Too often I will listen to the radio and hear a song that I think just really doesn't deserve to be played on air. Do people really like to listen to this? What is so good about the song? Sure, it has a catchy phrase but the rest of it may as well have been digitally created. I mean, how is the quality of music judged these days? Well if it's on the radio i'm guessing it's just based on some kind of commercial image or sound, but I want to know what separates the good music from the bad. It seems that in all art, the 'masterpieces' are the ones that have stood the test of time. For literature - something like the works of Shakespeare, for philosophy - something like Plato's or Aristotle's writings, and for music we have people like Bach, Mozart, Beethoven. I don't think we can doubt the greatness of these works. Musicians all around the world still appreciate and play these pieces by these great musicians. Their legend and influence hasn't died yet and I don't see it dying for sometime. But what about say The Beatles? or Jimi Hendrix? They revolutionised the music and guitar world and their music is also still played today. Now I don't know if they are going to last as long as Bach or Mozart but they certainly have left quite a mark in the world of music. So what makes them so great? Could it just be because they were the first of their kind to produce that kind of music? Does inventing a style of music necessarily make you a first class band or musician? Surely it can't alone. It appears that they more so defined an Era. That their music was a turning point for the music world, that they changed the music paradigm of their time. It might be that their songs are actually respected as a part of history as opposed to just quality of music. (Don't get me wrong, I highly admire the music of both the Beatles and Jimi Hendrix). So it could be that because they have a history attached to their sound that they are regarded as 'greats' or 'legends'. It does seem a little bit unfair however for those who might be just as good but who will never receive the same credit. And maybe it is because they can't. Not that there is an end to music (at least in my opinion) just that they can't break free of the current paradigm of music. If everyone is playing the same (or roughly) thing, then no matter how good you are , you're not going to stand out (of course with a few exceptions). So i often find myself being careful when I'm judging music and comparing it to the 'greats' because they might be just as good however they just lack the... innovation, uniqueness, the ability to change a world's view on music <= (I was struggling to describe that part) Anyway, so I guess it ends up being 'what' the musician/s does (as well as being awesome) as opposed to 'how good they are' that makes them a legend.
