One of the most unfortunate developments is the subjective approach to music in the Mass since Vatican II is that it has made music the single most divisive issue concerning the Mass, bar none. Vatican II did not intend this, but its subjective interpretation caused it.
I am a teenager of the Folk Mass era of the 1960’s. It was very controversial even then but archaic today. This passing fad singlehandedly began the great music divisiveness in the post Vatican II Church. Prior to Vatican II only the actual Mass parts in a Sung Mass beginning with the Introit could be chanted with the option of simple or more complicated forms of Gregorian chant and polyphony.
Some parishes were able to pull off complicated Masses writer by the great composers--but these were rare and the hierarchy was somewhat concerned about the secularization of the chants of the Mass for entertainment purposes then used in Masses actually celebrated.
The 1960’s Folk Mass with hand clapping, foot stomping and secular instruments like the tambourine began the great division not only in parishes but also families as to the style of music used at Mass resting solely upon personal tastes and the "kick" one gets from hearing music and this being the criteria for it being good or not.. When I could drive at 16 I went to the Folk Mass by myself not with my parents who despised this novelty. Vatican II can’t be faulted for this only its extremely poor, wrong and subjective implementation.
The folk music movement which opened the door to fads in music in the Mass is what has made Catholics consumers of church music and church music has become a big business in the Church because fads and tastes are constantly shifting.
Today the fad for some young people is “praise and worship music” borrowed from the non-denominational Protestant Churches. I had one well known liturgical musician in the Church tell me that what we are doing by giving into these kinds of musical fads, especially of the non-denominational type, is that we are preparing the way for our younger generation to leave the Catholic Church for these non-denominational sects because their music and preaching and fellowship will always be better than what we do because they don’t have the Sacraments of the Church as we do, so they create the hook of slick music in the contemporary style to get and keep member and they constantly test the market to see what works best for their consumers as fads and tastes change!
We simply have to get away from the fads of church music and the plethora of new hymns and hymnbooks that are a part of the consumerists' approach to worship in the Catholic Church today—a multimillion dollar business (and for Protestants too!). We need to be untied as a parish, diocese and universal Church in the manner in which we sing the Mass. Families need to be united too at Mass. This is the vision of Vatican II even in the limited amount of diversity it actually allows. Ideally each parish should only have one Sunday Mass that is packed to the rafters not multiple Masses designed to please a consumer’s taste. But in multiple Mass parishes we need to be unified not divided in the manner in which we sing and worship. Let's go back to Vatican II's Sacrosanctum Concilium and compare what it said about the revision of the Mass (which fortunately is still being celebrated in many places as the EF Mass) and look at what we did to it in the Ordinary Form as it is celebrated in the majority of parishes in the world today. Is there a disconnect? I would say so.
No matter how poorly the ancient Order of the Mass might have been celebrated here and there prior to Vatican II, in no way does it compared with the poverty of celebration today of the Ordinary Form. Thus, more than ever, we need Vatican II's Sacrosanctum Concilium's vision of the renewal of the Ancient Order of the Mass, which the post-Vatican II developments compromised and destroyed.