We're going round and round like a dog chasing his tail in regard to new music VS old music, and new musicians VS old musicians. The reasons for this have absolutely nothing to do with the music or musicians; I'll explain.
The primary reasons are economic; back then, there were many more "Juke Joints". While the term "juke joint" is normally used exclusively for "blues joints", I'm using it in reference to all small clubs that hire live entertainment. For example: I saw Phyllis Diller and Richard Pryor at such a small club before they became famous. Not together or on the same night, but at the same club.
Albert King, Ike and Tina Turner, worked the same juke joints in St. Louis. I saw them many times before they became famous; the same for Grant Green. I saw more dynamite jazz groups than I can shake a stick at. My point for bringing this up is that musicians, and all other entertainers have to have a place to work while honing their craft. The number of "juke joints" have shrunk by at least a "gozillian"; now you get my drift.
Since you can't resurrect the dead, when it comes to live music we don't have a choice; but that's no problem for me, because live music is usually better than recorded music, and new musicians have more formal training than yesterday's musicians from what I can gather. (If you kant git what you wont, like what you can git) That's what Rok told me, and I know he knows.
Enjoy the music.