I found a much more interesting measure is simply to take the Billboard Top 40, wind it to an arbitrary date and see how many songs you know.
By that measure, older music was much better. Sure, the chart has flashes in the pan and bubblegum garbage in every age, but the difference in memorability between the Top 40 now and the Top 40 even 15 years ago is quite staggering.
So the BBC have been performing a variation of this by playing 30 year old "Top of the Pops" programmes on BBC4, and it's an interesting experience to see what has and hasn't stood the test of time. Most episodes have at least one spectacularly terrible "hit" on. Bonus points if the presenters intro them as the next new thing. Back then most of the performances were mimed to the track, with occasionally hilarious results.
However, at no point did someone as annoying as Ed Sheeran dominate the charts...
For political, financial, practical, and historic reasons, the "live" tracks were supposed to be rerecorded specially for the show. So often you'll hear a unique version on TOTP.
After about the early 70s it was damn near impossible to record and mix a single in less than a day. So what actually happened is that the TOTP producer responsible for the rerecording would be taken out for a very generous drink and/or lunch while the "session" was happening, and then they'd return to find that a master tape had magically been created in their absence, and not at all brought in by the band's manager, having already been recorded and mixed earlier.
It was a weird sleight of management that kept everyone happy.
Then the bands would go on and throw themselves around with no instruments plugged in. The vocals were often live, but everything else was literally just for show.
> However, at no point did someone as annoying as Ed Sheeran dominate the charts...
Debbie Boone? The Beatles before Dylan told Lennon that his lyrics suck?
Anyway, the issue with Ed Sheeran is that he appeals to the Tweeny Girls who are the only group still spending money on music. And, as such, the powers that be are going to flog him senseless until he stops printing money.
The issue is less Ed Sheeran being annoying than the saturation marketing reaching comical levels.
Is it possible that today’s top 40 is at a disadvantage because the songs haven’t yet been as extensively recycled through advertising, movie soundtracks, re-releases and other mechanisms by which the top 40 of 15 years ago has become more embedded in our culture and hence more memorable?
Pop music doesn’t have any music in it anymore just sound fx. I speculate it has to do with lawsuits over the very few melodies available. First case I remember was the one with George Harrison.
By that measure, older music was much better. Sure, the chart has flashes in the pan and bubblegum garbage in every age, but the difference in memorability between the Top 40 now and the Top 40 even 15 years ago is quite staggering.