Due to the interest shown in the controversy of some of my previous entries i would now like to draw some attention to the 2000s or the so-called 'noughties' and hear what some people think.

In my opinion, this decade has been the weakest of the past 5 decades. If you examine this website you will find that only 4 songs have made the top 100.

Through comparing the 1990s with the 2000s i have noticed something very interesting. The 90s saw success of all music genres, whereas the charts these days only really feature hip/hop, rap and freestyle type music. Rock music is now a dead type of music. I haven't been overly motivated to watch video hits that much lately but the only rock these days is Emo.

AKA TOTAL WASTE-OF-TIME BULLSHIT

Who honestly wants to hear emo rock? It actually pains me having to listen to the likes of Fall-Out Boy, My Chemical Romance, 30 Seconds to Mars, etc.

To me the only good music around is material produced by Timbaland. He has transformed the image of such artists as Justin Timberlake, and Nelly Furtado. These 2 have dominated the charts for the past year.

My top 10 songs for the 2000s are as follows:

1)Lose Yourself - Eminem - 2002
2)My Love - Justin Timberlake - 2006
3)What Goes Around...Comes Around - Justin Timberlake - 2007
4)In Da Club - 50 Cent - 2003
5)By The Way - Red Hot Chili Peppers - 2002
6)Survivor - Destiny's Child - 2001
7)Crazy In Love - Beyonce Knowles - 2003
8)Forever Young - Youth Group - 2006
9)Boulevard of Broken Dreams - Green Day - 2004
10)Cry Me a River - Justin Timberlake - 2002

Hence my top 3 artists for the 2000s go to:
Justin Timberlake, Eminem, and RHCP

Coincidently these 3 all emerged from the 1990s, and for this in years to come music is in need of a big revival.

Please share your thoughts

keep in mind, this decade isn't over yet...

i'm struggling to compare decades... i don't think my knowledge of music is extensive enough to comment really. An interesting thing to think about is whether or not music is getting worse as time goes by. it might be, but i can't see a likely reason for it. with the internet, and pay TV etc. people are exposed to more music than ever to be influenced by. on top of that, instruments are becoming more affordable, home recording has never been easier, and computers are making a whole heap of things possible that were never possible before. with that in mind, you'd expect the amount of good music to be on the rise. hovever, this doesn't look like the case. music of today seems just about as good as any other time. maybe that will always be. it's an interesting thing to think about though.

Not everything has been calculated. In the 90s I'm sure all the other decades dominated the singles and album polls but once top 40 of the decade lists starting coming out in 1999 that's when all the records shot up in placement. Wait til the end of 2009. We'll be seeing a lot more records shooting their way up thanks to best of 00s lists.

I think there is a lot of great music from this decade, but it doesn't get the mainstream exposure it should. Thank God for the Internet. I'll post a list of my favorite albums and songs later once I remember where I put them.

"Hence my top 3 artists for the 2000s go to:
Justin Timberlake, Eminem, and RHCP"

RHCP, seriously? On the strength of two really quite dull and not very good albums?

There's been plenty of great stuff this decade not that you;d know from studying the Billboard charts, same as any era in history really though.

Richard, let me start by saying that your writing is concise (which makes you seem like an intelligent person), but your posting upsets me, and I'm probably not alone. I say this with all due respect: your taste in music and your commentary on the current state of music need serious re-evaluating.

1.) "this decade has been the weakest of the past 5 decades"

Like someone else said, this decade isn't over yet, and for you to make a blanket statement such as this shows not only a lack of knowledge of music, but a general impatience which is not indicitive of a true music lover. And if you're looking for classic songs and albums, wait until the decade is over. "Classics" take time to appear.

2.) "Rock music is now a dead type of music"

A deeper investigation will show that this is not true. Rock may not be the popular music right now, but it's still being made, and there are some great new, innovative, original rock bands out there. Again, a blanket statement that is completely unfounded.

You may not like My Chemical Romance, but "The Black Parade" was one of the most critically acclaimed albums of 2006. If you don't like the songs, fine. Heck, it's not my favorite music either. But I acknowledge the artistic nature of it, and the talent that went into its creation, and you need to do the same. To call it "bullshit" is, objectively speaking, incorrect.

We all have our own musical tastes, it can't be denied. You have yours, I have mine. But your top ten list has no place on this website, because none of your picks are acclaimed, or even objectively "good" for that matter.

If you're going to write intelligently about music, you need to strike a balance between objectivity and subjectivity. I ask you: do you really think that in 10 years any of the songs on your list will be considered "classics"? Perhaps you listen to them now and they make you shake your ass, but good music offers more than that.

Justin Timberlake is a talented guy. So is Eminem. All the artists on your list are talented, but ask yourself what they're contributing to popular music. Are they innovative? Are they pushing boundaries? Is their music having a wider social impact?

Do yourself a favor: listen again to Boulevard of Broken Dreams. Then go listen to Wonderwall by Oasis. If you notice any similarity, perhaps you should re-evaluate your list. If you don't notice anything, then maybe you should refrain from posting again on this website.

So any song that begins with a dolefully strummed acoustic guitar is merely a ripoff of "Wonderwall" and hence worthless? I guess I'd better throw out my Nick Drake albums, then. ;-)

Anthony, if like you say everybody has their own musical taste, then who are you to say that Richard's or anyone else's expression of that taste has no place on this website? And what in blazes does "objectively 'good'" mean? Christ, all opinion is subjective. -Nothing- is "objectively" good, except IN THE AEROPLANE OVER THE SEA.

I don't agree with a lot of what Richard says (e.g., I have no idea what's up his keister about OutKast), but his top 10 list on this thread is more than defensible. You ask what Justin (and by extension, Timbaland) is contributing to music; well, for one thing, before "My Love" I doubt anyone ever came up with the idea of a dance-pop number having a synth hook in the chorus that sounds like Porky Pig imitating Curly of The Three Stooges, so it's got that going for it, which is nice.

But in all seriousness, almost every song on Richard's list (no, I don't know who Youth Group is either) is one that will likely be listened to 5-10 years from now as a fine example of what was good and popular in its time. But to paraphrase THE BIG LEBOWSKI, that's just, like, my -opinion-, man.

Harold, listen to the songs again. Boulevard is Wonderwall, just re-written. Unintentional or not, it's a rip-off. There wouldn't be a mp3 mash-up of it if SOMEONE didn't agree with me. Plus, Noel Gallagher even commented on it. My comment was not personal opinion.

Anyways, my diatribe over Richard's post was a completely honest and fair reaction to a Top Ten list that is lacking in musical intelligence and variety. I looked at it, and I saw one thing: it's the product of someone who hasn't turned off the MTV or top 40 station long enough to realize that there are other genres out there besides pop. Where's the variety in his list?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those 10 songs he listed all went #1 at some point. But just because a song goes #1, doesn't make it a classic.

And Richard, don't go getting flattered that we're talking about you. I'm sure it makes you feel all warm and toasty inside, but your comments are so ridiculous that SOMEONE had to say something.

Haha, you're funny Anthony, and you also raise some good points.

Regarding the whole "objectivity/subjectivity" debate, if an album like Sgt. Peppers (just an example) consistently appears in critics lists (and therefore, appears on this website), doesn't that mean it's objectively good? Regardless of what my personal opinion of it is, can't we say that because it's stood the test of time and has been critcally acclaimed for so long, that it's greatness contains some objectivity?

Cheers!

Would I be mistaken if I said every song on your list went number one, whether it be on singles chart or as part of an album on an album chart.

There's far more to the music scene than what your being force fed by MTV

Antony and the Johnsons? Arcade Fire? Bright Eyes? The White Stripes? Sufjan Stevens? Bob Dylan? The Yeah Yeah Yeahs? Bjork? Wilco? The Libertines? My Morning Jacket? Eliot Smith? Beck? TV on the Radio?

Dont see them much on MTV, but all have released some true masterpieces in the Noughties, plus countless other masterpieces have been released by artists who I have not mentioned

The difference is the fact that the mainstream does not embreace this music like it embraced the Beatles, Led Zeppilin, Pink Floyd, Elvis etc so the charts rarely feature some of the asforementioned artists

What What What?
Is there a single album since OK Computer in 1997 that could really be considered a classic in the same breath as The Beatles or Bob Dylan?
Honestly...
Well maybe a couple of near misses...

Midaso. To answer your question about is there an album since OK Computer that warrants the status of a classic. Yes, it's called Yankee Hotel Foxtrot.

As for the 200s being the weakest decade - personally - I have found the 2000s to be the best decade of music for one reason: accessability. I know that if I were alive in the 60s I wouldn't have known who the Velvet Underground were, but being alive in the 2000s I can find bands that won't get played on the radio. Personally, I've felt that some of the love for the Beatles is that everyone has heard their stuff a bunch, and it's just familiar, not neccessarily the best stuff out there. I like the Beatles, of course, but for people who listen to classic rock radio, it's about half of what you hear anymore.

I don't think musical tastes are as homogonized anymore because we don't get 90% of our information through the radio, but through the internet. In the 60s, even the critics could probably listen to only so much, and a lot of it was the Beatles so they just got lumped in their #1 spots. Now, there is so much content it's overwhelming and everyone, including critics, can express their personal tastes a bit better when creating lists. It's hard to now be the one act that defines music of a culture because everyone's taste is so different.

Anyway, here are my lists:

Songs:
1. My Morning Jacket - Gideon
2. The Hold Steady - How a Resurrection Really Feels
3. Spoon - The Way We Get By
4. Wilco - Pot Kettle Black
5. The Roots - The Seed 2.0
6. The Strokes - Someday
7. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs - Maps
8. DeVotchKa - How it Ends
9. The Knife - Heartbeats
10. Ghostface Killah - Back Like That

Albums:
1. Wilco - Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
2. My Morning Jacket - Z
3. The Hold Steady - Boys and Girls in America
4. The Roots - Phrenology
5. The Flaming Lips - Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots
6. People Under the Stairs - O.S.T
7. The Stokes - Is This It?
8. Blur - Think Tank
9. Sigur Ros - Agaetus Byrjun (I misspelled that)
10. Ghostface Killah - Fishscale (and LCD Soundsystem - Sound of Silver is giving that a run for its money)

I predict that Richard's top song, "Lose Yourself," will be ranked higher in ten years than it is now. Just my opinion, but it has everything that classic pop music should have and then some.

Sufjan's Illinois will be considered a classic in the same sense as Beatles and Dylan.

As it should be.

I actually have found a lot this decade to adore. I recently compiled a list of my top 200 singles of the deacde. Following the format, here's my top 10:

1. Kylie Minogue- "Can't Get You Out of My Head"
2. Annie- "My Heartbeat"
3. Björk- "Pagan Poetry"
4. Annie Lennox- "Pavement Cracks"
5. Franz Ferdinand- "Take Me Out"
6. Morrissey- "I Have Forgiven Jesus"
7. LCD Soundsystem- "All My Friends"
8. The Strokes- "Reptilia"
9. Yeah Yeah Yeahs- "Maps"
10. RES- "They Say Vision"

Wow. Weezy, that is a bold statement. Don't get me wrong, I think Illinois is a great album, and yes, it has received tons of critical acclaim, but I'm just not sure that it's as innovative and groundbreaking as what the Beatles recorded, or as socially conscious and brilliant as Dylan.

The musicianship and lyrical talent of Sufjan can't be denied though. And thank you for giving a great example of how the 2000's have been a great decade for music, and not one of the worst.

Slush, your comment is interesting. I agree that if we'd lived during the sixties, we probably never heard something about Velvet Underground and many other obscure bands that are now considered "cult classics" (United States of America, The Left Banke, The Millennium, Os Mutantes to name some of them).
Within' a world of the internet, everyone can hear everything of music wherever he lives and it's fantastic !

New music just doesn't give me the same feeling
Doesn't give me the same excitement as discovering music from the glory days...

Anthony. I dont see you posting any topics of interest. dont criticise my choices.

1)Emo Rock being crap is not an opinion but a fact. It is just whinging, complainy loud noise. And the people who sing it have silly hair.

2)Rock Music wont get better, and neither will other music. Look at the top songs from the 2000s. The bulk of them are from the early decade - 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003. This trend will continue!


On the other hand yes i do agree with you. Boulevard of Broken Dreams is a rip-off of Wonderwall. In fact you can download a mix of the 2 called 'Wonderwall Boulevard' and the 2 mix perfectly. Despite this it doesnt mean Boulevard of Broken Dreams is a bad song

What do you consider 'emo rock'? Is all 'indie rock' 'emo'? Does The National qualify as 'emo rock'? Or Battles? I suppose Death Cab for Cutie and Arcade Fire are 'emo rock' too?

Meh, I don't think all their songs are great.. but they definitely have some good songs, especially The National and Battles imnsho.

at the drive-in baby! it's emo, and it rules. that's about all the emo i listen to though. Can't say i hate it as a genre though... never really listened to enoughto decide.

P.S. thumbs up to richard. Although anthony has suggested that you stop posting, please don't. in my opinion, you have played a big part in this forum being interesting lately, and you have as much of a right to post here as anyone. Don't ever feel like you're not good enough, no matter what you listen to. keep up the good work

P.P.S. anthony, how old are you? fifteen? younger? seriously, that's just childish. if richards taste is crap, most of the people on this forum will pick up on it and simply not take his posts seriously. you don't need to point it out to us. you certainly aren't helping richard either.

Deathcab and Modest Mouse for whatever reason are considered emo. Good News is one of the 00s greatest records. Not Antarctica like hardcore fans insist.

Wow, it's "pick on Anthony" time. Fine by me. I suppose it's justified, to a certain extent.

My only problem with this entire post is that we're generalizing about a decade that isn't over yet. To me, it's not an intelligent way of going about it. When 2010 rolls around, then we can go to town! But until then, shouldn't we wait until it's over before we start criticizing it?

And I apologize for any hurtful comments. It's just opinion. After all, isn't this site all about opinion?

Someone told me today that emo is the new hair metal, only less fun. He might've been onto something.

Well maybe not quite as bad as hair metal...
But I thought people on this site of all people would have realized that you can't compare decades cos it's so obvious music was a lot stronger in the 60s and 70s(and in fact, in the 50s,80s and 90s as well)
Look at that top 10 in the first post - how much weaker is that than a top 10 of almost any single year of the 20th century from 1956 on?
There's hardly been any decent melodies in years - look at that top 10 - you could only really say that one or two of those songs have memorable melodies
It's mostly a big yawn I'm afraid...

i think it's fine to talk about whatever, whenever. doesn't bother me that the decade isn't over yet... as long as people take that into account, of course. this decade up against others? roughly the same in my opinion.

before i asked people to post how old they were. i just want to see there's any relationship between our age, and the period of music we like most. can we do that? from now on, post your age (or approximate age), and the decade you like the most. for me:

i'm 20 years old, and alot of the music i listen to was released in the past 2 decades. it's kinda tied between the 00's, and the 90's. Having said that, i don't own alot of music from decades other than those two so... there's a good chance that i haven't heard enough music to decide. But for now, i'll go with the 90's.

I'm 30 years old. I like 60's, 70's, 90's, 00's, everything except the 80's (the years of my childhood... ).