Perhaps we need more older artists in the music industry instead of this constant obsession with youth and beauty. I mean, would a Phil Collins type artist get a look in today? This article examines whether there’s room for adults to make records for adults, an interested debate given that youth has taken over the music industry in ways which just didn't seem possible before.
66 year old Sir Elton John said today’s ‘processed performers’ lack the skill to perform live and called the majority of contemporary pop hits ‘packaged crap’.
Whilst I think there's a lot of great music around today, it would follow that a more discriminating industry would net less variety and quality with the limited artists they promote. Indeed, many people think that older musicians may be losing out because they don't get a fair shot in front of A&R in the first place.
But of course there are always exceptions to the rule. Almost 50 years ago saw the youngest ever chart toper with Little Jimmy Osmonds "Long Haired Lover From Liverpool." He was just 9 years and 8 months old when he hit the top spot in 1972. The youngest female chart-topper is Helen Shapiro who took "You Don't Know" to the top at the tender age of 14 years and 10 months.
And if you're approaching 30 I have a sobering thought for you, the Beatles created their entire catalog before any of them turned 30!
Achieving fame young may be a necessity before long because it's been found that popular musicians die up to 25 years sooner than the average person. As Blondie said, die young, stay pretty.
What do you think? Are artists and bands younger these days? Do you think they better looking than in the past? And, of course, is music better now or back then? Share your thoughts.