Musical Demo Submission thread

[Ham_authority95]

Snippy

I'm not a massive fan of pop music but I get the feeling that you don't listen to much pop music. There really are some gems amongst the crap, but then when has that not been the case for any genre of music ever.

Taking rock music, for every Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd there would be a hundred shitty bands clogging up the music stores, and it kind of annoys me that people only think that this rule applies only to modern pop music.

Name one good current pop anything.

Just to inform you, "good" is completely subject to taste, as BonsaiK would probably agree with.

So your idea of "Good" (probably guitar solos, crunching riffs, etc etc) is completely different from someone who just wants a catchy melody and beats to dance to.

 

[Shale_Dirk]

I do have an interest in posting in this thread...however my band's myspace currently has our early demo recordings, which we are in the process of re-recording professionally. Drums and bass are complete, but we're waiting for studio time for guitars and vox.

Seeing that it will likely be around a month for recording and mastering, I shall be back to post around that time.

 

[cocoadog]

Snippy

I'm not a massive fan of pop music but I get the feeling that you don't listen to much pop music. There really are some gems amongst the crap, but then when has that not been the case for any genre of music ever.

Taking rock music, for every Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd there would be a hundred shitty bands clogging up the music stores, and it kind of annoys me that people only think that this rule applies only to modern pop music.

Name one good current pop anything.

Just to inform you, "good" is completely subject to taste, as BonsaiK would probably agree with.

So your idea of "Good" (probably guitar solos, crunching riffs, etc etc) is completely different from someone who just wants a catchy melody and beats to dance to.

Yes I know that and I stated I have no problem with that stuff. Pop however does not fall anywhere into that category.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Here's an instrumental song from her new album where she shreds it up a bit:

.

That was frickin awesome. Made me smile.

And my goodness, Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

 

[BonsaiK]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

I suspect the involvement of the medical industry. Or perhaps he's just a really healthy, clean-living guy (wouldn't surprise me actually).

I do have an interest in posting in this thread...however my band's myspace currently has our early demo recordings, which we are in the process of re-recording professionally. Drums and bass are complete, but we're waiting for studio time for guitars and vox.

Seeing that it will likely be around a month for recording and mastering, I shall be back to post around that time.

Mastering for a demo recording is overkill if you ask me. But yeah, whenever you're ready, this thread is ready.

 

[Shale_Dirk]

I do have an interest in posting in this thread...however my band's myspace currently has our early demo recordings, which we are in the process of re-recording professionally. Drums and bass are complete, but we're waiting for studio time for guitars and vox.

Seeing that it will likely be around a month for recording and mastering, I shall be back to post around that time.

Mastering for a demo recording is overkill if you ask me. But yeah, whenever you're ready, this thread is ready.

Sorry, I meant that our demo recordings are being re-recorded for an EP.

 

[zen5887]

More of plea for advice than a demo.

I'm in a band (posted on page one I think) and we're starting to pick up momentum, we just finished a string of decent shows, we have a guy helping us out with promo and stuff like that, and we've almost finished recording some more stuff.

The problem is, I'm running out of time and money.

They want to hire a rehearsal space which will cost me $20 a week. I only get about $120 a week, and most of that goes into fuel/food/living and what I don't spend goes into my holiday fund. Plus there are talks of us supporting another band on tour, which I couldn't afford. I'm also in my final semester of uni, so I'm getting drowned in assignments/practice, and then there's spending time with my girlfriend and other things I like to do. And I live an hour away from Brisbane.

Its not that I don't want to be in the band, when we play its an amazing feeling, I like the guys and I love the songs. I'm just not sure if I can be committed enough for them. I'm also quite aware that Prog Rock isn't that big, and we most likely won' "make it big," unlike the singer who listed "being able to support myself off this band" as one of his goals in our last meeting. So I kind of feel bad that my heart isn't in it as much as him, I mean, this is my first proper band, so I'm just happy to have fun and write some cool songs.

Make all my problems go away oh mighty Bonsaik!

 

[BonsaiK]

Hi,

Criticism and evaluation is always welcome however critical or brutal. That's part of life, especially in the pursuit of something creative. So advise away;

HEBEPHRENIC


Rather than going into too much detail here the best bet is to visit our last.fm page;
http://www.last.fm/music/Hebephrenic
Aswell as a biog and a couple of pics it has full downloadable tracks for all of our recorded stuff. The most recent stuff is the first 3 featured tracks.

Also 2 videos, the first an old and very basic music video, the second an unofficial Akira based one with a slight sound glitch at one point. Video production for new songs will be much higher level when I return from Japan in April.

Anyway we always welcome thoughts and I'd be interested to see what you think.

Cheers,
Dave, Hebephrenic

Spoiler

Spoiler

Your vocalist is excellent at the screaming but poor at the quiet singing sections, his pitch wavers a lot and he doesn't sound confident. Just because it's a quiet section and he's not screaming doesn't mean he should sound wavery and wimpy. Dynamics in vocals can be used to really good effect, but a clean vocal should sound just as strong as the screaming vocal. That doesn't necessarily mean "sing louder", it just means "project more". Exactly what you want to project more of is up to you, but you want those clean vocals to make as powerful a statement (of whatever kind) as the screamy ones. Right now your vocalist sounds unsure of himself, like he's concentrating so hard just to get the notes right that he forgot what he was actually singing about.

That's the only real weakness. It's okay, certainly competent, but your real barrier apart from that is that there are a lot of bands out there that sound more or less just like this. You main barrier to success is really just that you're treading down an extremely well-worn path with this style of music. It wouldn't hurt for you guys to mix it up a little somehow... add something into the mix that no-one else has thought of, that would help, something to set you apart from the many, many other bands like this...

 

[BonsaiK]

More of plea for advice than a demo.

I'm in a band (posted on page one I think) and we're starting to pick up momentum, we just finished a string of decent shows, we have a guy helping us out with promo and stuff like that, and we've almost finished recording some more stuff.

The problem is, I'm running out of time and money.

They want to hire a rehearsal space which will cost me $20 a week. I only get about $120 a week, and most of that goes into fuel/food/living and what I don't spend goes into my holiday fund. Plus there are talks of us supporting another band on tour, which I couldn't afford. I'm also in my final semester of uni, so I'm getting drowned in assignments/practice, and then there's spending time with my girlfriend and other things I like to do. And I live an hour away from Brisbane.

Its not that I don't want to be in the band, when we play its an amazing feeling, I like the guys and I love the songs. I'm just not sure if I can be committed enough for them. I'm also quite aware that Prog Rock isn't that big, and we most likely won' "make it big," unlike the singer who listed "being able to support myself off this band" as one of his goals in our last meeting. So I kind of feel bad that my heart isn't in it as much as him, I mean, this is my first proper band, so I'm just happy to have fun and write some cool songs.

Make all my problems go away oh mighty Bonsaik!

Sure. *waves wand* Quit your band.

You're obviously into it for different reasons to your bands' principal member. I'd say turf this band on good terms now (rather than shitty terms later, like, in the middle of a small tour) and then find some other group of more relaxed guys and gals to play with. Tell them that you're not really happy in this band and you don't really have time for it. If you want to make the breakoff ultra-gentle and show that there really are no hard feelings, you can even offer to stay in the band until your replacement is trained up...

Have to say it - your Uni degree is way more important than your band. You'll get another shot at the band thing, but re-doing Uni work is expensive and soul-destroying.

 

[cocoadog]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

 

[BonsaiK]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

 

[cocoadog]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

 

[BonsaiK]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

 

[cocoadog]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

Unless you consider singing itself music it is hard to say that pop is music. I know not all of it is like that, but I have heard songs on the radio where there is literally a bunch of clapping. With maybe one guitar riff and some symbols. I honestly don't think that's music. Some of it doesn't even hold itself together rhythmically, it is all about the singing.

 

[BonsaiK]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

Unless you consider singing itself music it is hard to say that pop is music. I know not all of it is like that, but I have heard songs on the radio where there is literally a bunch of clapping. With maybe one guitar riff and some symbols. I honestly don't think that's music. Some of it doesn't even hold itself together rhythmically, it is all about the singing.

So by that definition a choir would also not be music, as would most tribal music...

 

[cocoadog]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

Unless you consider singing itself music it is hard to say that pop is music. I know not all of it is like that, but I have heard songs on the radio where there is literally a bunch of clapping. With maybe one guitar riff and some symbols. I honestly don't think that's music. Some of it doesn't even hold itself together rhythmically, it is all about the singing.

So by that definition a choir would also not be music, as would most tribal music...

Well no choir is just singing. Tribal music uses drums so that counts.

 

[Gildan Bladeborn]

I don't actually have anything to contribute towards the topic this thread is actually about - I have a musical background and I write about obscure music for fun, but I'm not in a band and I have no particular notions of starting/joining one - so I'll just weigh in on one of the tangents that cropped up.

-Post about the commercial viability of shredding went here-

I'm going to do something shocking here and agree with you when you assert that shredding, by itself, isn't a particularly viable musical pathway to pursue as an artist looking to break into the music scene. Heck, guitar wankery for its own sake isn't even that interesting to listen to and I like instrumental music, a great deal in fact - to me shredding always feels like the guitarist is using the song to essentially say "Hey, look at what I can do!" and not conveying anything else; it's just pure musical masturbation, songs consisting of unending solos that are technically impressive but difficulty =/= enjoyable to listen to.

There has to be balance or some other element to the sound; without that you're limiting yourself to a much smaller audience who don't actually need to listen to you when folks like Vai and Satriani are still around. As for folks like Buckethead? He's a guitar virtuoso, he's ridiculously prolific, and the only reason anyone recognizes his (stage)name is because of his involvement with Guns N' Roses - there's a lesson there.

On Dragonforce: Inhuman Rampage might not be their best album, but it's the one that everyone knows by virtue of containing the only Dragonforce song that everyone knows, which they only know about at all because it was in Guitar Hero and very very hard to play. I would therefore consider using it to make the point you were trying for to be perfectly valid.

On Orianthi: Her break-out album entered my personal sphere of awareness devoid of context (I had no idea she was Australian or Michael Jackson's guitarist until... 5 minutes ago, and hadn't heard of her at all when her album made it on my radar) so I was judging it on the musical merits (and price, it was on sale at the time) alone, and having rather enjoyed the snippets I heard it quickly joined my music collection. Given how often we take diametrically opposed positions on "pop" music it's somewhat refreshing to see you use something I actually enjoy as an example.

With that said, "According To You" is, in my estimation, the weakest track on that album (probably for the same reasons it ended up being the single) and suggesting that the rest of the songs sound like it, while broadly true, sells those tracks short somewhat. "Bad News" is a better example in my estimation.

-snip-

I think the point you're trying to make, but failing to, is that a great deal of Pop "artists" shouldn't be considered proper musicians, given that they don't play a musical instrument or write anything they perform for themselves. From a certain perspective it is easy to think of a lot of Pop sensations as glorified karaoke acts, but to assert that the end result isn't music is still disingenuous - I'm a colossal snob and I won't even give you that point.

Singing in a choir doesn't (necessarily) make you a musician, but writing music for a choir does, and what choirs perform is still music. Music that is entirely electronically generated and/or spliced together from pre-existing samples to create something new is still music, whether or not the folks behind it can play a bloody instrument. What those groups aren't is a proper band, but being in a band isn't a requirement for classifying what you produce as "real music".

 

[Berethond]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

Unless you consider singing itself music it is hard to say that pop is music. I know not all of it is like that, but I have heard songs on the radio where there is literally a bunch of clapping. With maybe one guitar riff and some symbols. I honestly don't think that's music. Some of it doesn't even hold itself together rhythmically, it is all about the singing.

So by that definition a choir would also not be music, as would most tribal music...

Well no choir is just singing. Tribal music uses drums so that counts.

Umm.... What?
<youtube=kB9hjYLkTMg>

I believe that they disagree.

 

[cocoadog]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

Unless you consider singing itself music it is hard to say that pop is music. I know not all of it is like that, but I have heard songs on the radio where there is literally a bunch of clapping. With maybe one guitar riff and some symbols. I honestly don't think that's music. Some of it doesn't even hold itself together rhythmically, it is all about the singing.

So by that definition a choir would also not be music, as would most tribal music...

Well no choir is just singing. Tribal music uses drums so that counts.

Umm.... What?
<youtube=kB9hjYLkTMg>

I believe that they disagree.

That's obviously not just choir. They are simulating instruments with vocals. It's like stomp, only with singing.

 

[BonsaiK]

Name one good current pop anything.

"Good" is 100% subjective. Nobody can look at any piece of music, anywhere, in any style, and say "that is objectively bad music". (That's right, even Stairway To Heaven ultimately gets off the hook.) The fact that something is "pop" (short for "popular" and let's not forget that) suggests that a lot of people may like it, and if a lot of people like something, well, there's a whole bunch of people who think that the music is "good" and therefore not "bad". People don't make a habit of buying music that they hate, strangely. Market research indicates that people buy the music that they enjoy.

Steve Vai just does not age, does he?

So you are saying that no ones opinion is wrong? That leads to bad things remember. People can listen to any kind of music they want to, I'm just saying that pop isn't music. Singing maybe, but not music. Any use of instrumentals that it includes could be played by first time players, or edited on the computer. That is not music.

That's an interesting point of view. Many music scholars would disagree.

I find that hard to believe. If I was a music scholar and was less well known then a pop star who doesn't work half as hard as me but makes 10 fold the cash I would be kinda pissed.

Yes, that's certainly possible, and in fact I met many people at University with that particular chip on their shoulder. However, you wouldn't make the logical leap to saying "what they're doing isn't music" unless you were a complete music snob. You could say "I think this music is bad/worthless/terrible/whatever", but to say "this is not actual music" would be obviously incorrect. It's a cheap shot taken by people who often don't actually understand how the music works, or why it works. Just because music is "bad" doesn't mean it's not music. It's the same mistake that people make with art, where they look at art that they think is total shit and go "oh, that's not art". Of course it's fucking art. It's just art that you don't happen to like.

In other words "art" "artistic" and "music" "musical".

Unless you consider singing itself music it is hard to say that pop is music. I know not all of it is like that, but I have heard songs on the radio where there is literally a bunch of clapping. With maybe one guitar riff and some symbols. I honestly don't think that's music. Some of it doesn't even hold itself together rhythmically, it is all about the singing.

So by that definition a choir would also not be music, as would most tribal music...

Well no choir is just singing. Tribal music uses drums so that counts.

That's so incredibly not true, that I could post over a hundred examples of you being 100% false. I don't have the time and you probably don't have the patience, so here's just three for the "no choir is just singing" part (and note - no "instrument simulation" in these videos):


And "tribal music uses drums", well that depends on the tribe. Plenty don't.