Citation needed. The articles are actual proof and measurements, whereas Tantacrul's take is just an opinion.
>They for example look at a really small subset of music "Million song dataset" and only analysed basic metrics that could be automatically measured.
The "small subset of music" is the most popular music of any year. That is what reveals music tastes over time, and this is the kind of music that permeates culture.
As for the "basic metrics" there's not basic as in trite/insignificant but basic as fundamental.
It's just that some people want so much to cling to "each period is the same, there are no ups and downs in cultural production" to not be seen as backwards oldsters, whereas milenia of history teaches that that there are absolutely ups and downs in cultural production (periods of stagnation, etc).
>it's a major simplification to say that "all music is worse now"
It's also a strawman. Nobody said that here.
Synth began in the 70's, and Moroder/Jarre is far better than the 90% of today's crap.
That's a lot!
They for example look at a really small subset of music "Million song dataset" and only analysed basic metrics that could be automatically measured. To be honest I think the linked Spanish paper and the senationalist "Science proves modern music is bad" should be retracted since the methodology is flawed.
Don't take my word for it, take Tantacrul's - composer, video creator, Design Lead for MuseScore [0].
It's such a complex topic to study "music" - you have to narrow it down - genre, country of origin, purpose - it's a major simplification to say that "all music is worse now", there are a lot of types of music that didn't exist in 1961 (synths, electronic, hip-hop) - how can you compare it?
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfNdps0daF8