In response to the original post, I believe many original styles of music have been improvised over the past couple decades but very few have been widespread and acclaimed enough to be considered "revolutionary" and to impact music as a whole. I think music is too fragmented now for that.
There are plenty of modern/contemporary artists across genres that, in my opinion, are making music with quality comparable to the classics. Sadly most of these artists are ignored by the mainstream which is mostly dominated by the bland, pre-fab carbon copies that should not be looked to as representatives of the state of music as a whole.
On the other hand music is subjective and everyone has different tastes that are affected by different things: the styles they prefer, the bands they grew with up or listened to at a certain time in their life, the lyrical themes that speak to them and so on. People like the mass-produced music of today for their own reasons that are no worse then the reasons I like the music I do.
I started out favouring artists like the Beatles, Dylan, Floyd, for their (obvious) quality but I soon discovered modern music with the same excellence. originality, beauty and for lack of a better word, power (especially the 90's golden age of alternative/indie). I now try to maintain an eclectic taste in music regardless of year, genre or nationality.
