This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
We Must Stop Rebecca Black From Destroying Music as We Know it
Return to board index
Post by
454052
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Pwntiff
Music cannot die. Genres can go in an out of style. The same was said about Elvis, the Beatles, and just about every up-and-comer that went against any sort of conventionality.
Post by
Adamsm
So, if you don't want it to go viral, don't f*****g link the stupid thing.....
Post by
Cambo
I agree that a movement must be created to campaign against the crap that the music industry throw to us. I for one don't open my wallet unless it is good music.
Even though pop stars like music, and are entitled to releasing material and being what they want, the record companies have us by the balls and tell us what's hot and whats fresh and whats new. And I fear it is indeed for money, not for the art of music.
Despite them being big and conglomerated, and us being but simple peons - if we band together with a clear voice, with clear aims, with the internets behind us we will be heard.
I'm serious too. Really.
Post by
454052
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
454052
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
606231
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
Wait....isn't that the chick who beat out Bieber, who Elaus loves? God damn it, I knew he was trolling but still.....
Post by
Pwntiff
I was making a point that your phrasing was overly strong. Also, I'm a devil's advocate. If your issue is with the labels, don't focus on an artist. Even Bach was disliked in his time.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
It's not about the genre. It's about the disgusting quality of the music being forced upon us everyday.
A couple things to note:
Music isn't being forced on anyone. Anyone that chooses to listen to and enjoy to a certain song/artist/genre does so because he/she chooses to. Whatever you may think of the state of the music industry, it's not a totalitarian regime: any recorded-in-the-garage song can be heard by anyone in the world.
Music quality hasn't been the main drive behind the evolution of music this last century. Rebellion has. I didn't start listening to punk rock as a kid because of any inherent musical quality (regarless of whether there is any or not), I started listening to it because my parents didn't like it. People embraced metal because it pushed the limits. People listen to pop because it sets them apart from the previous generations that look down on this music. Rap, hip-hp, indie music -- the story is all the same.
What it means to be a popular song has changed these last couple years. It used to be popular song = more records sold. Now, anyone with half a brain can click a YouTube link. I've listened to every one of Lady Gaga's songs, but if it were 20 years ago, I wouldn't have bought any of the CDs. People so often look at views on YouTube and assume it means the same thing that number of CD sales means.
When it comes down to it, measuring what is good music is pretty arbitrary. What makes this combination of air vibrations better than some other combination of air vibrations? Pretty much the only thing we can measure is how many people prefer one over the other.
Post by
120504
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
454052
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Interest
Here, wash it down with
this
.
Post by
UnholyDeciever
I think people can listen to whatever the %^&* they want. It's all a matter of opinion and we all know what they say about those. But that song you linked sucked and was pointless(my opinion someone might like it though).
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
When someone gets this big and famous, it has an effect on the quality of music everywhere. Look at Justin Bieber and the rise of auto tune. He got famous off it, now everyone is using it. And saying anyone can listen to any recorded-in-the-garage song does not work. They're usually bad. And even if they do manage to make good music, they don't reach a large amount of people. If they don't reach large audiences, they don't get the recognition they deserve. Not only that, but they don't tend to last either.
If you believe Justin Bieber is the source of the popularity of auto-tune, then you don't know much about music in the last decade. If you want to blame anyone, blame T-Pain. He's the one who popularized it after it bagan to fall away.
Secondly, your paragraph is one giant circle. Why is Bieber famous? Because he's popular. Why is he popluar? Because he's famous.
That is the fundamental difference of music then and today. It is drifting toward appealing to the most superficial desires of the masses. In the case of Justin Bieber, he is attractive and they eat it up. This is where the evolution of music stops, because there is no rebellion.
The Beiber phenomenon
is
the rebellion (though it started before him). It's the movement towards younger artists. The younger generation feels like it can relate better with younger artists, as opposed to the older artists that the previous generation grew up with.
No, views on youtube =/= CD sales, BUT it often means sales on itunes, etc. The people who aren't downloading this song because they genuinely like it, are downloading it because they think it's a funny meme. That's what I made this thread for: alerting people to this kind of thinking. And if this song has ten million views, you can bet it's only going to encourage them to do it again and again.
But the views themselves are meaningless, because the popularity already exists. Popularity = more views from people who otherwise wouldn't listen to it. Take something like an indie song on YouTube, anyone who looks it up and listens to it is someone who is genuinely interested.
So maybe we shouldn't enjoy food because it's just one carbohydrate vs. another. Maybe we shouldn't enjoy art because it's too arbitrary to say one combination of colors is better than others? Maybe we shouldn't enjoy sex because if you had one muscle spasm resulting in orgasm, you've had them all? I really don't see what you're trying to say here.
Don't claim a topic is serious and then go back to trolling. It's obvious what I'm saying. Music taste is subjective. Enjoy whatever the ^&*! you want...it's
your
enjoyment.
Post by
variable303
If anything, it seems like "Friday"
helps
your cause, as it highlights exactly what is wrong with much of today's pop music. This is the reason why it gained traction on such a widespread level. People don't listen to it because they enjoy it, but rather to mock it and other forms of 'manufactured' pop that it emulates.
Post by
454052
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Orranis
What disgusts me the most is the slow death of literacy in mainstream music.
"She's indecisive - She can't Decide"
No #$%^ing @#$%. I didn't know that crappy cookie-cutter pop songs had to come with a dictionary in them for every word longer then three syllables.
Seriously, my main problem with most mainstream music today is that it has a blatant lack of depth. And promotes an anti-intellectual ^&*!@#-filled culture.
This isn't limited to any genre, and whoever believes that is ignorant Tears for Fears are pop, and they go against the current norm. Immortal Technique is a rapper that breaks the '%^&*!es and money' norm. There are many other examples.
This is why I'm not a 'hypocrite' when I say MTV is terrible today when Nirvana was originally an MTV band, because it's not the genre they play or how indy it is that make the reason I don't like it, it's because back then I believe they were actually singing about something.
It's the difference between Toxic and Toxicity.
Post by
107106
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
variable303
Seriously, my main problem with most mainstream music today is that it has a blatant lack of depth. And promotes an anti-intellectual ^&*!@#-filled culture.
I get where you're coming from, but I don't necessarily believe that depth should be a prerequisite for music to be considered 'good'. A song needn't be profound or rife with philosophical meaning to be enjoyable.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.