Have you noticed that in the last few years, only young people have made it big in the pop industry? Everywhere you go, if it's pop music you're after, the only voices you're going to hear are those belonging to 20-year-olds.
Sure there are older throats in other genres, but in pop, it's teeny-boppers or nothing.
Not so long ago, it was perfectly acceptable to have slightly older singers in the charts. Don Henley, Billy Joel, Cher, Bruce Springsteen, Phil Collins, Bill Medley..... But lately, if you're over 25, you're on your way out. And if you're over thirty, well, you may as well be a dodo.
About eighteen months ago, a song surfaced in the UK by a fifty-something guy named Gorden Haskell, and a couple of radio stations got behind it. With a little publicity, it got to number one in the British charts, and I thought that was just great. Sometimes I really miss hearing songs being sung by a more mature voice, instead of being surrounded by the same nasal whinings from several dozen virtual teenagers. It's not that all the young stars are untalented, it's just that they are so prevalent. There are times when I just want to hear a little more experience behind a song, or simply a different kind of voice that younger singers just don't have.
This can't be put down to the rose-tinted ramblings of an old-school grampa, since I'm younger than Britney Spears myself (just). I just feel like a lot of pop songs would benefit from slightly different vocal abilities - abilities which, no matter how talented they are, today's monopolizing miniatures cannot possess at this stage in their lives.
Am I alone in this?
Author
Topic: Age limit on pop acts (Read 172 times) Share