Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-04-2010, 04:03 AM
 
3,448 posts, read 3,132,073 times
Reputation: 478

Advertisements

The pretend artists are glad to see so much de-railment in qualitive musical integrity
through all the mentioned smoke screens of instrumentation, marketing and self serving buisness planing. So everyone here is following along like good little sheepies.
The birth, of extraordinary music is natural .
The ability and the talent is about us as it always was, but the attention is quite
divided with theatrics, appearance and exposure abilities.
The talent , needs an anchor to justify the receiving message of extended expression. The anchor is the worthiness of the whelm in listener ship.
Where, the soul of society lingers in dismay and confusion , so the anchor follows.
The artist cannot inspire a gathering aloof to simplicity.
The good news is the show must go on and I've noticed some remarkable work
in Movie scores . Opinion , having studied History of Music, is that the birth of great
music has nothing to do with "instruments on hand" or computers as a great talent
will easily provide with what is available to him-her. (see music history-mankind)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-29-2013, 04:48 AM
 
Location: Northern Wisconsin
10,379 posts, read 10,913,300 times
Reputation: 18713
I used to love popular music, but today it just seems like noise and more of a dancing show and the music is secondary. IMHO, most of the stuff made in the last 20 years just plain sucks. Why? I have no idea. Lots of people apparently agree. From what I've read, most of the music publishers are making money off their catalog, the stuff that was produced in the 50's,60's,70's and 80's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2013, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Miami, Florida
41 posts, read 60,714 times
Reputation: 23
Default Ok........

Ok, so we all know that today's top 40's or even top 100's aren't as good as when "I" or "we" were 16 y.o. But that not my point, I'm trying to get people aware of our repetitive "stile" , it feels like we all got stuck with the same cloths over and over always going back (something we already do).
We need to start sharing new music , good music! At least in our own opinion, look at the WRECK ROOM RECORDS a you tube channel that show so many artist that deserve a second look with stiles that some of us never hear and some singing a very well known song in a key that just sound amazing , one of my fav.
THE SKINS - Surf - YouTube

And this girl rocks!
IDGY DEAN - Indian Squirrel Dance - YouTube

I know a lot of people can do this, but why are we not listening to them on the radio? Or sharing it in Facebook
Are that boring, have we become so littered on music that we are actually reaping ourselves in a bubble?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2013, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Taos NM
5,353 posts, read 5,129,553 times
Reputation: 6771
I'm sorry to say this, but each year music gets better than the year before it. There was a ton of crappy songs in the 60's and 70's, we've just had 50 years to filter out the "best" songs. There are even more crappy songs today, but there are more awesome songs as well. It just comes with the fact that more music is produced today than in the past.

*Hint* the top 40 always are crap. Dig deeper than that to get the better music.

Here are some modern bands that are leaps and bounds better than any band that existed in the 60's and 70's. Not only is their music far superior, their lyrics are much more profound and deep.
TOOL
Alice in Chains
Audioslave
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2013, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,539 posts, read 21,254,017 times
Reputation: 16939
I don't much like the 'new' popular music either. Too much electronics and show, too much flash. I don't like modern country since its impossible to tell it from rock. I don't much care for the sexual girations either. But I just ignore it.

There is *plenty* of good music around but you won't find it in big shows. Small clubs which feature nitch music have never gone away. I use Utube to find new folk/celtic folk performers I haven't heard of and there are many. Figure out what you like and start looking.

Just because the public seems to be more impressed with electronically modified recordings and flashing lights and flashing female performers, and just loudness, it doesn't mean that's all there is. Let them. If its crap it will be forgotten. Look at lesser known artists in the sort of nitches you like and spend your money on their music. Vote with your feet.

On Amazon enter a catagory of music. Then see who shows up, and check them out on you tube. Then do them the honor of buying a download of what you like. Ignore the crowd and tell your friends to listen.

It's true there was a lot of bad sixties music, and some of it is still bad but attached to memories which make us not notice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2013, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Taos NM
5,353 posts, read 5,129,553 times
Reputation: 6771
One thing to remember is that your not going to have a new favorite song or new favorite artist the first time you hear them, it takes listening to them 2 or 3 times before you can appreciate them. Pop music is peoples favorite music, so it must either be a song they have heard before (which explains the repitition and remixes of songs) or similar to a song they have heard before. Therefore, pop music by definition cannot be creative, so Don't gripe about music being uncreative when all you listen to is pop music.

If you listen to good modern music, those 60's and 70's bands sound rather uncreative and lame.

One more thing, it requires just as much talent to play a heavily distorted guitar or bass or drums as it does acoustic. It really depends on what you want to create on which sounds you put into your song.

Lastly, Joshua Bell playing his Stradivarius violin on Bach's hardest song displays talent, but not creativity. Personally I could care less about Joshua Bell EVEN THOUGH HE PLAYS A ACOUSTIC INSTRUMENT WITH TALENT. On the other hand, Trent Reznor displays both creativity and talent when he creates a Nine Inch Nails song, even though all the music is electronic and he doesn't actually "play" any of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2013, 03:41 PM
 
39 posts, read 54,944 times
Reputation: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil P View Post
I'm sorry to say this, but each year music gets better than the year before it. There was a ton of crappy songs in the 60's and 70's, we've just had 50 years to filter out the "best" songs. There are even more crappy songs today, but there are more awesome songs as well. It just comes with the fact that more music is produced today than in the past.
This, this, this, one hundred times over. Not necessarily that music is better today than it was - that's open for debate. But virtually everything from "back in the day" seems better than it was because we remember all the great stuff and forget the trash. This is a bias that you see in almost every arena and it's frustrating. Music is and always has been derivative, especially popular music. The whole idea of popular music is to make records that will be enjoyed (or at least bought) by as many people as possible, thus you end up with music that's often simple, repetitive, catchy and formulaic. Why? Because that's what attracts the most dollars.

If you look beyond the Top 40, you'll find that music is as strong as ever. There's a whole universe of engaging, innovative music made by extremely talented people, just as there's always been. In fact, the rise and proliferation of technology means that more people than ever can create music. Twenty years ago I probably never would have been able to make music, but now I've built myself an entire studio for production/recording for a few thousand bucks. And before that, I started with a few simple pieces that probably cost $200 total. Some people start with even less than that.

If you think today's music sucks, you're probably not the target audience pop music is aimed at. The fact is, music executives don't care about catering to people outside of their target audiences. So, instead, look beyond that and I can all but guarantee you'll find tons of stuff to fall in love with. All you have to do is work for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2013, 03:05 PM
 
5,758 posts, read 11,634,135 times
Reputation: 3870
It's unlikely that we'll have another wave of music that sounds "truly new," in the sense of being unimaginable compared to what has come before. Part of that is due to simple sonic exhaustion. The part of the electromagnetic spectrum that can be picked up by human ears is limited in range, meaning that there are only a certain number of distinct tones that the brain can even recognize.

When music was younger, many such sounds had simply never been produced, since the technology didn't really exist, and there was still room for complete novelty in terms of sonic construction.

That era is mostly gone. Basically what we have now are refinements or re-workings of existing sonic palettes that have been produced at earlier points in time. I think that's the general message of this thread - while there might be "interesting" or "good" music being produced, nothing really sounds "unimaginable" in the way that - for example - early electronic music in the late 50's sounded to people. Back then, those electronic tones really were being recorded for the first time, and the sound was completely novel relative to the entire body of recorded music a decade prior.

We are unlikely to hear that anymore, due to the fact that so many different sonic approaches have already been developed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2013, 07:28 PM
 
11,555 posts, read 53,171,880 times
Reputation: 16349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil P View Post
[b](snip)

Lastly, Joshua Bell playing his Stradivarius violin on Bach's hardest song displays talent, but not creativity. (snip).
You're really displaying your tin ears here, Phil P ...

in the same way that you acknowledge there is talent, value, and pleasure in listening to the music that many pop performers cover over and over ...

there's huge differences in the way that the violin (or piano, etc) can be played and the resulting performance impacts very differently. Joshua Bell doesn't play the notes on the page exactly the same way as each of the different top rated violinists in the world do; each one renders a unique performance and that's a major interpretative part of the artistry of their work. That you can't or don't or won't hear or acknowledge that creativity is not the basis for any valid criticism of Joshua Bell.

You obviously don't like the compositions that he plays, and that's your choice.

By the same token, I don't enjoy 99.9999% of the (c)rap masquerading as "music" these days. I get to hear a lot of it from those folks who believe that all the rest of the world derives pleasure from listening to their choice of musical entertainment, and it's painful and annoying for me to hear it most of the time.

From my perspective, there isn't a lot of "better" music in the most recent stuff getting airplay these days. Talent notwithstanding to perform this stuff, it simply doesn't bring me any pleasure or a desire to hear it again. It's not a case of needing to hear it again and again to finally come to like or enjoy it ... it's crap on the first listening for me and hearing it again doesn't improve my enjoyment ... much as I've had to hear so much of it over and over again. My bet it is a lot of it will be consigned to the dustbin of the performing industry in short order ... like a lot of the music from the 60's-70's-80's that you don't like, either.

PS: many of the little snippets of the music that you apparently enjoy owe their melody or some of the riffs to music that was written down centuries ago by those composers that you don't like .... if you'd take a music appreciation class, you might learn that there's little new "under the sun". How it's presented and performed, the substitution of electronic noise for accoustic musical origins ... those are new inventions, most of which don't bring me any pleasure.

Last edited by sunsprit; 08-31-2013 at 08:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2013, 11:11 PM
 
15,446 posts, read 21,349,093 times
Reputation: 28701
Music is much like language. Some of it you understand, most of it you don't. Music has to touch memories and experiences of the one listening to it or it goes right over the listener's head. It may even annoy the listener just as hearing an unexpected language spoken in your local grocery store can.

And for those who think stage sounds are stagnated, electronic technologies are still very much developing. I just bought my grand daughter a BC Rich with a Floyd Rose bridge because she likes Black Veil Brides and wants to be a "shredder." Even on my old 1960s Fender tube amp, the sound of that guitar is unique. I'm sure that on a decent modern solid state amp it would sound even more unique. And too, I have described the sound of my 1960s Harmony Bobkat as crude and 1960ish which is the sound of most of the electrical guitars and amps of the 1950s and 1960s.

BTW, the music of Black Veil Brides simply goes over my head and makes my old ears, more attuned to classic country and blue grass played on acoustical instruments, rattle. However, it no longer annoys me because my granddaughter is actually learning to play.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top