evolve and experiment throughout their careers. Some artists even produce their most impactful work later in life, as seen with Rossini, for instance. Maturity, experience, and prolonged reflection can lead to richer and more nuanced artistic expression.
What some perceive as a decline might be a natural evolution not appreciated by all people accustomed to the artist's earlier style. So whether there is a decline or not is partly a matter of personal biases and expectations.

 

Some do, some don't. Consistency is the tough one in modern popular music. It is kinda rare in my memory for a band to continually pull out relevant work to that can hold up their previous output in their youth, but of course there's the aforementioned Radiohead, Tool, Frank Zappa and bands or artists that pop out something special like Box Of Rain from The Psychedelic Furs or Dylan's Time Out Of Mind.

 

A lot of musicians are forced to release new music to keep their careers going, and it might be made when they don't have a high creative mindset. Making music needs inspiration, so don't leave home without it.

 

A lot of jazz musicians seem to keep it together later in life. Rock musicians, not so much

 

Initially, I thought this thread may have something to do with age. If someone suggested as any human gets older, their, skin, muscle tone, strength and stamina changes so many of the more technically demanding skills they had in their youth require more work to execute, I would agree.

As for quality of work, this falls on the composer. That said, there is always the possibility that the composer believes their latest work to be the best thing they've ever done, even if everyone else doesn't think so. In Pop music, I do not define the word quality with recent three chord tunes as being remotely related. Within a month of beginner lessons, most chordal instrument students learn three chords. In many cases, the only quality in a Pop tune is the production.
Zappa nailed it in my signature quote. Creativity does not require approval from anyone.

 

yeah. humans in nature were meant to die by forty. so we evolved to where if important shit was needed to be created, it'd better be done by then. hygiene and medical advances staved that off.

as far as much of the popularized music in recent history, i'm of the opinion that since everything pleasing to the ear has been done already, the only thing left original to do is to make noise.

 

Last edited: Jan 28, 2024

The hunger is never there like when you started out! with any profession! You can make really good songs & make shit songs! But if it's your income then don't soley depend on music!!

 

Last edited: Jan 28, 2024

i cast you out troll, in the name of the father, the son and the holy spirit!

 

I dunno, his vocal styling in the first titty-centric vid of him supposedly in his "prime" was reminiscent of a badly autotuned crazy frog ringtone on helium.

He sounded marginally better in the last vid after he developed the raging crack habit, but there's not much between the two.

 

Is he wrong though?

 

Where there is demand, there will be supply.

 

made a quick graph not related to the question obviously

 

yes very, consumerism doesnt care about how much shit you upload; or how many times something is shown to them

 

Last edited: Jan 28, 2024

But the point is that Spotify sells a commodity, like soy beans. Not art.

 

Am I the only one who thinks all 3 songs were absolutely f-ing horrible?

 

what was actually said in response to my comment on how much music hes released...

with that wording in response to what i said, is the notion is that you need to play the algorithm. when thats not the case in determining if youll get support for your art, or if youll stay relevant in the music world