A few years ago I would have totally agreed with the OP. Now I am not so sure. The biggest gripe I have is the non-musician's perception of autotune. Autotune DOES NOT take a bad singer and make them decent or a good singer and make them great. Autotune is an effect, like vocals through reverb or an Echoplex back in the day. Every generation has lack-of-real-talent people becoming stars or at least one-hit wonders. Remember the song "This Diamond Ring"? Gary Lewis had no talent, but because his dad Jerry was a big star he got a hit record out of it.
And I agree with woodbinepmi -- we definitely gravitate to songs of our youth. That doesn't mean that current music is terrible. It's the new generation's youth music. Remember a guy named Elvis or that British band known as The Beatles? Do you remember all the hub-bub surrounding the corruption of our youth because of rock-and-roll? The old farts were appalled because they weren't Bing or Frank. My wife made me watch A Star Is Born with Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper. This is not my kind of movie, the music theme notwithstanding. Lady Gaga can effing sing, and was really good in her role. I think it's safe to say that she has talent whether or not you like her popular songs.
Let's also not forget the songwriters. They are not bound by effects like autotune. Did you ever try to write a song? I'm amazed at some of the melodies that are still being written. And I think it's great that anyone can create music now with the proliferation of digital audio workstations and relatively inexpensive hardware.
As far as live acts...yeah, I would be cheesed-off if the singer was lip syncing, but today's generation doesn't care. It's about the show, not the music. Do you think that the all of the 150,000 or so attendees of the Derby care about horse racing? No, it's about being at the event and being able to prove it because you shot video on your phone.
I'm a crusty old guy, but maybe I'm getting soft.
