Why modern pop music is so terrible
- Thread starter Haywood
- Start date
1:30 in...Don't hate on Lady Gaga, she is actually pretty damn good. After her appearances on Howard Stern I definitely changed my tune. The music industry definitely takes original music from the artist and commercializes it.
Is this a joke video? Or a real analysis?
Is this a joke video? Or a real analysis?
Dentman
Well-Known Member
Same here. After hearing that Stern interview my opinion of her changed. With that said I'll never be a fan, it's just not my thing.
Based on the criteria of the video, there’s quality material out there if you put in the time to find it. And to me there a massive difference between being an outstanding singer and being an outstanding musician. Is there a formula for instant POP success and making mega-bucks? Absolutely. Unfortunately some very talented people get caught up in the formulaic money machine and that’s a shame.
This is complete bullshit and I wish we'd stop talking about music this way. You simply cannot compare an Album which did not have one hit single on it to a bunch of hit singles which don't have worthwhile albums from which they came. If you want to compare number one hits from 1967 to 2017, then lets compare "Ode of Billie Joe" to "Shape of You" or "Light my Fire" to "Rockstar". That's a fair comparison.
If you want to compare great studio albums from 1967 to great selling albums of 2017 then let's compare The Monkees (two hit albums in 1967) to "24K Magic" by Bruno Mars or "Hardwired to Self-Destruct" by Metallica. I can find a shit ton of amazingly diverse, complex, and dynamically varied albums produced in the last decade which are as good as or better than "Sgt. Pepper's" which did indeed go Gold and Platinum, but they were not comparatively as popular as the dance, radio, streaming, and club hits that bitchy music critics like to compare to the past. There were lots of simple, boring, dull hit songs from back in the day - in fact many of the hit singles were FAR simpler and more inane than modern hit singles.
I don't accept the premise of this gratuitous tribute to snobbery made into an fake documentary on the history of music. It is insulting.
And I'm the one screaming that Rock and Roll is dead.
If you want to compare great studio albums from 1967 to great selling albums of 2017 then let's compare The Monkees (two hit albums in 1967) to "24K Magic" by Bruno Mars or "Hardwired to Self-Destruct" by Metallica. I can find a shit ton of amazingly diverse, complex, and dynamically varied albums produced in the last decade which are as good as or better than "Sgt. Pepper's" which did indeed go Gold and Platinum, but they were not comparatively as popular as the dance, radio, streaming, and club hits that bitchy music critics like to compare to the past. There were lots of simple, boring, dull hit songs from back in the day - in fact many of the hit singles were FAR simpler and more inane than modern hit singles.
I don't accept the premise of this gratuitous tribute to snobbery made into an fake documentary on the history of music. It is insulting.
And I'm the one screaming that Rock and Roll is dead.
Once you get past the theatrics, she has an amazing voice. Not a fan either, but I've seen videos of her alter ego, Stephanie Germanatta(sp), and she can belt them out like no other. I also thought her superbowl halftime show was one of the most original and highly entertaining.
Did you actually watch the entire video? I agree that some of it is crap, but some of it is actually very interesting. One of the more interesting points was that most of the hit songs from the last decade were all written by the same two people. Another was the heavy-handed use of dynamic range compression. It is not all snobbery.
That has been the case for decades. When I look at all the really creative music released during my coming of age, almost all of them were first signed by new and small labels and later, after building an audience, they were bought out by large labels or the large labels would acquire the small labels. It was a crazy time, but the big labels haven't been releasing innovative music for 30 years - it isn't a new thing. Look at Rap, the big labels wouldn't sign any of that "extreme anti-social angry mob" music, so the Rappers took the cash they earned releasing music on their own and built their own labels. Since the internet became commonplace, there are always top artists who are 100% independent, like Aimee Mann, Roger Clyne and the Peace Makers, Sufjan Stevens, and others. We cannot judge music solely on the big labels. Really, we never could - at least not in the past 30 to 40 years.
Music is a business. That's the answer. Massive dynamic compression sells. It isn't the producer or label who are to blame for giving their customers exactly what they want. Same for the song-writers - two of them seems to have been really good at creating exactly what the public wants to hear. That's an open marketplace. Generally we are all snobs on this forum by complaining that musicians, producers, and labels are making high selling songs. Zappa wrote a long allegory in the inner sleeve of this "You are what you is" double LP where he told the story of how really horrible cheese is all the food industry will make if everyone only buys really horrible cheese. He was making that point in the early 1980s, and now we are whining about the same thing.
And I am one of the whiners.
But this it is totally not fair to blame anyone but the customer. There are thousands of amazing songs and albums being released every year which do not have the negative characteristics we all bemoan in hit music. If the customers would buy all that stuff, it would be more famous and be heard on the radios and streaming stations and used in movies and TV shows. Intead, we refuse to buy anything great because we have decided our favorite records from thirty to forty years ago are perfect and anything which sounds different is shit, so fuck it all. Look at Van Halen - huge fans who abandoned them when Sammy Hagar took the front-man role whined for several decades that they wanted a reunion with David Lee Roth. Well, it happened and an amazing album was released which could very easily been that album all of the super-fans wanted to hear after 1984, but it was only modestly received and got limited airplay. It was a fucking amazing album and was exactly what Van Halen fans were demanding for decades!!! But the customers responded with a huge "meh."
Basically, we are like a bunch of old men in the 1960s whining that rock and roll is shit and nobody is making great music like Woody Guthrie, Burle Ives, and Les Paul. This is on us, not the industry.
So, I am getting tired of all the extreme nostalgia for the Beatles, or the Stones, or Led Zepplin, or whomever. That was great at the time, but there is some amazingly good stuff being released right now which is very worthy to stand up next to those old artists. If you were around in the 1970s when some of these classics were released, you'd remember all the shitty music being played on the radio - especially the top stations which were often NOT the rock and roll stations we look back on with nostalgia. Anyone remember the Carpenters, The Captain and Teneele (?), Tony Orlando and Dawn, The Osmunds, and so many other relatively shitty artists? Sure, we can look back and appreciate that stuff now, but at the time we hated that shit.
D
Deleted member 133
Guest
It has been neat to see how Lady Gaga's persona has developed and morphed ever since she came to our attention.
In the 2011 Stern interview the very topic (how Gaga might change) was brought up.
Regardless, the fundamentals that make her who she is have not changed.
I was a fan from first hearing her (and certainly from first seeing her live in concert) and remain so.
Jeff
ps. As to that video: watched it all the way through and could agree with a lot of what was said. However I don't agree with the premise implicit in this thread's title: I don't find modern pop music terrible - just the opposite.
In the 2011 Stern interview the very topic (how Gaga might change) was brought up.
Regardless, the fundamentals that make her who she is have not changed.
I was a fan from first hearing her (and certainly from first seeing her live in concert) and remain so.
Jeff
ps. As to that video: watched it all the way through and could agree with a lot of what was said. However I don't agree with the premise implicit in this thread's title: I don't find modern pop music terrible - just the opposite.
D
Deleted member 133
Guest
Remind me please.
Ok I think I'm suffering a little confirmation bias herebut yeah.
I think a lot of us are suffering some confirmation bias here.
D
Deleted member 133
Guest
Hello? Hello? Is this mic live?