r/musichistory

When I look at old album covers from the 1950s and earlier, there’s a relatively basic photo of the artist(s) dressed nicely, smiling (or, sometimes not).

Fast forward to the 1970s, and now many album covers feature some psychedelic artwork that looks like it was created by someone on acid.

Was there a particular watershed moment or album that inspired other musicians to say, “Hey, we should put some cool shit besides our faces on our next album like those guys!”

For thousands of years, music was a lived experience. Then, in the mid-1920s, it became an object.

In this video, we explore the forgotten history of the American Federation of Musicians’ (AFM) campaign against "Canned Music." From the "Robot" propaganda ads of 1930 to the total recording strike of 1942, musicians once waged a full-scale culture war against the very technology we now take for granted: the recording.

As we face the rise of generative AI, the arguments of the past, that machine-made art is "soulless," "artificial," and "fake",are returning with a vengeance. By looking back at how the world reacted to the first "recorded" sounds, we might find a path forward that preserves the most valuable part of art: human presence.

I worked really hard to put this together, took about 20-24 hours of my time to Research, Cross Reference, Think of Assets, Generate Assets, Refine Generations, edit it all together in Adobe and about 50 dollars in credits spread across gemini, OpenArt, Suno, EllevenLabs

The first album I ever bought at Tower Records was Californication by Red Hot Chili Peppers. 1999. I was a small kid, there was a deal, I walked out with it.

That little record sold 15 million copies. One of the best albums ever recorded.

The guy who produced it is a likable dude with a giant beard who looks like Santa Claus. His name is Rick Rubin.

Same Rick Rubin produced Toxicity by System of a Down. About 12 million copies. #1 on Billboard on day one, for a bunch of angry self-unaware Armenians with a crate of charisma.

And Reign in Blood by Slayer. And the Johnny Cash comeback that won 5 Grammys. And LL Cool J. And the Beastie Boys. And Adele. And Jay-Z. And Eminem.

40 years. Rap, metal, country, pop, rock.

Zero connection between these artists. Zero. Except him.

Three things about Rick Rubin, and why this is the most important story of 2026:

(1) He started in 1984. Young guy in his NYU dorm. Room 712. He and Russell Simmons started a label out of that room. Def Jam. First record they put out was LL Cool J. A rising rapper in the cheerful 80s.

Two years later, same kid from the same room produces Reign in Blood by Slayer. One of the most important metal albums ever made. Not my taste, but the dissonance from rap to metal — and the fact that he just knows how to produce anyone, regardless of genre — that's a serious recurring motif.

Rick Rubin has a taste that's good.

(2) 1991. He produces Blood Sugar Sex Magik. Legend says the Chili Peppers were a pile of junkies in a rehearsal room. Done people. Singing about shooting heroin under a bridge. He produced them, gave them confidence in their own work, and the band from California started exploding.

1. He takes Johnny Cash, who everyone had forgotten. Country singer who lost everything to addiction. Brings him back to life across four albums. 5 Grammys. Not a small thing.

1999, Californication. 2001, System of a Down. He takes a bunch of strange Armenians, amplifies the strangeness instead of softening it, and turns them into a household name in global metal.

(3) Here's the thing.

Rick Rubin can't play any instrument. He's not a sound engineer. He doesn't operate Pro Tools.

He sits in the studio. He listens. He says "this isn't good." That's it.

In 2023, 60 Minutes asked him how he makes a living. He said: "They pay me for the confidence I have in my taste."

He's since become a meme in the vibe coding community.

We're in 2026 and there's an endless argument about whether Claude Code will replace startups. Whether agents will replace programmers.

It's an argument about the tool. Not about the most human thing there is — taste.

The mixing console didn't make people producers. Pro Tools didn't make people producers. A $2M studio didn't make people producers.

Rick Rubin made people stars. Meaning Rick Rubin's taste did. He knew how to listen, and with great confidence say "this is good, this is not."

He understood the sensitive human soul that wants to create, and knew how to pull it out of someone.

The man has talent at "it."

And "it" is what you need.

Claude Code is the tool. As long as you don't know what you want, it'll hand you something average that burns your time and your energy. You need to be a producer with good taste.

How do you do that?

Take everything you did well in your career, in your work, in your craft — and copy it into Claude. Transfer your taste (and I think everyone has good taste if they're connected enough to themselves) into the software, and watch yourself ship amazing things at scale.

That's how I write some of my own posts.

That's the whole story.

Hi. I recently began learning guitar. And as i learn about notes, it's history, names, and everything just gets so confusing.

Cool. So, i will summarize my understanding until now and you have to evaluate it solely based on facts. I am confused about how these notes came and were realized? What is the hsitorical flow? Below is what i understood, but these are two diff paths, and one has to be right.

Humans saw a string, attached to bone and pluck it. they heard a sound

Now, they placed finger halfway, and plucked it. They heard the same note, but higher. They judged it by ears. So they realized that b/w a full string, and a half string, there's a loop. And they need to fill the spaces in bw.

They then plucked 2/3 of the string, and heard a new melodious note.

Now, from this point, i am confused that what happened.

Approach 1-

They now, plucked 3/4 of string, and found it good too. They also realized that this feels like a step high to the note played for string length 2/3 of original.

So, till now they have 4 points. x, x/2, 2/3x, 3/4x. and a realization of audible distance bw 2/3x and 3/4x.

Then the found the ratio b/w 2/3x and 3/4x to be 8/9x.

Now, the implemented this to the full string till x/2, while keeping the points 2/3x and 3/4x. and got total of 7 notes.

The distance 8/9 became full step, and the small distances that came due to presence of 2/3x came to be known as half step.

The good part is this approach only gives 7 notes, so confirming that 5 notes were added later on. The problem with this is it produces music of step WWHWWWH, meaning first note is what we called today as C. Now, this is confusing. Why would they call first note as C? That's just straight away confusing. Also, lowest note they say was called A. and ofc, full string plays lowest note, so it has to be a and not c.

Approach 2-

They found that playing 2/3 of x is giving us new note. So they kept doing it, pulled back the out of string notes. This would now however, give total of 12 notes, but we had 7 notes earlier, and 5 came later on. Also, this also doesn't give justice to naming. If the stopped at 7. first question is why would they randomly stop at 7? when coould keep proceeding? And then the first 7 notes that come by t his method are also not abcdefg. they are diff.

And one thing i am am assuming is that the note we call today as ABCDEFG, are def the first one that were discovered, because ofc that's why they were named such, and later additions became theri sharp/flats. So, nothing in history seem to fall into piece and justify anything.

So, What path did history took? And how we came to what we are today? Which approach happened first, and which happened later? Show me every step and naming process. Don't just say and this continued. show me even the each and every math steps, even if repetetive, and tell me properly the naming convention and order. Take your time. Evaluate my whole statement. And answer properly.

Cool footage; it seems like the channel is posting Gibb stuff.

In this episode of Dustbin Prophecies, we explore the haunting soul classic “Big Bird” by Eddie Floyd—a song born from the devastating loss of Otis Redding in 1967.

Written during a flight into Memphis, “Big Bird” captures the disorienting weight of grief, longing, and the impossible desire to reconnect with someone who’s gone. Through its aching vocals and restrained Stax instrumentation, the song stands as one of the most emotionally raw recordings of the era.

We dive into the story behind the song, the moment that inspired it, and why its quiet power continues to resonate decades later.

A meditation on loss, memory, and the spaces in between—this is one of soul music’s most underrated masterpieces.

Dustbin Prophecies: digging through the forgotten corners of rock history — one record at a time