I don't think that there is a definable sound yet for this generation, in fact I think that the lack thereof is in itself the sound of this generation. This generation hasn't had a defining moment or sound yet, we're searching, and that search so far encompasses all points of the music spectrum. The internet has brought so much music to our fingertips that we tend to browse and pick our music a la carte and that prevents one sound from rising to the forefront. When you're constantly on shuffle you don't remain in any one spot long enough for it to grab you.

Sent by Brian | 3:01 PM ET | 05-08-2008

I think it's difficult to define the music of an era without distance. I graduated high school in '81 - so the music I considered mine is all Billy Joel, Styx, Pat Benatar and then Duran Duran, R.E.M. and Squeeze in college. Does that fall into anyone's idea of defining bands? "Mix" stations always play album cuts that never saw the light of day on mainstream radio as landmark songs while Exile, who had the #1 Top 40 song of the year in 1978, have been "exiled" because the band went Country. I would say look to soundtracks like "Garden State" for the mix that we'll be attaching to Gen Y.

Sent by Ann V. | 3:32 PM ET | 05-08-2008

Postmodern. It doesn't have a definition, but that's just what it is.

Sent by Emory | 3:43 PM ET | 05-08-2008

I would say look to soundtracks like "Garden State" for the mix that we'll be attaching to Gen Y.

Gag me. If that's what will define my generation, I want out!

Sent by Lars | 3:50 PM ET | 05-08-2008

Instant gratification.

My grandmother only saw Elvis perform live on the Ed Sullivan show. I googled Britney Spears and found 148341 videos of her, alone. My mom shuffles through cassettes and cds, while I flip through my ipod for any random album I have. I use to attend "release parties" at record stores for big cd releases (Radiohead, Modest Mouse), but now I can preorder it on itunes, and not even put shoes on to get it. Its not so much the rebellion, its the laziness.

Sent by Angela | 3:55 PM ET | 05-08-2008

This generation's access to the internet has broadened our horizons well past the point where "the sound of a generation" can be defined. Most of us can PROVE that we listen to a little bit of everything.

Yesterday, I made a mixtape for a big move I'm making in a week. For every Velvet Underground track, there's a Camera Obscura. For Every Silver Jews, there's a Thin Lizzy track. For every Destroyer, Mulatu Astatke.

I can tell you what I like, what defines me, but most of that is the music of earlier generations - or music that draws heavily from them.

Take Okkervil River's "John Allyn Smith Sails" or "Plus Ones." Both songs depend on the work of earlier artists. This whole generation is like this. We are the whole of the 20th Century.

Sent by Matthew Trisler | 4:00 PM ET | 05-08-2008

I think perhaps this generation is not defined by a common sound, but by their fluency in many sounds.

Where I live in Roanoke, Virginia, a group of young musicians has formed The Magic Twig Community (see: www.myspace.com/themagictwigcommunitysound). Within this collective there are countless bands, all speaking their musical language fluently. From 60s psych rock to hip hop to jug band music to 80s synth pop, Magic Twig bands draw on a multitude of sounds and use them to inspire songs of their own.

Now that listeners have the power to choose what they want to hear it appears the drive to 'play what's popular' is rapidly subsiding.

I prefer creativity over imitation anyday!

Sent by rootsminer | 4:05 PM ET | 05-08-2008

Don't know what to call it but I think this generation's sound will be defined by the production techniques - things like the lack of dynamics in the mix and use of pitch correction. I'm talking specifically about mainstream radio here. That's what usually comes to define a generation, not the underground music.

Sent by John McAteer | 4:51 PM ET | 05-08-2008

first thought: hip hop. it is a global force for this generation, too.

the stylings and structure of hip hop is dovetailed with the re-mixed and globalized sounds affored by the web

Sent by dizzymslizzy | 4:55 PM ET | 05-08-2008

As a Gen Y, we want what's new, "original" and different. That's why the music acts have such a short shelf life. They are new for a season and then they are out.

Vampire Weekend is a great example of my generation. Pretty great music, unsigned, received a lot of press for being "underground" however their next album will be unheard of in the mainstream way.

The same "underground" status is even craved for other genres besides indie rock.

For example, hip-hop, Kanye blew up and was fresh and new and "original", but after all is said and done people are beginning to lose that admiration.

Another example, Mariah Carey, her label can put as much press on E=MC2 as they want, but she will never be what she was in the 90s because of her being around since the 90s.She's not original or fresh or underground. (However, artists that come back from the 90's means they are either being "ironic" or "retro" which gives them a novelty effect)

So it doesn't matter what the actual sound is, as long as it has a beat and has a new face to it, then it's cool.

As for Garden State, Juno and Napoleon Dynamite have done a similar thing to indie music. "Unique" and "originality" in films is as important as it is in music. (Their soundtracks give audience members music "cred". Juno is actually coming out with another soundtrack because a lot of that audience hasn't heard twee or anti-folk before)

There won't be a defined genre, there's just way too much music getting out there and growing at similar rates to have a chosen genre.

Sent by Sara Knee | 5:02 PM ET | 05-08-2008

Please let it not be "Crunk" music.
That's all I'm asking.

Sent by bryant | 6:32 PM ET | 05-08-2008

Indie, emo, acoustic stuff. I think we're sort of going back to the folk rock stuff, thank jesus! :)

Sent by desi | 7:04 PM ET | 05-08-2008

I think all the musical generations you listed share the commonality of being part of the progression of the music industry. All of those eras of music depended on the music industry giving them record deals. But as the industry began to take over the music, technology has served as the self correction.

Now for our generation (born 1979), anyone with a mac and a thousand bucks to buy equipment with can make a record that is halfway decent. That kind if change in the musical landscape has given rise to a growing disparity between music as an art and music as a business. It didn't used to be like that.

So I think the lasting musical legacy for our generation is going to be the "indie," for lack of a better word, scene. It's an awfully wide variety of styles, but the melding of styles is part of that same thing.

I don't think we'll have a style like swing or hip hop that defines us musically, but rather a rethinking of the music industry in general.

Sent by Wes Hunter | 11:20 PM ET | 05-08-2008

Genration "Y" as in "Why bother?
I think its not generation 'Y" but generation "z"
as in 'zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's - being asleep.
As an art revolutionary its hard to wake anybody up in this century And perhaps none are safer than the media.
Z as in zombie!
We use to answer "what are you rebelling against/" with "What have you got". Now when asked "What are you rebelling against?" the reply is "Oh sorry didn't mean to make waves!" Ha ha!

Sent by Tom Hendricks | 12:44 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I forget who it was that said this to me, but I think it explains quite a bit:

"Your generation is the first generation that not only listens to (and likes) their parent's music, but their grandparents', too."

So much of what defined the music of prior generations was that generation having a teenage rebellion against their parents, and all that defined "old."

But now that music is so readily available, we grow up listening to music from every era, and can appreciate it on its own terms. So the music we love ends up being more evolutionary than revolutionary. Artists are experimenting with known forms, using electronic techniques in very organic ways, while trying to figure out what makes music good. And whenever that experimentation works, the Top 40 crowd grab hold of it, and reproduce it as best they can, trying to figure out why people like it.

So this generation's music is built on the music of the past, rather than a radical departure. Think of it like the Romantic period of music, taking the forms and themes of the Classical and Baroque periods' works, and making them more complex and robust. Keeping what worked, and discarding what didn't.

Which makes me happy, because I love stuff from the Romantic period, and I really like some the stuff that's coming out now. So I can only look with anticipation to what's coming next.

Sent by Ian | 2:01 AM ET | 05-09-2008

Democratic music? Past eras were easier to define in terms of genres because they were characterized by only one or at times a few styles of music...

This era is different in that it could only be defined BY the access to ALL forms of music by the listeners of the art form.

This is also in one way or another, the era of independent music ! Indie Rock, Indie Pop, Indi Hip Hop. The death of the old record industry and the birth of a new musical landscape where the music flows like water and is created by everyone.

Indeed this is the beginning of a new democratic era of the art form.

Sent by Ash Adil From Michigan | 2:29 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I believe generation Y is defined by EMO. It seems to be what most bands on the radio sound like.

Sent by Gary | 5:22 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I think it's wrong to say we're in a postmodern age without history and without a style. We've certainly moved beyond the downbeat, paranoid and ironic age of 90s rock, for instance. Developments like the introduction of dance into rock, or electronica into folk, suggest a new need for movement, colouration, experimentation, hybridisation - and fun. There's a childishness in music these days that you can hear in the yowling vocal deliveries and hand-clapping choruses of bands like Los Campesinos! (or indeed Clap Your Hands Say Yeah).

Sent by Robbie | 6:58 AM ET | 05-09-2008

You know the sound of typing on a keyboard. Thats generation Y.

Sent by Brendon | 8:46 AM ET | 05-09-2008

Unfortunately, I think it's hip hop. Not the good stuff like The Roots or Mos Def either but the top 40 MTV stuff. I think the sound that defines the generation has to be obvious - and hip hop has been incredibly popular for years now... ugh...

On the other hand, you can argue that there is no defined sound for this generation. If that's the case then I think it's because people have more choices available to them. There are so many different genres out there and thanks to technology, it's easy to expose yourself to music not found on the radio. Perhaps the days of a generational sound are over...?

Sent by David | 9:14 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I haven't listened to the radio in a few years. I think that says something about the sound of our generation. I find my music mostly through the internet i.e myspace, all songs, facebook. This generation is so open to new sounds and techniques, I don't think you can sum up our "sound" with one word or idea. I guess if I had to I would say "availability" is the sound of my generation.

P.S I love All Songs Considered. I wouldn't be listening to half the amazing music I do if it wasn't for you. Thank you!!!

Sent by Michael Fox | 9:26 AM ET | 05-09-2008

With the indie music evolution (revolution?), the music of generation Y in undefinable. And maybe that's just it, The Indie era.

Sent by jmj | 9:26 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I was born in 1978, right between Gen X and Y and now I teach highschool. For me and my friends, the democracy of the internet has overwhelmed the influence of tastemakers like MTV and radio, so we can listen to a little of everything or focus on some tiny obscure niche. But where I teach, it seems like every kid wears emo band shirts. So I'd say for middle class white kids it's either undefined or emo.

Sent by zebbart | 10:23 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I think something that hasn't been said is that, despite the internet's rising prevelance, lots of places don't have diverse media outlets that even tell kids anything exists to look for. All over America, the radio is sounding more and more the same, dominated by top-20 playlisting and demo-oriented marketing. For an awful lot of people my age, if they don't love what they hear on the radio or might get lost in the endless sea of obscurity fostered by the internet, a huge influence on our tastes has been wrought by a tired and true source for many generations: our parents.

Now, I was born in 1982 and I was lucky enough to grow up in Southern California- a major media market with lots of options and outlets tied to a culturally urban/suburban environment. I didn't have my own computer with internet access until I went off to college, but that didn't stop me from growing into a full-blown music nerd. I consumed back issues of Mojo and Spin and RS, and I would read collections of music journalism for fun (or I used to, anyway.) I would rent "The Last Waltz" and "Velvet Goldmine" every weekend. I started trading mix CDs with smart, hip friends and going to shows all the time. Even though my tastes were still maturing, in my teenage years I became exposed to not only the latest iterations of different genres and styles, but I had the ability to go back and hear where they came from.

"Emo" to a lot of us started with Jimmy Eat World, but became The Promise Ring and Jawbreaker, and then eventually Rites of Spring and DC hardcore. "Metal" might have been System of a Down, but soon became the Dillinger Escape Plan, Entombed, Metallica, Judas Priest and Sabbath.

Eventually, the internet and a healthy appetite for cultural minutae would lead me to establish a very well-rounded set of sensibilities and aethetic values that hopefully will help prevent my generation from being defined solely by what I listened to in high school.

But really, it all starts with the fact that I was lucky enough to steal the copy of "London Calling" my Dad bought in the 90s to appear cooler in his middle age, leading me to discover ska and reggae and punk and art rock and glam and eveything else. But he was, after all, from Canada, and I'd be lying if I said this wasn't the biggest reason that I STILL know the words to a dozen or so Bachman Turner Overdrive songs. And when nobody is around and my apartment is dark in the night, you just might still find me rocking out to "Ain't Seen Nothing Yet..."

Sent by Brendan K. | 10:29 AM ET | 05-09-2008

The Swell Season, the people who were in the film "Once" then went on to be a real couple/band, sold out a 3,000 seat hall here locally in just a few days(which is unusual). It's that kind of media synergy that defines what's pop now.
I was astonished a few years ago when an appearance by William Hung, the failed 'American Idol' contestant, created a long line for tickets at the local record store - while 'real' music often goes begging.

Sent by schlep | 11:08 AM ET | 05-09-2008

Schlep answered it correctly.

William Hung is the sound of this generation, end of story.

Sent by Skirkster Beetle | 11:13 AM ET | 05-09-2008

First it was Ian Curtis, then it was David Byrne, then it was David Bowie, then it was Bruce Springsteen, then it was Paul Simon.... the defining music of our generation is all mimicry of the past greats.

Sent by David W. | 11:14 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I was born in '83 and everyone my age agrees that the bands of the early '90s rock--Nirvana, Weezer, Pearl Jam, etc. define how we remember that era. As a counterpart, we remember huge commercial hip hop like puff daddy...it was the final hey day for the major labels. Another defining moment was Napster. We all remember coming of age and experiencing music through napster. We all had some of the most random mixes of unrelated songs. And the process of downloading new stuff is unique to our generation. This ushered in a fragmentation of music and media in the 2000s that we're still dealing with today. Then Myspace broke and suddenly everyone is distributing music that they make in their home. Most of it is bad. But no true music fans, and most of our generation is not listening to radio or getting music on MTV. We're more likely to hear a new band like Vampire Weekend while watching Gossip Girl. It seems that the only defining theme is the minute personalization of our music...almost as a fashion accessories worn with an iPod. And in spite of all of this a few bands manage to reach a critical mass. I feel like I'll remember seminal albums by bands that reached a critical mass like Radiohead, Beck, Wilco, Arcade Fire, etc. But that's just my taste. We all have our own tastes and that's the only thing that binds us. I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess it is post-modern.

Sent by Lee | 11:24 AM ET | 05-09-2008

I'm going to sound like a grumpy old man, but the predominant sound I hear now is amateurishness. My college-age daughter at art school seems to like just about anything that isn't played (especially sung) competently (Kimya Dawson being a good example). There wasn't one song in your last All Songs Considered podcast, for instance, whose vocalist didn't make me cringe. Is this an American Idol backlash?

ok..try this, think Dylan, think Velvet Underground, think Kinks, think Neil Young.
need i go on. Those are the same aesthetics heard on this weeks show. Music now is about the personal not the flash. It's less rehearsed and I'd say better for it. What Dylan, Lou Reed and Neil Young had was a way to sing with raw emotion. True it is polar from American Idol I suppose, but not a reaction...because I'd imagine the singers on this weeks All Songs Considered couldn't care less about that show.

I'd also listen to a few of these songs a few times through and see if they don't grab you. Remember competence can be heard on the billboard 100, it doesn't make it lovable or better.
bob boilen

Sent by John | 12:09 PM ET | 05-09-2008

It's hip hop.

Sent by Devan | 12:21 PM ET | 05-09-2008

Death metal.

In all seriousness, there is no overriding sound of this generation. Alternative, boy band, Top 40, dance rock, emo, indie, gangsta rap, hip-hop, metal, techno, electronic, "retro" bands, what passes for punk these days, post-rock, prog-rock, experimental, and on and on. Unlike the previous generations, the landscape of popular music today contains many hills and no real mountains.

Sent by Bobby | 2:29 PM ET | 05-09-2008

For this generation it's the medium not the message.

Sent by dk | 2:53 PM ET | 05-09-2008

Dear All Songs Considered,

I am surprised to read that even the Millenials' at NPR were stumped on what is the sound of our generation. Listening to your show this morning of "The Great Unknowns" it seems only obvious. Though the catch is the music of our generation is an aesthetic, not a genre. The aesthetic being the undiscovered, or simply the underground. Within each underground genre whether it be some strange one person sub-subgenre or simply indie (suggesting independent), the defining factor for most is the intimacy the listener feels with the musicians or artist. In my prior example of indie music, it's Generation Lo-fi. Listeners opt for the surreality and noise of say Grizzly Bear or Neutral Milk Hotel over magazine faces and commercial success. It's the same with underground hip hop and all the subgenres of punk and hardcore and country and americana. A good song hits me mostly when I'm in my living room and I feel like the band is there with me or could be and not unreachable or infallible.

Sent by colin m. | 3:15 PM ET | 05-09-2008

I tried to think last night what music "kids listen to these days" that makes me want to scream, "Get off my lawn!" at them, but there's not a lot that I can't tolerate. Angry suburban rock (Korn, Lincoln Park, Evanescence, etc) is what comes to mind most, but even that I can tolerate in small doses.

Its already been brought up that Generation Y doesn't seem to be rebelling in anyway with a new sound, but I don't think the last couple of generations are letting them rebel too much. It's easy for me to see the difference in my taste of music compared with my Dad's. There's definitely a generational line there. There are some things I listen to that my Dad can't tolerate. But I don't see the same line with my younger relatives or some of the kids at work. You are more likely to hear, "Wow, that's sounds cool. Turn it up," from people now in their 30's and 40's hearing a new band then you are to hear, "turn that racket off!" And I don't think it is because they are trying to pretend they are still in their 20's.

The incredible accessibility to different types of bands and artists make it tougher for a generation to choose just one sound as well.

I think there is a trend of mixing genres that will be indicative of the Generation Y soundtrack. Gnarls Barkley and Gorillaz are examples of that. In fact, I think "Crazy" will be one of the songs that will induce a bar room full of reminiscent "Y"ers to spontaneously sing along out loud in a few years; the same way that folks my age would with "Living on a Prayer" (although we only sing that out loud to be ironic.)

I also think that a lot of the soundtrack will be reinvented older sounds. Mark Ronson is giving a real Motown sound to a lot of the stuff he produces and bands like The Futureheads have a real new wave sound to them. When I listen to Vampire Weekend, I hear a lot of The Police in their sound.

I don't see the Generation Y soundtrack breaking away from the music of older generations. I see it embracing those sounds and using them in their own musical voice, sort of like a grand remastering and remixing of whole genres.

Sent by Mac Coldwell | 4:25 PM ET | 05-09-2008

I tend to agree with most of the post that discuss how my generation mix and matches music. How my generation is breaking the the recorded industry. And did you notice that most of the post have been written by blokes that do not listen to the radio. The sound track of Y is created be each user for the time place, and feeling attached. Last week I went to a party, on the way there I was listening to Dylan. Not really party music right? It was Tupac and Biggy for the night, yet that morning on the way to starbucks I was walking to the tunes of "I wide awake, it's morning"

Sent by shawn | 8:55 PM ET | 05-09-2008

How would I define the music of today's generation? I'd describe it as end-user, individualistic and personal. I submit to you that, as a rule, music today does not serve to connect us as a large generational group. Instead, the music of this generation is something that defines us as people. I would also echo the comments that have stressed the importance of the Internet as a medium for finding music. But even these comments do not go to the heart of the matter, which is that the Internet has given us so much variety that we can no longer be a homogeneous generation.

Sent by Pablo | 11:02 PM ET | 05-09-2008

So many correct answers. For many (especially here, with your audience), the answer would include Nirvana, REM, and those that have been influenced by them. The notion of an 'underground' and the 'undiscovered' would certainly appeal to the crowd here as well.

For others, however, the answer might include former mouseketeers, boy bands, country, hair metal, Jimmy Buffet, Jay Z.

We're the generation of the narrowcast. We started with our radio divided along crispy clean enclaves - oldies, country, college rock, top 40. And then, the internet got involved. You can find your niche and you never have to leave it.

Wikipedia has an entry on "cello rock". While I don't honestly believe that's a genre, it's a sign of the times. See also the "indie-folk-tronica" referenced by Second Stage (which isn't even wikied yet), or "nerdcore".

Sent by jamesG | 12:29 AM ET | 05-10-2008

the Millenials i have known and observed fall into two basic types. type 1 are those who observe genre boundaries - i'd say amongst that type, Emo really is the defining music that gen Y will be remembered for. but the 2nd type is a new breed that ignores genre limitations and boundaries, both aesthetically and socially (observance of musical genre has always had a big social role) more than any prior generation - for instance, as a gen X type, i reflexively put a very different value on music that is played live on organic instruments vs. music composed in a computer, but gen Y isn't interested in that distinction.

Sent by slim moon | 8:09 PM ET | 05-10-2008

I'll start by mentioning I was born in '79, then agree with jamesG's response. I would also add that since the late 60's it seems that the basic music category 'Rock' has been (and will continue) spawning an infinitely expanding number of sub-categories (at least according to hipsters and slick music mags), bringing us to the current age, where people attach themselves to their favorite niche (one only needs to see the available musical style choices on myspace to verify, my favorite being 'Melodramatic Popular Song'). Although there are people out there, perhaps a small few from the new generation, that are putting everything back under the umbrella of Rock and listening to all of it. I'm also amused by the growing trend of people in their early-twenties liking music/musicians once considered lame or passe (Neil Diamond, ABBA, Journey, Styx... for instance) merely for the irony of liking them; "they're so bad, they're good."

Sent by Matt Hocker | 10:47 PM ET | 05-10-2008

Of course, we who listen to "All Songs Considered" want just that.... all songs considered for our generation (I was born in '83). And although that is slowly creeping into the popular opinion, I do not believe that can be considered our trademark. They may also purchase music online, but over half of the Gen Y'ers I know listen to Top 40, which I think is overrun with Hip Hop. Like others here have said, it's the mainstream culture that defines the soundtrack.

Sent by Tara | 8:54 AM ET | 05-11-2008

Commenting on the sound of my generation is a little strange for me. I will be graduating from college in a few weeks and in the fall I will be attending graduate school. I have been very reflective recently and this blog seems to fall into that theme; but I digress.

I would define our generation with a single song. Radiohead's recent album "In Rainbows" contains a gem of a song titled "All I need." It is as much a song to make out to as it is a song that truly epitomizes the social disconnect that our generation can experience in our digital world. Our lives can become dominated by blogs, facebook, and scanning 24 hour news web sites. It also helps that this song was distributed with the Radiohead online promotion/gimmick where the user could download the album and pay what they thought was fair. If that doesn't define a generation I don't know what does.

Sent by Jon Avery | 3:21 PM ET | 05-11-2008

This generation has no definite sound, as a few people mentioned, but rather an overwhelming sound of yesterday. Artists today assimilate sound of generations before to create a unique sound with empty nostalgia. However, some artists do this very well. My latest musical crushes have joined Folk, Motown, Show Tunes, and Rock to create a musical vernacular separate from the sound it derives from. Crushes like Sway (Boston), Pearl and the Beard (New York), and The Venn Diagrams (New York), linking grand sounds with fleeting loves and historic rebellion successfully tap into the lack of identity this generation has and made it their own.

Sent by Brad Silk | 4:22 PM ET | 05-12-2008

The underground brought into the foreground? Myspace is the postmodern record store.

Maybe our stylistic values are uncertainty. Maybe our identity is the loss of identity. Who needs a Patriot Act when our blogs tell 1) Our political and philosophical affiliations 2) Our reading habits (no need for library snooping!) 3) Who has made us mad, and what form of retribution we'd like to retaliate with, and 4) Why we did or did not like the specific color of nail polish, or fishnet stockings on our favorite (fe)male artist? (On a side note, I have contemplated this topic and enjoyed both accessories equally on Jolie Holland and Johnny Thunders.)

The rising sales of independent artists / independent record labels seems like an egalitarian reaction to the corporate dominance of the music market, which stems as far back as the 70's, or 50's or 20's, depending on who you ask. Artists like Wilco , Radiohead and others who have embraced the communicative abilities of the internet have reaped, above all, the immense benefits of artistic freedom.

If I am letting my optimist-self speak, I think we're in for a few more years of marketing and aesthetic innovation which will construct the atmosphere both the artist and the fan would like to exist within. If the pessimist speaks, we are in the musical equivalent of global warming, where so much noise pollution will corrupt our best sensibilities. Auto-Tune will suck the voice out of the heartland, leaving it a virtual dustbowl of talent. Pro Tools will become the anti-pacemaker, stealing the rhythms of life in our heartbeats and circadian habits. Simon Cowell will crown himself "Jesus 2.0" (or "Jesus Vista", whichever is more defunct) and call forth his legion of extraneously high-fructose pop music to drown out the coastal pockets of artistic communities in the U.S., so all that we are left with is that dustbowl that I mentioned earlier. And Simon Cowell.

So I think our generation exists in a middle state where we have yet to harness the immense powers of the internet into any worldwide collective good. And we're living with the consequences of being perpetual slackers. Here's to us.

Sent by EP | 10:33 PM ET | 05-12-2008

I quickly read through the earlier postings and agree with some. Based on the brief description in the Unknown Showcase show, a generation becomes defined by the "new" music created during that time. People are continuely inspired by what came before, but I think some of the most original sounds from our generation are Emo, and The many sounds that fall under Electronica. I personally think Weezer's Pinkerton was the mainstream start of Emo. I am not as deep into the Electronica scene, and so have no specific artist to offer.

But other artists from this time to consider: Radiohead, At the Drive In & Rage Against the Machine, They Might Be Giants, Cake, The Flaming Lips, Frank Black, Jon Spencer, Tori Amos, and Sonic Youth.

Sent by Kat | 1:38 PM ET | 05-13-2008

I personally refer to the born in 1980-90 generation the Dot Com generation. It's the defining characteristic of our lives. We have computers from kindergarten on. It's affected every bit of our lives.

So with that in mind, I would state that we are the first generation without a collective soundtrack. We witnessed the death of MTV, the rise of Napster, and basically a freedom to take in the music we like. As opposed to what record companies felt would sell the best. If you want to peg the music of our generation with a singular term I would use Indie. Of course it doesn't describe a type of music but it does explain it's deliver.

Consider this, while I was in college there were two songs that everyone I knew had on their computer. "Because I Got High" by Afroman and The Gourds version of "Gin and Juice". Neither song was formally sold and in the case of "Gin and Juice" most people still don't know who actually performed the song. These were two songs distributed solely on the internet.

Sent by Jeremy | 5:21 PM ET | 05-13-2008

well, if my tween daughter is any indication, it's hip hop and what would have been called hard rock in 70s and grunge in the 90s!

Sent by OlderMusicGeek | 7:17 PM ET | 05-13-2008

As a member of this generation, I do have to agree with the people that have acknowledged the difficulty in identifying a type of sound of this generation. With the introduction of the Internet, bands no longer have to depend on mediums like MTV or radio stations to promote their music. This allows for increasing experimentation with varieties of sounds because they do not have to seek anyone's approval before reaching audiences. Look at the success of Sara Bareilles, who by allowing a free download of her song "Love Song" on itunes, achieved mainstream success by the next month. Bands, with the simple aid of websites such as Myspace, can promote themselves, thus expanding the freedom for both artists' creativity and listeners' choice on sounds.

Sent by Tiffany | 12:16 PM ET | 05-14-2008

There is a strong difficulty level with identifiying a sound for this generation - at least as an outsider. I think they are less force-fed than my generation. I am 33 as we didn't have much choice. Instead, we were forced to listen to the music on the radio Casey Cason's Sunday Top 40 and MTV videos. We didn't have the listening luxury and freedom of downloads, internet archives, and ipods. Records got broken, tape reels broke, and cds got scratched. It was difficult to transport 100 cds. Do you remember the big black zippered bags? Access to 1000's of personal selections was impossible. This generation in all their freedom has the most diverse "sound track", a "sound track" with expansivness that I find difficult to quantify and even imagine. Lucky Generation Y, with their buffet of delictable tunes - no force feeding. Their music table is set with exactly what they want to devour.

Sent by Christy Hulsey | 3:35 PM ET | 05-14-2008

It is, in no particular order:
Radiohead: OK Computer
Death Cab For Cutie: Plans
The Strokes: Is This It?
Sufjan Stevens: Come on Feel the Illinoise
Beck: Odelay
Whitney Houston: Whitney
Snoop Dogg: Doggystyle
U2: Achtung Baby
Weezer: Weezer(the blue album)
The Smashing Pumpkins: Mellon Collie and The Infinite Sadness
Coldplay: Parachutes
Mariah Carey: Music Box
Christina Aguilera: Self-Titled
The Beastie Boys: Ill Communication
Bjork: Homogenic
Broken Social Scene: You forgot it in People
Red Hot Chili Peppers: Blood Sugar Sex Magik
Nirvana: MTV Unplugged
Arcade Fire: Funeral
Outkast: Stankonia
Pearl Jam: Vs.
The White Stripes: White Blood Cells
Thursday: Full Collapse
The Get Up Kids: Something to Write Home About
John Mayer: Room for Squares
Justin Timberlake: Justified
Kanye West: College Dropout
Wilco: Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
Green Day: Dookie
Guns n' Roses: Use Your Illusion Part I
That is all. If you put those albums in a time capsule, one hundred years from now, people would perfectly understand how screwed up we were. And Why.

Sent by J. Luke Webb | 3:37 PM ET | 05-14-2008

I think a lot of the responses so far have it right when the talk about the effects of the internet, an interest in our parents' and grandparents' music, and the lack of a distinct "sound". Nobody I know listens to music on the radio. Fewer and fewer people I know buy CDs. So there is no longer a sort of centralized, approved sound making it big the way there was in the good old days when Capitol could just put enough money behind a band and turn them into a household name.

But I think the biggest effect is that of the internet, specifically in the way that it globalizes much of our interaction. Going through the day, I'll listen to The Who, Smashing Pumpkins, and Run DMC along with local stuff in my area like Spaghetti Western String Co., but that'll all be followed by Fiamma Fumana's Modenese folk-techno, Orxata Sound System's Barcelonan "post-Bacalao", In Extremo's Old Norse metal covers coming out of Germany, and some Chilean pan flute albums from mix CDs I bought from Peruvians living in Madrid. And to top it off I might switch over to Gogol Bordello for some gypsy punk. Or maybe Tchaikowsky. Or John Lee Hooker.

This is the generation where barriers don't melt under the acid trip, or get torn down by the anarchists, or just get whined away by the grungers. This is the generations where barriers, where genres and categorized tastes, just AREN'T.

Sent by Colin | 4:22 PM ET | 05-14-2008

This generation's music is about sharing influences, that sharing assisted by the internet has put musical development in a warp drive. X&Y generation's music is about plurality, about being eclectic. The sounds reflect that, pulling back on a rich tapestry of music from the past, drawing on global influences and movements, as well as looking forward to what can be.

So much sound can be accepted as music these days. 20 years ago would people put up with what Wilco does live when they dip into their noisey passages? Noise is something that seems to come up often for me, its a musical element that bands will employ to create contrast in the arc of a song, Sonic Youth could be the grandaddy of this, but Wilco uses it, Deerhoof uses it, Radioheads goes there at times, Akron/Family, Liars... Noise is used differently by John Zorn as well as M83 and Man Man.

Extending the range of what is defined as musical or accessible is something that this generation has been really good at. There is a massive plurality of genres and interests, its not uncommon for someone to be interested in Annie from Sweden as well as Shalabi Effect from Montreal and at the same time have a special place in their heart for Biggie Smalls. In the past what you listened to defined who you were, now its the variety of what you listen to that rounds out the corners of your musical taste.

This generation brought Hip Hop! That alone...

Theres also endless varieties of electronic music [jungle, trance, ambient, IDM etc etc] We broke laws and stole music we loved and shared our discoveries with as many people that would listen. Theres the global musical cross pollenization, Beck was hip to the Japanese musical style of Shibuya-Key with bands like Buffalo Daughter and Cornelius. John freaking Zorn, tho technically a boomer, has done much for Jazz/rock/improv/noise/classical. Tim Berne has taken free jazz, funk, and downtown jazz and pushed the envelope of collective improvisation while maintaining a strong pulse and groove. Dave Douglas, The Bad Plus, Marc Ribot, MMW, David Torn, Jamie Saft, Jim Black, The Necks, Nels Cline, Vandermark5, major movers in jazz.

But these are just my opinions based on what Ive managed to wrap my ears around, theres so much more out there to be listened to.

Sent by Jay T | 11:27 PM ET | 05-14-2008

I think a lot of people have already hit the nail on the head, this is the musical generation of microtrends.

Where previously people found music through a limited number of channels, now there is an internet radio station or digital download store to suit any subgenre.

Forget pop music, these days are the end of the platinum artist and the arrival of widespread self-publishing.

Sent by Six | 4:54 AM ET | 05-15-2008

I think that our generation(my generation) has a very definable sound that started with the "The" bands of 2000-2002. Though most faded into obscurity or sold out hard, a couple of them kept it real. For example, The White Stripes or the band that I think is the most important of the 2000's; The Strokes. At the same time, I think there are other records that have defined this generation. "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" by Wilco is an album that instantly comes to mind or even "Neon Bible" by Arcade Fire.

Sent by Scott | 1:58 PM ET | 05-15-2008

apathetic eclecticism

Sent by sonokrug | 6:12 PM ET | 05-15-2008

I think an equally interesting new topic in relation to this one would be: What is (or can there be) the NEW sound in the history of Rock? Has everything been exhausted leaving modern musicians to mimic the sounds of past eras; i.e. garage rock of the 60's, electronica of the early 80's. Or is the only other option to mix and match genres; glam and garage, folk and techno, disco and country... ad infinitum. Or is there some sound, some style out there that is still waiting to be created?

Sent by Matt Hocker | 3:39 AM ET | 05-16-2008

The first time I heard "Staring At the Sun" by TV On the Radio, I knew I was listening to a band that was taking all of their many influences (as so many other posters have pointed out, the Millenials have A LOT of influences) and putting it together in a layered, textural, orchestral kind of way that I think at least lays the groundwork for a type of music that could define a generation.
While I love The Strokes and The White Stripes, they wear their influences on their sleeves. Which is why I like them I guess.
But bands like Animal Collective, Arcade Fire and TV On the Radio, to me, seem to be going above and beyond their influences and end up bringing more than just a certain style to the table.
It's their approach and attitude toward music making that really set them apart and can help define and influence a generation of music.

Sent by Talin | 10:07 AM ET | 05-16-2008