Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, you still are confused between "hips" and "waste" dispite me saying it in at least TWO posts now. All of these peoples pants are at their hips, maybe slightly lower.
You ALSO have no concept of differentiation between "baggy clothes" and "sagging".
As you can see from the Wiz Khalifa picture (who also sells millions of records by the the way) "sagging" is no problem in tight pants
Again, "starting a genre" does not give you credit for everything that came after it.
Real World had nothing in common at all with things like Next Top Model or Dancing with the Stars.
As I said before, giving Real World credit for Dancing with the Stars is like giving The 3 Stooges credit for The Office.
No, the changes are extreme.
Disco at its peak was never as large as the British invasion, and it was ALWAYS a sub genre.
Appearing on someone elses album to say a line does not make you famous.
I guess if we are going by that, Poppa Wu should be tremendously famous, since he has a speaking part on almost every single Wu Tang and Wu-Tang affiliate record ever made, but, my guess is nobody cares, just like nobody cared about Little Wayne.
Gladly. The Eagles, dispite not putting out an album in almost 20 years, put out their 7th disc in 2007, it went 7X platinum in the US, and hit number 1 on the chart.....amazing....by the way, it outsold Encore, Relapse and Recovery by Eminem.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
Eminem, Snoop and JayZ are legends, do you understand? They sell records now for the same reason that U-2 can fart into a can, record it, and go number 1 in every country on the planet.
However, there are dozens of rappers selling millions of records that came about in the past few years.
Actually, really, thats only the case with rap, and thats mostly because the biggest rappers all became moguls. However, as far as the music is concerned, they still sell records because they are rap legends, period.
The difference is that Snoop managed to stay relevant, long enough, to become a legend. Most of the others were popular for a very short fleeting time, and some, like Public Enemy, died when their style went out of favor.
August of 1999 is not the "90's". 4 months of one year does not place someone in that decade. Thats like saying someone born in August of 1989 was a child of the 80's. Thats ridiculous, they remember nothing of the 80's, and experienced the last fraction of it in infancy.
Well have to disagree that the Peas werent ever good.
The Red Hot Chili Peppers have been singing about California since 1983, so what?
Britney Spears absolutely changed. She went from Bubble Gum pop to electronic dance music. Jay Z absolutely changed. Snoop changed many times trying to hold on. He became a No Limit soldier, dropped his "gangster image" and started selling out doing songs with Pharell and Justin Timberlake. Seriously, 1992 Snoop would have shot 2004 Snoop directly in the face.
The only reason why he is able to keep up his pot head image is because recreational drugs have become even more mainstream in popular culture. You cant search for a picture of Lil Wayne or Wiz Kalifa without getting 90% of them back with a big puff of smoke coming out of their face. He fits right in.
It does matter, it matters tremendously. Most celebrities have an arch, and when the beginning of their arch is at the end of one decade, of COURSE they are likely going to be popular well in to the next decade.
It is absolutely not suprising at all that people who just got famous in 1999, are still famous a decade later.
I said nobody would mistake Nickelback for Nirvana, Pearl Jam or Alice in Chains, or any late 80's early 90's grunge, I could care less what genre they fall in.
Thats amazing, because I have never once seen a "Disco" section at any record store, big or small.
Wow, hair metal and mid 80s "synth rock" had a similiar effect on people.
I dont care how big of sub genre it was, it was still a sub genre. Appetite for Destruction sold more albums then any of those records, but if that record were made right now, its sales would be pitiful.
14. I agree, hoodies have always served as seasonal dress.
It didn't become CULTURAL dress until Hip-Hop in the 1990s.
Per Wikipedia.
By the 1990s, the hoodie had evolved into a symbol of isolation, a statement of academic spirit, and several fashion collections.[citation needed] The association with chavs or neds in the UK developed around this time, as their popularity rose with that specific demographic. Young men, often skateboarders or surfers, sported the hoodie and spread the trend across the western United States, most significantly in California.[citation needed] The rise of hoodies with university logos began around this time.[citation needed] Tommy Hilfiger, Giorgio Armani, and Ralph Lauren, for example, used the hoodie as the primary component for many of their collections in the 1990s.[1][2]
Wait a second wait a second, your argument has primarily been centered around completely ignoring all years but 98-99 of the 90's, but, when its convenient, you bring up the early 90's?
Where they filmed it is proportionate to the funding they could get, and venue willing to run it, which is usually predicated on how much they can make over another act.
All of that is tied to how popular (in attendence and viewership) the event is/has been/is projected to be.
The bottom line is that they werent even able to push for a decent venue until 2001.
Clearly, a show from 2001-2012 would capture the differences between the 90's and 2000's.........
Anyhow, if someone showed up at the local high school like this
Nothing these people are wearing that was popular at some point in the 90's, is acceptable at all now. I could find thousands more examples.
1. No, YOU are the one who is confused about sagging. Me and EVERYBODY I knew and grew up with spent the entire '90s and early part of the 2000s sagging. I don't know where YOU grew up, but it obviously wasn't in the inner city like I did. If you think that sagging only means basically having your pants down by your legs then I don't know what to tell you. My life experience trumps your ignorance.
2. How come it doesn't? The Real World is the basis for "America's Top Model" because "The Real World" created the model of throwing people from totally different backgrounds into ONE house where there's no TV or radios allowed and making sure chaos happens. Forced conflict is pretty much the basis for ALL reality TV. "The Real World" & "Road Rules' were also the first shows to bend the meaning of the word "reality" by staging and reshooting incidents as well.
Reality TV would have been all like "Cops" and American Family", documentary style, if it wasn't for "The Real World", not actual TV shows with storylines.
And "Dancing With The Stars" is NOT a reality show. Jeezus. "Dancing with the Stars" is a COMPETITION show, like "Star Search" and "Jeopardy" and shows like that. There is a difference. Reality Shows are about people LIVING life. "Dancing with the Stars" is a competition. Big difference.
3. You're crazy if you don't think Disco was as big as British Invasion.
Disco was so big it FORCED non Disco artist to do disco records. It forced The Rolling Stones, Rod Stewart, Queen, Chicago, Cher, Diana Ross, Barry Manilow, Elton John, and even Pink Floyd had to incorporate Disco in the 1970s.
The "Saturday Night Fever" soundtrack sold 40 million copies and is one of the top 5-10 best selling records ever.
That's FAR more than ANY rap, grunge, punk, or funk album in history.
Look at the "Disco Sucks" rally in 1979. Do you see how many people came out just to DESTROY Disco records? About 20,000. You think you''re gonna see 20,000 people show up to destroy "pop-punk" records? No, you know why? Because most people don't know or care enough about the genre. Disco was unavoidable. Rick Dees and Ethel Merman were making Disco records for chrissakes. It was in every TV show, commercial, movie, etc. . . It was unavoidable for people living in that time, much like Hip-Hop is today. I'm sorry, "grunge" and "pop-punk" and subgenres like that have NEVER reached that peak.
4. How did Lil' Wayne JUST appear on somebody's song? He was a STAR in the "Hot Boyz", he was a star on Juvenile's "400 Degreez" and B.G.'s "Bling Bling". His first album "The Block is Hot" went PLATINUM in 1999. How is that comparable to Poppa Wu? He's not even a rapper.
5. Did I say that NOBODY from the '60s sells records today? NOOOOOOOO for the 120th time. I never said that.
Are those people still effecting the videos on MTV, BET, VH1, and the way people dress, talk, and culture . . . . NOOOOOOO.
There's a difference between being to have a hit and being at the FOREFRONT of the culture.
Lil' Wayne, Jay-Z, Beyonce, etc. . . are at the FOREFRONT of the culture. People want to look like them, dress like them, talk like them. People are constantly talking about them in tabloids and on the news. That doesn't apply to The Eagles. Your average music fan born in the '80s or '90s wouldn't know Joe Walsh if he stood right next to them.
Great musican, great career. Not culturally as relevant as Lil' Wayne socially. He's not gonna trend on Twitter or see his Facebook page flooded anytime soon.
6. U2's not at the FOREFRONT of American culture. They don't affect what comes out of the "kids" mouths, or what they wear. They have a rabid, die-hard fanbase, but they are hardly in American culture what Jay-Z and Lil' Wayne are.
I turn on MTV at any given moment or go on virtually any celebrity website on the internet or VH1 or BET, etc. . . I see Beyonce. Turn on the E! channel, you see these people. You don't see Bono except when some kids an orphan in Africa or something, but U2 are more elder statesmen than at the cutting edge of American culture. Big difference. Frank Sinatra was famous in the '60s, but all of the "cool" people at Haight Ashbury and at Woodstock were listening to "Sgt. Peppers'.
Merely being around is not the same thing as being culturally relevant to the people who are the tastemakers in society.
7. Run-DMC became "legends" and yet 10 years after their first hit, they were irrelevant. Grandmaster Flash & The Furious Five were "legends". AND???? Nobody was buying their records in 1995. They weren't relevant by the early to mid '90s still. Neither was Eric B. & Rakim, Public Enemy and tons of other LEGENDS in HIp-Hop. Merely being a legend hasn't meant a damn thing in Hip-Hop . . . . UNTIL the guys who came along in the '90s. If anything, legend in HIp-Hop has just meant you're old and nobody wants to hear what you have to say.
8. You can't compare something coming out in 1999 with being born in 1999. With your logic, somebody born in 1996 wouldn't be a "child of the '90s either" because how many people remember pop culture when their 3 or 4? Only somebody born in 1990-1993 would be able to be a "child of the '90s" with your logic.
If something came out in 1999, it is still the '90s, hence the term ninety in it's title.
9. But Britney going from bubblegum pop to electropop isnt that much of a difference. It's all pop and she's still singing about the same stuff and trying to do the same dance moves. Her career has not progressed at all. You keep mistaking small production differences with HUGE cultural shifts.
10. Snoop has NOT changed that much. Hell, he practically even looks the same. Whether he's on NO Limit, Death Row, whatever, he's still playing a lanky pimp who's simultaneously smooth and dangerous. I agree 1992 Snoop was MORE dangerous than 2012 Snoop, but it's not like Snoops started dancing like Hammer and has become a baptist minster and only raps for God or something. He's a hustler, just like he always was. Same goes with Jay-Z.
Nowhere did I say that they didn't UPGRADE, but there's a difference between upgrading from say Windows XP to Windows Vista and throwing out your Windows computer to buy a Mac. One is an UPGRADE, the other is completely changing the way you do things.
None of those people you mentioned have completely changed the way they do things the way U2 did with "Achtung Baby" in 1992. They changed their clothes, what they sang about, they went from super serious to completely making fun of themselves, they even changed their songwriting techniques. THAT is throwing out the PC to get a Mac. Not just going from XP to Vista.
11. It IS surprising not that they're still famous, because technically Vanilla Ice is still famous and can get on TV here and there. What's surprising is that they still DOMINATE the culture. They still have control over how people live their lives on a daily basis culturally. That is not something that you saw very often. Most successful artists even ones with longevity like Neil Young or Sade or Michael Jackson become reclusive and cede the pop spotlight to much younger artists who then come up with the new fads, the new trends, the clothing lines, the new slang, and keep their names in the papers on a daily basis, while they come out with a record once every 5-8 years. They don't continue being worldwide phenomenons who you see at every award show getting award shows and on TMZ every night.
12. You're making my point for me here. There's no Disco section NOW!!! In 1977, there would have been a Disco section in your music store. Matter of fact, it might have been the BIGGEST section in the store after "Saturday Night Fever". That's how big it was, but as big as it was it was gone by the early '80s. Now, it's just a relic. Disco artists themselves had to STOP calling themselves Disco because of the backlash. It technically doesn't really exist as a genre anymore, because people ran away from it.
Now THAT is a huge cultural shift. From biggest cultural phenomenon, to everybody being associated with it having their careers almost ruined by it.
13. Yeah, but if Kid N Play showed up like that in 1993, they would have been ridiculed. That's my point. That style of dress didn't even make it into the MID '90s. I never said that people dress today like they did in 1991. I don't know where you're getting that I said that, but those pictures illustrate my point that the change WITHIN the '90s from the early '90s to the late '90s culturally was bigger than the one that's happened from the late '90s to today.
1. No, YOU are the one who is confused about sagging. Me and EVERYBODY I knew and grew up with spent the entire '90s and early part of the 2000s sagging. I don't know where YOU grew up, but it obviously wasn't in the inner city like I did.If you think that sagging only means basically having your pants down by your legs then I don't know what to tell you. My life experience trumps your ignorance.
Lol. My ignorance. I grew up in more gang infested areas then you ever will see, thanks. Every person I knew "sagged" including me for a time in the late 90s.
However, not a single one of them could have imagined wearing their pants below their ass, which is what the youth do now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
2. How come it doesn't? The Real World is the basis for "America's Top Model" because "The Real World" created the model of throwing people from totally different backgrounds into ONE house where there's no TV or radios allowed and making sure chaos happens. Forced conflict is pretty much the basis for ALL reality TV. "The Real World" & "Road Rules' were also the first shows to bend the meaning of the word "reality" by staging and reshooting incidents as well.
Reality TV would have been all like "Cops" and American Family", documentary style, if it wasn't for "The Real World", not actual TV shows with storylines.
Ok, so I guess Three Stooges should take credit for every comedy ever made after it, especially slapstick physical comedy shows. Wow, its amazing, nothing has changed since the 30's!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
3. You're crazy if you don't think Disco was as big as British Invasion.
Disco was so big it FORCED non Disco artist to do disco records. It forced The Rolling Stones, Rod Stewart, Queen, Chicago, Cher, Diana Ross, Barry Manilow, Elton John, and even Pink Floyd had to incorporate Disco in the 1970s.
It didnt "force them" to do anything, they jumped on the band wagon, just like Britney Spears jumped on the electronic band wagon, and dozens of rappers started using auto tune.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
The "Saturday Night Fever" soundtrack sold 40 million copies and is one of the top 5-10 best selling records ever.
That's FAR more than ANY rap, grunge, punk, or funk album in history.
I could care less about how many records Saturday Night Fever sold, it didnt create its own genre. It was DANCE MUSIC, period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Look at the "Disco Sucks" rally in 1979. Do you see how many people came out just to DESTROY Disco records? About 20,000. You think you''re gonna see 20,000 people show up to destroy "pop-punk" records? No, you know why? Because most people don't know or care enough about the genre. Disco was unavoidable.
They would with the proper propaganda. Literally millions of Elvis records were destroyed, and millions of the Beatles as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Rick Dees and Ethel Merman were making Disco records for chrissakes. It was in every TV show, commercial, movie, etc. . . It was unavoidable for people living in that time, much like Hip-Hop is today. I'm sorry, "grunge" and "pop-punk" and subgenres like that have NEVER reached that peak.
It was unavoidable for FIVE YEARS. That is a fad, an extremely popular fad, but a fad nonetheless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
4. How did Lil' Wayne JUST appear on somebody's song? He was a STAR in the "Hot Boyz", he was a star on Juvenile's "400 Degreez" and B.G.'s "Bling Bling". His first album "The Block is Hot" went PLATINUM in 1999. How is that comparable to Poppa Wu? He's not even a rapper.
He was a star in the Hot Boyz? You mean the Hot Boyz nobody cared about until late 1999?
The "The Block is Hot" went platinum in when? NOVEMBER 1999? Hell, most of those "platinum" sales werent even until AFTER 2000 for that album.
Lil Wayne was a 2000's rapper, period. Over 90% of his albums he pushed were made after 2000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
5. Did I say that NOBODY from the '60s sells records today? NOOOOOOOO for the 120th time. I never said that.
Yeah you did, you absolutely said that any modern artist would outsell a classic artist, and the fact is, whenever a classic artist releases new material, they BURY the modern artists. Period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Are those people still effecting the videos on MTV, BET, VH1, and the way people dress, talk, and culture . . . . NOOOOOOO.
They are affecting culture about as much as Eminem or Jay-Z. I dont know about you, but I dont see people trying to emulate Eminem any longer, and Jay-Z was motivated to dump Rocawear (a line known for "urbanwear"), and go saddle up with Pharrell on his prep-line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Lil' Wayne, Jay-Z, Beyonce, etc. . . are at the FOREFRONT of the culture. People want to look like them, dress like them, talk like them.
Meanwhile, people like Beyonce, Jay Z and other hold overs from years ago are busy trying to mold themselves to current trends.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
People are constantly talking about them in tabloids and on the news. That doesn't apply to The Eagles. Your average music fan born in the '80s or '90s wouldn't know Joe Walsh if he stood right next to them.
Thats funny, my wife gets tabloids all the time, and celebs from the past are CONSTANTLY in them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
7. Run-DMC became "legends" and yet 10 years after their first hit, they were irrelevant.
They were irrelevant because they made themselves irrelevant. They never altered their style to adapt to current hip hop trends, and only made 3 albums since 1990.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Grandmaster Flash & The Furious Five were "legends". AND???? Nobody was buying their records in 1995. They weren't relevant by the early to mid '90s still.
Grandmaster Flash is no legend. He is famous only for his pioneering work in Hip Hop and Djing and the song "The Message". He never sold many albums, and was pretty irrelevant outside of hardcore heads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Neither was Eric B. & Rakim, Public Enemy and tons of other LEGENDS in HIp-Hop. Merely being a legend hasn't meant a damn thing in Hip-Hop . . . . UNTIL the guys who came along in the '90s. If anything, legend in HIp-Hop has just meant you're old and nobody wants to hear what you have to say.
Most of these "legends" you are referring to, not only had careers over a decade long (Public Enemies last studio album under a label still got as high as 26th in 1998, Rakim went gold in 1997 and hit number 4), but all of these rappers suffered from not adjusting their style.
Again, Snoop Dogg has completely altered his image, and that is why he has carried on. He has bounced to nearly every popular form of hip hop style, sold out across genres, and makes sure to partner with the newest artists as well.
You tell me ANYTHING on DoggyStyle sounds like "Drop it Like its Hot". He converted from ganster rapper to "Master P style" to pop rap/dance. He went from pioneer to ***** in order to stay relevent.
Im sure if Wiz Khalifa made a song featuring Rakim, Rakim would immediatley be relevant again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
8. You can't compare something coming out in 1999 with being born in 1999. With your logic, somebody born in 1996 wouldn't be a "child of the '90s either" because how many people remember pop culture when their 3 or 4? Only somebody born in 1990-1993 would be able to be a "child of the '90s" with your logic.
I wouldnt call them a child of the 1990's but theyd be far more a reflection of the 90's then someone born in August of 1999.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
If something came out in 1999, it is still the '90s, hence the term ninety in it's title.
If something came out in 1999, it hardly is representitive of the 90's at all, and if an artist created 1/10 of their total body of work in 1999, that does not tie them to the 1990's.
It is debateable to even call Jay-Z a 90's rapper, but I will give you the benefit on that one, since his two biggest albums came out in the 1990's, and hes been relevant since 1996.
However, someone like Lil' Wayne, or Britney Spears, who had nearly all of their success in the 2000's are not 90's artists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
9. But Britney going from bubblegum pop to electropop isnt that much of a difference. It's all pop and she's still singing about the same stuff and trying to do the same dance moves. Her career has not progressed at all. You keep mistaking small production differences with HUGE cultural shifts.
No, you are downplaying huge shifts as "minor" when they are absolutely huge. Britney Spears went to electronic/dance the same way the BeeGees went to disco. You are downplaying the shift in rap from concentration on lyrics, to danceability and annoying hooks. You are downplaying the tremendous influence the infiltration of house and dub step is having on EVERYTHING.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
10. Snoop has NOT changed that much. Hell, he practically even looks the same. Whether he's on NO Limit, Death Row, whatever, he's still playing a lanky pimp who's simultaneously smooth and dangerous.
No, actually he played a ganster, then he played whatever role you would call a "No Limit Soldier", then he moved to pimp, now hes just a sell out who will do anything with any body in so much he stays in the limelight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
I agree 1992 Snoop was MORE dangerous than 2012 Snoop, but it's not like Snoops started dancing like Hammer and has become a baptist minster and only raps for God or something. He's a hustler, just like he always was. Same goes with Jay-Z.
Youre right, he went from singing about killing people to working with Justin Timberlake......there is no change there at all......same ol' Snoop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Nowhere did I say that they didn't UPGRADE, but there's a difference between upgrading from say Windows XP to Windows Vista and throwing out your Windows computer to buy a Mac. One is an UPGRADE, the other is completely changing the way you do things.
Snoop abandoned West Coast gangster rap when it was no longer relevant in the mid 90's, and jumped on the No Limit label, and started "rapping like them", and when that fad fell out, he went swinging to other branches. Unless in this metaphor "rap in general" is "windows", Snoop absolutely throws out the old operating system every few years, and is exactly the reason why he stayed relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
None of those people you mentioned have completely changed the way they do things the way U2 did with "Achtung Baby" in 1992. They changed their clothes, what they sang about, they went from super serious to completely making fun of themselves, they even changed their songwriting techniques. THAT is throwing out the PC to get a Mac. Not just going from XP to Vista.
Because Snoop clearly would be caught dead in his Southern Calfornia khaki/flannel ensemble from the early to mid 90's in 2006. Snoop did EXACTLY the same thing, SEVERAL times in his career.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
11. It IS surprising not that they're still famous, because technically Vanilla Ice is still famous and can get on TV here and there. What's surprising is that they still DOMINATE the culture. They still have control over how people live their lives on a daily basis culturally. That is not something that you saw very often. Most successful artists even ones with longevity like Neil Young or Sade or Michael Jackson become reclusive and cede the pop spotlight to much younger artists who then come up with the new fads, the new trends, the clothing lines, the new slang, and keep their names in the papers on a daily basis, while they come out with a record once every 5-8 years. They don't continue being worldwide phenomenons who you see at every award show getting award shows and on TMZ every night.
The whole world wanted to be like Michael Jackson from about 1979 to 1991 (hell Corey Feldman practically thought he was Michael Jackson), thats roughly the same time frame we are talking about for some of these people you mentioned.
Jackson changed his image several times, and his music changed as well to reflect the times, from the extremely dance oriented Off the Wall, to the more ballad filled Dangerous.
By the way, I think everyone on the planet would pin Jackson to the 80's, even though Off The Wall, his first real success, was made in 1979, and he was plying as a solo artist since 1972.
According to you, Jackson should be a "1970's" singer, and the 70's never died because Jackson was still relevant in the late 80's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
12. You're making my point for me here. There's no Disco section NOW!!! In 1977, there would have been a Disco section in your music store.
In 1993, you may have found Grunge. In 1967, The Beatles may have had their own section. In 2010, both can be found under Rock or Pop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Matter of fact, it might have been the BIGGEST section in the store after "Saturday Night Fever". That's how big it was, but as big as it was it was gone by the early '80s. Now, it's just a relic. Disco artists themselves had to STOP calling themselves Disco because of the backlash. It technically doesn't really exist as a genre anymore, because people ran away from it.
People ran from hair metal in the early 90's, and I cant imagine Motley Crue refering to themselves as a hair metal band. By the way, Hair Metal can ALSO be found under rock. If you move over to the "Dance" section, youll probably find Saturday Night Fever (unless its in Pop).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Now THAT is a huge cultural shift. From biggest cultural phenomenon, to everybody being associated with it having their careers almost ruined by it.
Almost nobody associated with it had their careers ruined. ABBA, The Bee Gees, and everyone else heavily involved continued to be popular for decades. Hell, the Bee Gees went platinum in 1997.
The only reason people distanced themselves from it was because it became no longer culturally relevant, which is the same reason why you dont see any groups styling themselves after Blink 182 circa 1998 any longer.
The stupid anti disco antics were largely a heavily propagandized "counter" movement popular with "rocker" kids, which even at its peak, failed to kill disco. These werent people who actually "liked" disco protesting, these were people who always hated disco (or just wanted to be in a pot infested destructive event).
These days its almost impossible to inflame anyone to do anything, but with the right propaganda, Im positive you could collect enough people to burn a pile of Lady Gaga records or anything you want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
13. Yeah, but if Kid N Play showed up like that in 1993, they would have been ridiculed. That's my point. That style of dress didn't even make it into the MID '90s. I never said that people dress today like they did in 1991. I don't know where you're getting that I said that, but those pictures illustrate my point that the change WITHIN the '90s from the early '90s to the late '90s culturally was bigger than the one that's happened from the late '90s to today.
No it isnt. If Wiz Kalifa showed up in an "urban setting" in 1997, dressed like he does, he would literally be stoned, or called an "Oreo" and outcasted best case. Period.
Just because a few things from 1999 could fit in 2009 does not mean they are the same. Hell, I have clothes in my closet right now, that I could probably get away with wearing in 1989. I wouldnt be "styling" but Id fit in. I have pictures of me from the 1980's, and nearly everything Im wearing in every picture (outside the parachute pants and stone washed jeans), I could wear right now.
My Dad has pictures from the 1970's, and if you ignore the bell bottoms, and small ass shorts, he could fit in today.
It shows how "normal folk" dressed and styled their hair in 1992 - which is completely different from today. Notice the pastel colors, the loose fit of their clothes, the dorky ball caps, the tucked-in T-shirts.
Fast forward 9 years later to my 2001-2002 high school yearbook. Although there were some short-lived fads evident, much of what people were wearing and their haircuts would not be out-of-place ten years later...unlike the people in the video, some of whom would look bizarre if they were magically transported to 2012. Of course, many styles today probably would not fly in 2001...but 80%-90% of the students then would not look out of place if they were wearing the same clothes (assuming they fit) and had the same haircuts today.
When did it change? From all that I've seen, 1999 - 2000. In 1998, ridiculously baggy pants (JNCO, etc.) and windbreakers were in for both boys and girls, though nobody over the age of 25 wore that. Many of the older adults were probably still wearing the pastel-colored shirts that they bought five years ago.
I agree, it was around '99 when I started noticing baggy clothes going bye bye and first, bell-bottoms for girls coming back, and slimming down of guys' pants eventually to be replaced by the tight-pants look of the early/mid 2000s.
As for pop music, I think the periods of the dominant forms, at least those which receive pop radio play and which lead the singles charts, are quite clear:
From '97 through '01, it was a mixture of radio-friendly rock (a la Vertical Horizon, Matchbox 20, Blink 182), true pop music (Lou Bega, Ricky Martin, Savage Garden, Nelly Furtado), and beginning in 1997, what I would call "teenie-bop" artists such as Hanson, the Spice Girls, Britney Spears, *NSYNC, and the Backstreet Boys. The lyrics centered around love and relationships. I remember them as being much cleaner than in the following periods of music, although towards the end of the period some of the more mature themes appeared.
Rap & R & B was probably most at the fringes around this time (at least prior to '00 in the mainstream white audience). Some songs nevertheless became popular: Monique & Brandy's "The Boy is Mine", Will Smith, etc. Could this have had something to do with the death of Notorious BIG, 2Pac, etc.?
Around 1998-1999, harder-edged "nu-metal" and "rock-rap" music also became popular, such as Limp Bizkit and Kid Rock. Music in this style continues to be played, though it is almost entirely relegated to "modern rock" format radio station.
"Teeny bop" music faded out around 2001. Those artists which rose to popularity during the craze either faded away completely had to re-invent themselves to release hits again. Think Christina Aguilera becoming "Xtina", Jennifer Lopez becoming "J.Lo", and Britney Spears going from saying she's a virgin to making songs with semi-obscene titles. In order to be popular for a long time, artists must re-invent themselves; those who fail to do so or do so unsuccessfully disappear from the charts. Another ideal example is Nelly Furtado, who used to sing about birds flying away in 2001 and descended into oblivion until 2006 when she teamed up with a popular urban producer and sang about promiscuous girls and boys.
'02 through '08, it was mainly rap and some R & B. People were even wondering whether rock was still "mainstream". It in fact had mainly been relegated, among the younger crowd, to modern rock format stations or to the punk/emo scene. However, at my school at least, when I graduated (2005) the two overwhelmingly dominant music styles were rap/urban and country. As for the urban music, beats were slow, melodies, in many cases, were almost absent, and lyrics were typically about sex, materialism, and living it up, in the case of male rappers. Atlanta came to dominate the mainstream rap scene. Many or most of the time the Top 40 singles chart was dominated by black artists.
'09 through '12 (today), it was house-influenced pop music with much faster beats and stronger melodies. Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, and Ke$ha seemingly came from nowhere and led this genre from being virtually unknown in the US (besides a few imports from Europe that became popular) to domination. (Madonna released an album which might have been a precursor of this style in 2005, but it was not popular in the U.S.) The lyrics are mainly about partying it up and dancing, with love and sex thrown in for good measure. Rappers adapted and often collaborated with them and others. If they would have done this in 2004 or 2005, they would be considered "gay" and shunned.
Alternative styles of dance music, e.g. dubstep, have also become somewhat popular.
Throughout the 2000's and into the 2010's, there continued to be a tradition of teen music with artists such as Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez, etc. These artists seem to differ from the "teenie-bop" stars of the past is, besides a couple of songs (e.g. Miley Cyrus "Party in the USA", Selena Gomez "Naturally"), their popularity remained within the pre-teen / young teen crowd. Back in the '90s, twenty-somethings listened to the Backstreet Boys, and there was not a person below the age of 50 who was not familiar with the melody of "Mmmmmbop". Maybe the change was one of marketing?
Also, people well-versed in this topic might disagree on how much change has occurred according to their background. For example, Lake County, Indiana is 25% black and is home to Gary, Indiana, which is almost all-black. Although they often overlap today, the black community continues to have different music listening habits (at all ages) compared to mainstream America. This is also true of Hispanic America, and to a lesser extent, of some progressive areas like New York City and Miami, and Canadian audiences, which were far more receptive at times to "dance" music than American audiences.
Lol. My ignorance. I grew up in more gang infested areas then you ever will see, thanks. Every person I knew "sagged" including me for a time in the late 90s.
However, not a single one of them could have imagined wearing their pants below their ass, which is what the youth do now.
Ok, so I guess Three Stooges should take credit for every comedy ever made after it, especially slapstick physical comedy shows. Wow, its amazing, nothing has changed since the 30's!
It didnt "force them" to do anything, they jumped on the band wagon, just like Britney Spears jumped on the electronic band wagon, and dozens of rappers started using auto tune.
I could care less about how many records Saturday Night Fever sold, it didnt create its own genre. It was DANCE MUSIC, period.
They would with the proper propaganda. Literally millions of Elvis records were destroyed, and millions of the Beatles as well.
It was unavoidable for FIVE YEARS. That is a fad, an extremely popular fad, but a fad nonetheless.
He was a star in the Hot Boyz? You mean the Hot Boyz nobody cared about until late 1999?
The "The Block is Hot" went platinum in when? NOVEMBER 1999? Hell, most of those "platinum" sales werent even until AFTER 2000 for that album.
Lil Wayne was a 2000's rapper, period. Over 90% of his albums he pushed were made after 2000.
Yeah you did, you absolutely said that any modern artist would outsell a classic artist, and the fact is, whenever a classic artist releases new material, they BURY the modern artists. Period.
They are affecting culture about as much as Eminem or Jay-Z. I dont know about you, but I dont see people trying to emulate Eminem any longer, and Jay-Z was motivated to dump Rocawear (a line known for "urbanwear"), and go saddle up with Pharrell on his prep-line.
Meanwhile, people like Beyonce, Jay Z and other hold overs from years ago are busy trying to mold themselves to current trends.
Thats funny, my wife gets tabloids all the time, and celebs from the past are CONSTANTLY in them.
They were irrelevant because they made themselves irrelevant. They never altered their style to adapt to current hip hop trends, and only made 3 albums since 1990.
Grandmaster Flash is no legend. He is famous only for his pioneering work in Hip Hop and Djing and the song "The Message". He never sold many albums, and was pretty irrelevant outside of hardcore heads.
Most of these "legends" you are referring to, not only had careers over a decade long (Public Enemies last studio album under a label still got as high as 26th in 1998, Rakim went gold in 1997 and hit number 4), but all of these rappers suffered from not adjusting their style.
Again, Snoop Dogg has completely altered his image, and that is why he has carried on. He has bounced to nearly every popular form of hip hop style, sold out across genres, and makes sure to partner with the newest artists as well.
You tell me ANYTHING on DoggyStyle sounds like "Drop it Like its Hot". He converted from ganster rapper to "Master P style" to pop rap/dance. He went from pioneer to ***** in order to stay relevent.
Im sure if Wiz Khalifa made a song featuring Rakim, Rakim would immediatley be relevant again.
I wouldnt call them a child of the 1990's but theyd be far more a reflection of the 90's then someone born in August of 1999.
If something came out in 1999, it hardly is representitive of the 90's at all, and if an artist created 1/10 of their total body of work in 1999, that does not tie them to the 1990's.
It is debateable to even call Jay-Z a 90's rapper, but I will give you the benefit on that one, since his two biggest albums came out in the 1990's, and hes been relevant since 1996.
However, someone like Lil' Wayne, or Britney Spears, who had nearly all of their success in the 2000's are not 90's artists.
No, you are downplaying huge shifts as "minor" when they are absolutely huge. Britney Spears went to electronic/dance the same way the BeeGees went to disco. You are downplaying the shift in rap from concentration on lyrics, to danceability and annoying hooks. You are downplaying the tremendous influence the infiltration of house and dub step is having on EVERYTHING.
No, actually he played a ganster, then he played whatever role you would call a "No Limit Soldier", then he moved to pimp, now hes just a sell out who will do anything with any body in so much he stays in the limelight.
Youre right, he went from singing about killing people to working with Justin Timberlake......there is no change there at all......same ol' Snoop.
Snoop abandoned West Coast gangster rap when it was no longer relevant in the mid 90's, and jumped on the No Limit label, and started "rapping like them", and when that fad fell out, he went swinging to other branches. Unless in this metaphor "rap in general" is "windows", Snoop absolutely throws out the old operating system every few years, and is exactly the reason why he stayed relevant.
Because Snoop clearly would be caught dead in his Southern Calfornia khaki/flannel ensemble from the early to mid 90's in 2006. Snoop did EXACTLY the same thing, SEVERAL times in his career.
The whole world wanted to be like Michael Jackson from about 1979 to 1991 (hell Corey Feldman practically thought he was Michael Jackson), thats roughly the same time frame we are talking about for some of these people you mentioned.
Jackson changed his image several times, and his music changed as well to reflect the times, from the extremely dance oriented Off the Wall, to the more ballad filled Dangerous.
By the way, I think everyone on the planet would pin Jackson to the 80's, even though Off The Wall, his first real success, was made in 1979, and he was plying as a solo artist since 1972.
According to you, Jackson should be a "1970's" singer, and the 70's never died because Jackson was still relevant in the late 80's.
In 1993, you may have found Grunge. In 1967, The Beatles may have had their own section. In 2010, both can be found under Rock or Pop.
People ran from hair metal in the early 90's, and I cant imagine Motley Crue refering to themselves as a hair metal band. By the way, Hair Metal can ALSO be found under rock. If you move over to the "Dance" section, youll probably find Saturday Night Fever (unless its in Pop).
Almost nobody associated with it had their careers ruined. ABBA, The Bee Gees, and everyone else heavily involved continued to be popular for decades. Hell, the Bee Gees went platinum in 1997.
The only reason people distanced themselves from it was because it became no longer culturally relevant, which is the same reason why you dont see any groups styling themselves after Blink 182 circa 1998 any longer.
The stupid anti disco antics were largely a heavily propagandized "counter" movement popular with "rocker" kids, which even at its peak, failed to kill disco. These werent people who actually "liked" disco protesting, these were people who always hated disco (or just wanted to be in a pot infested destructive event).
These days its almost impossible to inflame anyone to do anything, but with the right propaganda, Im positive you could collect enough people to burn a pile of Lady Gaga records or anything you want.
No it isnt. If Wiz Kalifa showed up in an "urban setting" in 1997, dressed like he does, he would literally be stoned, or called an "Oreo" and outcasted best case. Period.
Just because a few things from 1999 could fit in 2009 does not mean they are the same. Hell, I have clothes in my closet right now, that I could probably get away with wearing in 1989. I wouldnt be "styling" but Id fit in. I have pictures of me from the 1980's, and nearly everything Im wearing in every picture (outside the parachute pants and stone washed jeans), I could wear right now.
My Dad has pictures from the 1970's, and if you ignore the bell bottoms, and small ass shorts, he could fit in today.
1. Yes, I grew up in the murder capital of America, but YOU grew up in more "gangsta" areas than me. LMAO!
2. The Stooges can take credit for a lot in a certain strain of comedy, but they didn't INVENT the genre and effect everything after it. The Three Stooges were inspired by Charlie Chaplin and the Marx Brothers .They weren't even FIRST. And not all comedy is slapstick comedy. There's stand up comedy, observational comedy, sitcoms, etc. . .
Reality TV on the other hand DID NOT EXIST in it's current state before "The Real World" and "The Road Rules", and virtually ALL modern shows COPY the formula of forced conflict and scripted "reality".
3. But autotune is not a GENRE it is a tool. It's like comparing disco to electric guitar or something. It's an absurd comparison. Disco was a genre that took over the world. Autotune was tool that non-singing rappers used for about 2 years. There was no "Autotune Night Fever" that sold 40 million copies or a "Autotune Sucks" rally that almost blew up Comisky Park in Chicago.
4. What was dance music before DISCO? You don't even understand that there was NO SUCH THING as what we call modern "Dance" music UNTIL Disco changed the way people think about Dance music. There was no House, no Electronic Dance Music BEFORE Disco. Disco CHANGED dance floors. Before that Rock N Roll was considered Dance music, so was James Brown, so was Fats Domino. Disco CHANGED the definition of what Dance music was.
5. Yes, and The Beatles and Elvis are along with Michael Jackson the most POPULAR cultural phenomenons ins history. You're making my point for me. I couldn't get 20,000 people to have a "pop punk sucks" rally at Comisky Park, could I? How bout an "Autotune Sucks" rally?
I couldn't, you know why?
Most non-music fans don't even know those things exist. Disco was so unavoidable in it's time that EVERYBODY knew what it was enough to hate and resent it.
6. Yes, it was a fad. who said it wasn't? That's my point. It took over the world and DIED and quick death. It doesn't have to endure in order to be a proper genre of music. It just had to represent something that didn't exist before, which it did. It changed music.
7. So, what he started rapping in 1992. He was a rapper releasing albums in the '90s. You're kidding me with this whole 1999 doesn't count thing. Let's just wipe 1999 off the map then. Next time VH1 makes a greatest hits from the 1990s countdown, let's have them not put ANY songs from 1999 on there, because 1999 doesn't count. Did 1999 even exist at all? I don't know. What about 1990? Did that exist or is that too much still the '80s to you.
1999 doesn't count ONLY in your bankrupt ass argument. Juvenile's "Back That Ass Up" was a pop sensation and he had THE defining verse on it. B.G.'s "Bling Bling" came out in 1999 as well where he ALSO had the defining verse. He's a PRODUCT of the '90s. That's where he got his start, when he became a celebrity. When he coined the terms "bling bling" and "drop it like it's hot", which themselves became pop culture phenomenons. I couldn't stop hearing people saying that for YEARS. Please, he wasn't just some Poppa Wu type affiliate who gets to talk at the end of records. He was an intergral part of PLATINUM records.
8. I don't see many old celebrities in the tabloids as much as I see Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Jessica Simpson, Jay-Z, Beyonce, etc...unless they die or get arrested or something.
And yes, Eminem had the best selling album of the year 2010 and was the best selling artist of the 2000s, but yeah, nobody cares about that guy anymore?
That is a TERRIBLE argument.
9. Snoop has UPGRADED his style, not changed it. He still raps about being a West Coast pimp/gangsta who smokes weed all day. That's not what U2 did when they changed EVERYTHING about themselves on "Achtung Baby".
You keep mistaking production changes with cultural changes. Merely getting different people to make your beats doesn't change your style.
Merely working with Justin Timberlake on a song or two doesn't mean all of his songs are about puppies and sh&t. Half of the time on the songs that he makes with pop stars all he's talking about is being a "West Coast G" and smoking weed, which is what he's ALWAYS talked about.
And Grandmaster Flash is no LEGEND? ARe you f*cking high? Tell that to a Hip-Hop head or anyone who knows ANYTHING about Hip-HOp at all. Go to Eminem, Jay-Z, any rapper, producer, etc... and tell them that Grandmaster Flash is not a Hip-Hop legend?
And none of the old school rappers tried to upgrade their style? Are you high?
Whodini made a record with Jermaine Dupri and tried to change their style.
Run-DMC made records with Fred Durst to try to change their style
Rakim tried to make a record with Dr. Dre.
Big Daddy Kane tried to go gangster in the early '90s with "In The PJs"
Slick Rick tried to change his style after getting out of prison
MC Lyte tried to upgrade her style
They ALL tried. . . . and failed.
10. Guy the Beegees went from FOLK ROCK to Disco. They didn't go from a similar genre to Disco. Britney Spears went from dance pop to dance pop, just the production changed a little bit.
Are you seriously gonna compare that change to "Hit Me Baby One MOre Time" to "Toxic" or something? Please.
11. The '70s culture was dead in the '80s. The afro was dead, bellbottoms was dead, Disco was dead, Reaganomics and crack cocaine had changed the culture. Hip-Hop had come and wiped most of the old way of doing things away. The permissive liberal culture of the '60s and '70s gave way to the conservative Christian culture of the Reagan era and Moral Majority leaders like Jerry Falwell. The drug culture was pushed underground. Movies went from the experimental '70s into the blockbuster era post "Jaws". Michael Jackson merely being able to survive in that climate didn't mean that the '70s didn't die. You're completely strawmanning my argument.
You're acting like I'm saying that because 1 or 2 people have survived the '90s that nothings changed, when I'm saying that much of the cultural dress, way of talking, and celebrities from the '90s are still at the preeminent of pop culture.
The biggest movie stars are STILL Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston, Denzel Washington, Will Smith, Samuel L. Jackson, and people who were mostly the biggest movie stars in the late '90s as well.
It's not just 1 or 2 music artists. It's the ENTIRE culture that has gotten stuck in the rut.
12. No, in 1993, there was no GRUNGE section. You know why? Because Nirvana and Guns N Roses were being sold in the SAME section. Grunge technically didn't exist. It was a subgenre. Nirvana, Pearl Jam, The Smashing Pumpkins, Soundgarden, Alice IN Chains, etc. . . were mostly different in most ways. What they called "grunge" was just a catch all term for anything that wasn't Poison, Ratt, and Motley Crue, but it was all in the ROCK section of the store. Grunge was NOWHERE near Disco in popularity, just look at who was doing Disco and how many records were sold. Look at how many Discos popped up all over the country. Look at movies, TV shows, commercials from the '70s for chrissakes.
And "The Beatles" their own genre? No, they shared their genre with The Rolling Stones, The Who, The Yardbirds, etc. . .Nobody has ever claimed the Beatles were their own genre but you in this absurd internet argument you're making. I'm wondering if you're trolling me now.
13. LMAO, nobody had their careers ruined by Disco Demolition?
"Nile Rodgers, producer and guitarist for the popular disco-era group Chic said "It felt to us like Nazi book-burning. This is America, the home of jazz and rock and people were now afraid even to say the word 'disco'.
Disco was also used as a platform by the black and latino communities as retaliation against the domination of rock music which created a devasting backlash against disco; manifested by countercultures who chanted at baseball games that “disco sucks” and “death to disco”on July 12th, 1979 at the DiscoDemolitionNight riot. This date also became known as “the day disco died” due to disgruntled rock fans. Mass burnings of the BeeGees albums and posters were organized by radio djs. Unfortunately, the popularity of disco started to decline in the United States as a result of the backlash. Disco music topped the charts for the last time in July 1979, and by September of 1979, there were no disco records in the top 10. Disco was declared dead by the media, and rock was revived. Several record companies folded, reorganized or sold under the pressure. Salsoul Records was the only disco recording company to hang in there until 1984 while the other companies such as MCARecords, ABCRecords, CasablancaRecords, Polygram, TK and RSORecords fell off during the end of the 1970s.
Guy, it's obvious you don't know music history. So, stop it.
14. Guy, Lady Gaga is a pop culture phenomenon and one of the most famous people living right now. To compare her to disco is essentially proving my point that Disco was a pop culture phenomenon as well. You couldn't get anybody to have a pop punk or electro pop "burning" because it's not a phenomenon. Nobody knows or cares about those things.
15. Really, Wiz Khalifa would be stoned for dressing like this in my neighborhood? Really?
1. Yes, I grew up in the murder capital of America, but YOU grew up in more "gangsta" areas than me. LMAO!
Yeah, I bet you did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
2. The Stooges can take credit for a lot in a certain strain of comedy, but they didn't INVENT the genre and effect everything after it. The Three Stooges were inspired by Charlie Chaplin and the Marx Brothers .They weren't even FIRST. And not all comedy is slapstick comedy. There's stand up comedy, observational comedy, sitcoms, etc. . .
I dont care how much you nitpick, even if the 3 Stooges were inspired by Chaplin, that doesnt mean the 1910's never ended.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Reality TV on the other hand DID NOT EXIST in it's current state before "The Real World" and "The Road Rules", and virtually ALL modern shows COPY the formula of forced conflict and scripted "reality".
All genres started at some point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
3. But autotune is not a GENRE it is a tool. It's like comparing disco to electric guitar or something. It's an absurd comparison. Disco was a genre that took over the world. Autotune was tool that non-singing rappers used for about 2 years. There was no "Autotune Night Fever" that sold 40 million copies or a "Autotune Sucks" rally that almost blew up Comisky Park in Chicago.
Look another Lake County strawman. I think Ill call them "LCSM" from this point forward.
Maybe it would help if I restated my argument......auto tune is a fad that people are jumping on, similiar to mainstream artists making disco records, my argument was not that auto tune is equivalent to disco in the sense of its popularity........are you able to understand that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
4. What was dance music before DISCO? You don't even understand that there was NO SUCH THING as what we call modern "Dance" music UNTIL Disco changed the way people think about Dance music. There was no House, no Electronic Dance Music BEFORE Disco. Disco CHANGED dance floors. Before that Rock N Roll was considered Dance music, so was James Brown, so was Fats Domino. Disco CHANGED the definition of what Dance music was.
Dance music was ragtime and the Charleston, it was swing, etc.
Anyhow, maybe this will help you with your inability to understand that Disco is a subgenre no different then ganster rap.
5. Yes, and The Beatles and Elvis are along with Michael Jackson the most POPULAR cultural phenomenons ins history. You're making my point for me. I couldn't get 20,000 people to have a "pop punk sucks" rally at Comisky Park, could I? How bout an "Autotune Sucks" rally?
I couldn't, you know why?
Most non-music fans don't even know those things exist. Disco was so unavoidable in it's time that EVERYBODY knew what it was enough to hate and resent it.
In 1999, everyone knew who Blink 182 was, and with the promise of drugs and enough propaganda, you could get tens of thousands of people to protest them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
6. Yes, it was a fad. who said it wasn't? That's my point. It took over the world and DIED and quick death. It doesn't have to endure in order to be a proper genre of music. It just had to represent something that didn't exist before, which it did. It changed music.
Wow, I guess EVERY sub genre that didnt exist previously should actually be called a genre.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
7. So, what he started rapping in 1992. He was a rapper releasing albums in the '90s. You're kidding me with this whole 1999 doesn't count thing. Let's just wipe 1999 off the map then. Next time VH1 makes a greatest hits from the 1990s countdown, let's have them not put ANY songs from 1999 on there, because 1999 doesn't count.
Next time there is a list of the best 1990s rappers....oh wait there are plenty
Looks like they are all smart enough and possess enough common sense to figure out that making a song or 1 album in the 1990's does not make you a 90's rapper. Too bad I cant say that for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
1999 doesn't count ONLY in your bankrupt ass argument. Juvenile's "Back That Ass Up" was a pop sensation and he had THE defining verse on it. B.G.'s "Bling Bling" came out in 1999 as well where he ALSO had the defining verse. He's a PRODUCT of the '90s. That's where he got his start, when he became a celebrity. When he coined the terms "bling bling" and "drop it like it's hot", which themselves became pop culture phenomenons. I couldn't stop hearing people saying that for YEARS. Please, he wasn't just some Poppa Wu type affiliate who gets to talk at the end of records. He was an intergral part of PLATINUM records.
As proven above, the only "bankrupt ass" argument is yours, which is a condition of almost all of your arguments. You will find Lil' Wayne, nor the "Hot Boyz" on anything related to the 1990s, but you might find them on lists related to the 2000's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
8. I don't see many old celebrities in the tabloids as much as I see Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Jessica Simpson, Jay-Z, Beyonce, etc...unless they die or get arrested or something.
And yes, Eminem had the best selling album of the year 2010 and was the best selling artist of the 2000s, but yeah, nobody cares about that guy anymore?
That is a TERRIBLE argument.
LCSM #506077- Look really hard, and it might be difficult, please cut and paste where I said nobody cares about Eminem.
Or maybe what I actually said was that nobody is trying to emulate him.....yeah, that sounds about right. This is the Dennis Rodman argument all over again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
9. Snoop has UPGRADED his style, not changed it. He still raps about being a West Coast pimp/gangsta who smokes weed all day. That's not what U2 did when they changed EVERYTHING about themselves on "Achtung Baby".
First of all, Snoop has completely distanced himself from all things "ganster".
Second of all, his rap style absolutely has changed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
You keep mistaking production changes with cultural changes. Merely getting different people to make your beats doesn't change your style.
No, you keep mistaking complete shifts in subgenre for "production changes".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Merely working with Justin Timberlake on a song or two doesn't mean all of his songs are about puppies and sh&t. Half of the time on the songs that he makes with pop stars all he's talking about is being a "West Coast G" and smoking weed, which is what he's ALWAYS talked about.
Really?
Here is Snoops line from Katy Perrys California Gurls
Tone Tan
Fit and ready
Turn it up cause its gettin’ heavy
Wild wild west coast
These are the girls I love the most
I mean the ones
I mean like shes the one
Kiss her
Touch her
Squeeze her buns
The girls a freak
She drives a jeep
The men on the beach
I’m okay
I wont play
I love the bay
Just like I love LA
Venice beach
and Palm Springs
Summer time is everything
Come on boys
Hanging out
All that a**
Hanging out
Bikinis, tankinis, martinis
No weenies
Just to get
in betweeny
Katy my lady
(yeah)
You looking here baby
(uh huh)
Im all up on you
Cause you representing California
(ohhh yeahh)
Wow sounds like pop tart crap to me. 1992 Snoop would have never done that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
And Grandmaster Flash is no LEGEND? ARe you f*cking high? Tell that to a Hip-Hop head or anyone who knows ANYTHING about Hip-HOp at all. Go to Eminem, Jay-Z, any rapper, producer, etc... and tell them that Grandmaster Flash is not a Hip-Hop legend?
LCSW #788955 - I could have sworn I said that in the original post.....he was only a "legend" amongst the hip hop scene. Nobody cared about him outside of it, and his record sales reflected that. A "legend" is one who actually has popularity outside of a small sub group of people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
And none of the old school rappers tried to upgrade their style? Are you high?
Whodini made a record with Jermaine Dupri and tried to change their style.
Run-DMC made records with Fred Durst to try to change their style
Rakim tried to make a record with Dr. Dre.
Big Daddy Kane tried to go gangster in the early '90s with "In The PJs"
Slick Rick tried to change his style after getting out of prison
MC Lyte tried to upgrade her style
Rakim LEFT Aftermath because he didnt want to bend to Dr. Dre.
Whodini waited way too long to try to come back
Slick Ricks last album was the second best seller of his 4
Run-DMC never made an album with Fred Durst, and they did try to "change" their style, in a completely retarded direction which included practically removing themselves from the album.
MC Lyte isnt even worth considering because she was never popular, and Big Daddy Kanes commerical popularity lasted for a whopping 2 years in the late 80's.
Quote:
10. Guy the Beegees went from FOLK ROCK to Disco. They didn't go from a similar genre to Disco. Britney Spears went from dance pop to dance pop, just the production changed a little bit.
Are you seriously gonna compare that change to "Hit Me Baby One MOre Time" to "Toxic" or something? Please.
LCSM #9837373- I could care less how drastic a shift is, thats not tantamount to anything. Almost every artist who has achieved longetivity has revinvented themselves to some degree.
Quote:
11. The '70s culture was dead in the '80s. The afro was dead, bellbottoms was dead, Disco was dead, Reaganomics and crack cocaine had changed the culture. Hip-Hop had come and wiped most of the old way of doing things away. The permissive liberal culture of the '60s and '70s gave way to the conservative Christian culture of the Reagan era and Moral Majority leaders like Jerry Falwell. The drug culture was pushed underground. Movies went from the experimental '70s into the blockbuster era post "Jaws". Michael Jackson merely being able to survive in that climate didn't mean that the '70s didn't die. You're completely strawmanning my argument.
Thats your EXACT argument. Your argument is precisely that some popular artists from the late 90's continue to be some of the more popular artists in to the 2000's, meaning that the 90's never died.
Ill cut and paste it if neccessary.
Quote:
You're acting like I'm saying that because 1 or 2 people have survived the '90s that nothings changed, when I'm saying that much of the cultural dress, way of talking, and celebrities from the '90s are still at the preeminent of pop culture.
Actually, you are absolutely making the claim that because "some things" carried over to the 2000's, that means there was no change. You ignore or downplay the countless lists of things Ive pointed out that died.
In your bizzaro world, Afros going out marked a "major shift", yet, frosted tips and platinum blonde buzz cuts going out is not. Bell bottoms going out is a "major shift", but skinny jeans are not. Reagan coming in to power in 1981 is a "major shift", but George W. Bush and 9/11 in 2001 were not.
Get real.
Quote:
The biggest movie stars are STILL Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston, Denzel Washington, Will Smith, Samuel L. Jackson, and people who were mostly the biggest movie stars in the late '90s as well.
Thats pretty weird, because it seems to me like I see Jonah Hill, Shia Lebouf, Channing Tatum and Chris Evans in more movies then any of them.
By the way, Jennifer Aniston has NEVER been a big movie star. Will Smith has done nothing since 7 Pounds in 2008 and Hancock in 2007(because those were great roles and all). Chris Evans has shot 14 movies since 2007, including playing 2 different super heroes.
Quote:
It's not just 1 or 2 music artists. It's the ENTIRE culture that has gotten stuck in the rut.
No, its a handful of things that carried over, which you are completely blowing out of proportion, while simutaneously ignoring the very real and significant changes.
Quote:
12. No, in 1993, there was no GRUNGE section. You know why? Because Nirvana and Guns N Roses were being sold in the SAME section. Grunge technically didn't exist. It was a subgenre. Nirvana, Pearl Jam, The Smashing Pumpkins, Soundgarden, Alice IN Chains, etc. . . were mostly different in most ways. What they called "grunge" was just a catch all term for anything that wasn't Poison, Ratt, and Motley Crue, but it was all in the ROCK section of the store. Grunge was NOWHERE near Disco in popularity, just look at who was doing Disco and how many records were sold. Look at how many Discos popped up all over the country. Look at movies, TV shows, commercials from the '70s for chrissakes.
Grunge was a subgenre just like disco.
Quote:
And "The Beatles" their own genre? No, they shared their genre with The Rolling Stones, The Who, The Yardbirds, etc. . .Nobody has ever claimed the Beatles were their own genre but you in this absurd internet argument you're making. I'm wondering if you're trolling me now.
LCSM 10998383- Please copy and paste where I claimed the Beatles were a genre....oh wait, maybe I claimed that at one point you could find them in their own section, like Disco in the peak Disco period. My point was that because they are BOTH sub genres, after their peak time, they went right back under their umbrella genres.
Quote:
13. LMAO, nobody had their careers ruined by Disco Demolition?
"Nile Rodgers, producer and guitarist for the popular disco-era group Chic said "It felt to us like Nazi book-burning. This is America, the home of jazz and rock and people were now afraid even to say the word 'disco'.
Disco was also used as a platform by the black and latino communities as retaliation against the domination of rock music which created a devasting backlash against disco; manifested by countercultures who chanted at baseball games that “disco sucks” and “death to disco”on July 12th, 1979 at the DiscoDemolitionNight riot. This date also became known as “the day disco died” due to disgruntled rock fans. Mass burnings of the BeeGees albums and posters were organized by radio djs. Unfortunately, the popularity of disco started to decline in the United States as a result of the backlash. Disco music topped the charts for the last time in July 1979, and by September of 1979, there were no disco records in the top 10. Disco was declared dead by the media, and rock was revived. Several record companies folded, reorganized or sold under the pressure. Salsoul Records was the only disco recording company to hang in there until 1984 while the other companies such as MCARecords, ABCRecords, CasablancaRecords, Polygram, TK and RSORecords fell off during the end of the 1970s.
Guy, it's obvious you don't know music history. So, stop it.
Disco didnt destroy any careers. Sure, record labels that banked on disco might have tanked, or groups that only sang disco might have folded, but that has nothing to do with "disco backlash", it has to do with the fact that Disco went out, pure and simple.
I challenge you to find just ONE artist who had any amount of popularity in a different sub genre, who made a disco record, and didnt come out of it........Ill give you as long as you need.
Quote:
14. Guy, Lady Gaga is a pop culture phenomenon and one of the most famous people living right now. To compare her to disco is essentially proving my point that Disco was a pop culture phenomenon as well. You couldn't get anybody to have a pop punk or electro pop "burning" because it's not a phenomenon. Nobody knows or cares about those things.
Propaganda can do anything.
Quote:
15. Really, Wiz Khalifa would be stoned for dressing like this in my neighborhood? Really?
He looks like EVERYBODY I grew up with, just a few more tats, but that's it.
LCSM # 150002929 Why dont we go back to the picture that I posted, and stop creating alternate arguments. Wiz Kalifa, like most rappers, has a varied wardrobe. However, when he rocking the "skateboarder" skinny jeans or Pharell influenced looks, he would have NEVER fit in urban 1999. I could care less how much you try to lie and deny it.
I dont care how much you nitpick, even if the 3 Stooges were inspired by Chaplin, that doesnt mean the 1910's never ended.
All genres started at some point.
Look another Lake County strawman. I think Ill call them "LCSM" from this point forward.
Maybe it would help if I restated my argument......auto tune is a fad that people are jumping on, similiar to mainstream artists making disco records, my argument was not that auto tune is equivalent to disco in the sense of its popularity........are you able to understand that?
Dance music was ragtime and the Charleston, it was swing, etc.
Anyhow, maybe this will help you with your inability to understand that Disco is a subgenre no different then ganster rap.
In 1999, everyone knew who Blink 182 was, and with the promise of drugs and enough propaganda, you could get tens of thousands of people to protest them.
Wow, I guess EVERY sub genre that didnt exist previously should actually be called a genre.
Next time there is a list of the best 1990s rappers....oh wait there are plenty
Looks like they are all smart enough and possess enough common sense to figure out that making a song or 1 album in the 1990's does not make you a 90's rapper. Too bad I cant say that for everyone.
As proven above, the only "bankrupt ass" argument is yours, which is a condition of almost all of your arguments. You will find Lil' Wayne, nor the "Hot Boyz" on anything related to the 1990s, but you might find them on lists related to the 2000's.
LCSM #506077- Look really hard, and it might be difficult, please cut and paste where I said nobody cares about Eminem.
Or maybe what I actually said was that nobody is trying to emulate him.....yeah, that sounds about right. This is the Dennis Rodman argument all over again.
First of all, Snoop has completely distanced himself from all things "ganster".
Second of all, his rap style absolutely has changed.
No, you keep mistaking complete shifts in subgenre for "production changes".
Really?
Here is Snoops line from Katy Perrys California Gurls
Tone Tan
Fit and ready
Turn it up cause its gettin’ heavy
Wild wild west coast
These are the girls I love the most
I mean the ones
I mean like shes the one
Kiss her
Touch her
Squeeze her buns
The girls a freak
She drives a jeep
The men on the beach
I’m okay
I wont play
I love the bay
Just like I love LA
Venice beach
and Palm Springs
Summer time is everything
Come on boys
Hanging out
All that a**
Hanging out
Bikinis, tankinis, martinis
No weenies
Just to get
in betweeny
Katy my lady
(yeah)
You looking here baby
(uh huh)
Im all up on you
Cause you representing California
(ohhh yeahh)
Wow sounds like pop tart crap to me. 1992 Snoop would have never done that.
LCSW #788955 - I could have sworn I said that in the original post.....he was only a "legend" amongst the hip hop scene. Nobody cared about him outside of it, and his record sales reflected that. A "legend" is one who actually has popularity outside of a small sub group of people.
Rakim LEFT Aftermath because he didnt want to bend to Dr. Dre.
Whodini waited way too long to try to come back
Slick Ricks last album was the second best seller of his 4
Run-DMC never made an album with Fred Durst, and they did try to "change" their style, in a completely retarded direction which included practically removing themselves from the album.
MC Lyte isnt even worth considering because she was never popular, and Big Daddy Kanes commerical popularity lasted for a whopping 2 years in the late 80's.
LCSM #9837373- I could care less how drastic a shift is, thats not tantamount to anything. Almost every artist who has achieved longetivity has revinvented themselves to some degree.
Thats your EXACT argument. Your argument is precisely that some popular artists from the late 90's continue to be some of the more popular artists in to the 2000's, meaning that the 90's never died.
Ill cut and paste it if neccessary.
Actually, you are absolutely making the claim that because "some things" carried over to the 2000's, that means there was no change. You ignore or downplay the countless lists of things Ive pointed out that died.
In your bizzaro world, Afros going out marked a "major shift", yet, frosted tips and platinum blonde buzz cuts going out is not. Bell bottoms going out is a "major shift", but skinny jeans are not. Reagan coming in to power in 1981 is a "major shift", but George W. Bush and 9/11 in 2001 were not.
Get real.
Thats pretty weird, because it seems to me like I see Jonah Hill, Shia Lebouf, Channing Tatum and Chris Evans in more movies then any of them.
By the way, Jennifer Aniston has NEVER been a big movie star. Will Smith has done nothing since 7 Pounds in 2008 and Hancock in 2007(because those were great roles and all). Chris Evans has shot 14 movies since 2007, including playing 2 different super heroes.
No, its a handful of things that carried over, which you are completely blowing out of proportion, while simutaneously ignoring the very real and significant changes.
Grunge was a subgenre just like disco.
LCSM 10998383- Please copy and paste where I claimed the Beatles were a genre....oh wait, maybe I claimed that at one point you could find them in their own section, like Disco in the peak Disco period. My point was that because they are BOTH sub genres, after their peak time, they went right back under their umbrella genres.
Disco didnt destroy any careers. Sure, record labels that banked on disco might have tanked, or groups that only sang disco might have folded, but that has nothing to do with "disco backlash", it has to do with the fact that Disco went out, pure and simple.
I challenge you to find just ONE artist who had any amount of popularity in a different sub genre, who made a disco record, and didnt come out of it........Ill give you as long as you need.
Propaganda can do anything.
LCSM # 150002929 Why dont we go back to the picture that I posted, and stop creating alternate arguments. Wiz Kalifa, like most rappers, has a varied wardrobe. However, when he rocking the "skateboarder" skinny jeans or Pharell influenced looks, he would have NEVER fit in urban 1999. I could care less how much you try to lie and deny it.
LMAO
I love how you mock me for saying I come from the multiple time "murder capital of America", yet are too either lazy to
A: Figure out what's IN Lake County, Indiana
or
B: Look at my posts in the search function of this very site to see where I talk about living at.
*shakes head*
Well, anyway, I'm tired of arguing semantics with you, guy.
I'm talking about macro changes in culture like we say in between cultures in the '60s, 70s, '80s, and '90s, and you're arguing that unless everybody from 1995 is selling records in 2012, then EVERYTHING's different and there is no cultural bleed over.
The topic of cultural stagnation is an EXTREMELY popular one which many people who's job it is to actually STUDY and WRITE about this very phenomenon have tackled.
I love how you mock me for saying I come from the multiple time "murder capital of America", yet are too either lazy to
A: Figure out what's IN Lake County, Indiana
or
B: Look at my posts in the search function of this very site to see where I talk about living at.
*shakes head*
I already knew you were talking about Gary the minute you started blathering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
Well, anyway, I'm tired of arguing semantics with you, guy.
I'm talking about macro changes in culture like we say in between cultures in the '60s, 70s, '80s, and '90s, and you're arguing that unless everybody from 1995 is selling records in 2012, then EVERYTHING's different and there is no cultural bleed over.
No, thats your argument in reverse
My argument is that there has been cultural bleed from EVERY previous decade, and that does NOT mean that the decade just continued.
The only difference is that you, and the guy who you pilfered most of your play book from, Op Ed writer Kurt Anderson, novelist, refuse to acknowledge the changes from the 1990's to the 2000's, even if they are EXACTLY the same type of changes you actually do credit as "life shattering".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake County IN
The topic of cultural stagnation is an EXTREMELY popular one which many people who's job it is to actually STUDY and WRITE about this very phenomenon have tackled.
I already knew you were talking about Gary the minute you started blathering.
No, thats your argument in reverse
My argument is that there has been cultural bleed from EVERY previous decade, and that does NOT mean that the decade just continued.
The only difference is that you, and the guy who you pilfered most of your play book from, Op Ed writer Kurt Anderson, novelist, refuse to acknowledge the changes from the 1990's to the 2000's, even if they are EXACTLY the same type of changes you actually do credit as "life shattering".
So, a bunch of Op ed writers basically blathering their opinions are supposed to be "education" for me? Lol.
Only person who gets their education from tabloid garbage and opinion pieces is you, I prefer to develop my own opinions.
Yes, Tyler Cowan is an economist and professor and Kurt Anderson is a Peabody winning journalist, but it's me that gets my opinions from "tabloids" , yet it's YOU and YOUR wife who see "old celebrities in tabloids all the time, right"?
Whatever guy.
It's obvious you're too young to have an opinion about anything if you think sagging just got popular recently, Autotune is comparable to Disco, and tattoos just got really popular, completely ignoring Lollapalooza.
The only reason I brought up my hood is because your ass tried to play the whole "my hood is more dangerous than yours" card which was a DUMB card to play in the first place, but especially when mine is what it is and is world reknowned for being what it is.
You wrote this, remember: "I grew up in more gang infested areas then you ever will see, thanks".
Just take the L and move on, guy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
