Terrance Curtis Beasley
These ni*gas claim Top 5 but we OVOK
some old ass nikka gon play drake in 2042 and be like "damn I feel like im at the 2015 gay parade"
Like what?Some stuff literally sounds like the decade it was recorded in. There's music from all eras that sounds dated (or ahead of it's time) and usually that's directly related to the talent of the team who recorded it and how well the technology is used.
The technology used to record motowns hits is very run of the mill in 2017 but it's timelessness comes from all the ingredients being perfect.
A good example is DMX he has plenty of stuff that still sounds fresh but there specific tracks ( or more specifically beats) which sound very,very dated
and well...cheap.
While 2001 was/is recorded in such a way that whether you're playing it in 1999 or 2099 the shyt'll still knock.
Swizz Beatz/Dame GreaseLike what?

"The two albums you mentioned aged very well thoI see people use this to discredit hip hop legends
How does a classic "not age well"
Good music stay good music
The chronic takes me bacc to 90s Los Angeles
The infamous puts me in 90s NYC
If anything the new shyt that's out now will age terrible
No one in 2040 is gonna play some famous dex and be like "oooo I feel like I'm in 2016"
![]()
This. Those albums don't fall into the "didn't age well" categorie. Compare that to an album like Dmx "flesh of my flesh" which was the shyt when it came out and is barely listenable today for a more accurate example. As far as RTD goes, it is true that sonically it didn't age too well, because a lot of its beats were really generic. It has great songs that stand out, but also songs like "me and my bytch", which even at the time was subpar production. That doesn't diminish the impact it had when it came out, and i wouldn't go as far as saying it aged terrible, but it isn't like the chronic where you put it in 25 years later and it still bangs the way it did when it first came out.The two albums you mentioned aged very well tho
Juicy and Big Poppa sample songs that were already classic.@ the narrative that RTD didn’t age well based on 2 bars
Your bytch knows every word to Juicy and Big Poppa![]()
Exactly. Dudes mad some of their favorites get listed is allSome stuff literally sounds like the decade it was recorded in. There's music from all eras that sounds dated (or ahead of it's time) and usually that's directly related to the talent of the team who recorded it and how well the technology is used.
The technology used to record motowns hits is very run of the mill in 2017 but it's timelessness comes from all the ingredients being perfect.
A good example is DMX he has plenty of stuff that still sounds fresh but there specific tracks ( or more specifically beats) which sound very,very dated
and well...cheap.
While 2001 was/is recorded in such a way that whether you're playing it in 1999 or 2099 the shyt'll still knock.
Aged horribly= This once sounded dope, now it's unlistenable.
I think the OP is referring to sounding "dated", which basically means it sounds of its era and sounds old compared to modern sounds and styles. It doesn't mean it's not of high quality, just that it's not something that sounds modern.
nikkas be talking about "music doesn't age" but use adjectives like "timeless"nikkas be talking about music aging terribly but then the new acts be out here sampling or straight up remaking old songs.
