Except the conclusion isn’t scientific at all. It’s 100% based on opinion. The author identified trends, yes, but that’s about it.
Simpler and more repetitive doesn’t mean worse — it means simpler and more repetitive. Never once have I listened to a song and thought, “Wow, this sucks, these lyrics would compress really easily.”
I do. Something like Hotel California that invokes a vivid imagery in one's mind seems unthinkable today. I don't know whether this affects the imagination or lingual abilities of the listeners, but it certainly can not produce the same emotions.
Think what you want about the song, but the lyrics are descriptive yet metaphorical. I made this example because I assumed everyone is familiar with it. The point is: the lyrics don't just consist of "I did this, I did that, yeah yeah yeah".
Simpler and repetitive does mean worse - for you. I actually agree with you, but I know plenty of people that love club/dance music, which is about as simple and repetitive as you can get. I think it's important to take the context of the music being played/performed as well: a simple, repetitive piece would likely not be received well in an orchestra hall, while a song with complex melody, deep lyrics, and rich harmony would likely be skipped at a football tailgate party. Music serves several functions in many different environments, and labeling a piece or style as universally worse is almost never true.
