http://www.radioandmusic.com/headlines/y2k7/nov/5nov/old_music_special_report.php
I have put old in quotes due to its varying definition (which can be
as new as the 1990s). Surprising thing in this article is that the top
4 best-selling singers list (presumably in the old-gold set) does not
include KK. Top requested songs (whatever that is!) does not feature
KK either! I find that a little hard to believe.
C
Don't believe in what is being written by new breed of journalists.
They write without any insight, misreporting, misrepresenting and
misquoting the persons interviewed and use facts out of context.
The assertion of the article would be outrightly rejected by any
serious film music buff.
However, it can be safely said that the present music is like meteor
who sparks in the sky suddenly and fade away. But the oldies are like
bright sun shine of which remains forever.
Rajendra
Why "new breed"? You always have to take journalists' statements with
a pinch of salt.
You say:
> The assertion of the article would be outrightly rejected by any
> serious film music buff.
and then:
> However, it can be safely said that the present music is like meteor
> who sparks in the sky suddenly and fade away. But the oldies are like
> bright sun shine of which remains forever.
which is essentially what the article is saying in terms of
statistics. Should a serious music buff outrightly reject your
statement as well?
C