Correct me if I'm wrong but what I believe you're saying is that one of the broad elements of timeless, at least in your opinion, is it's seeming detachment from current historical events. Basically what you're saying is that literally, timeless music is devoid of strong connections to time (that makes sense!) And you're right, timeless music has no time, as long as we're taking a literal look at it. That's what this thread is about, anyway, what is timeless? How can we define timeless in such a way that it can encase not only the classics but also the modern? Is timeless just music that has been heard by a majority that stands the test of a certain length of time? What is that length? That brings into question whether a song has to be of an age to be even considered.

While answering those questions will probably limit the discussion, and I intend them all to be rhetorical and not actually be answered with a quantitative answer, they might spark some thought into the creation, popularity level, and limit of what is and what isn't timeless.

Broaden your definition of timeless, but if you get too broad, limit it. Timeless can be time-based, but also popularity based.

One last few questions for my peers:

Is Mozart's music timeless?
What about Gershwin's Rhapsody In Blue?
The Beatles' Help?
How about The Decemberists?

These are questions I hope you guys actually answer, and debate. What would it be about The Decemberists that is timeless, if they are? I think they have the potential.