What's the paradigm of today's popular music?

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

Every idiot with a middle-school vocabulary and a sound producing device (wub to the wub) decides that if they act douchey enough or sell out enough they can become riCh and famous.

However, too many people had this idea and now none of them will be remembered for very long or stand out well enough for anyone to care.


So I'm cynical since my Nickelback thread, sue me.

Nice to see some hardcore bias and generalizations.

Seriously dude, everyone called you on it in the Nickleback thread, quit it.

And I'm saying they were RIGHT. What, is that not enough? I'm bloody agreeing.

 

[M K Ultra]

And I'm saying they were RIGHT. What, is that not enough?

To prove your sincerity you must... [dramatic music] step on this Nickleback CD!!!

 

[thesilentman]

This generation is only interested in sex and drugs, like j-e-f-f-e-r-s said. It's also repetitive and generally lacking in composition. The majority of teenagers out there are idiots, I tell you. Most of them don't even know that music can be meaningful beyond sex and drugs. I think it all comes down to the fact that my generation doesn't care, just like the people in Brave New World, who didn't care about how crapsack their life was because they were diverted by sex and happy pills.

I have no freaking idea why I hate my age group so much...

 

[Kpt._Rob]

The paradigm of today's music is consumability. Contemporary music is designed around psychological principles which actually make it mildly addictive. It uses simple repetitive beats to create patterns which the brain easily recognizes and predicts (which is something the brain likes). Today's music, more than anything else, is about getting stuck in your head and making you want to buy it. Incidentally it's almost universally terrible, and lacking the complexity, intelligence, or genuine emotion of the music which would have been produced 100 or even 50 years ago. Music itself sold out.

 

[HardkorSB]

-50s: Uplifting, bouncy music due to war fatigue and people wanting 'feelgood' music like Beach Boys
-60s: A reaction against conventional music of the 50s and a wish to experiment with different sounds late in the decade. Definite anti-war feeling from the effects of the Vietnam war.
-70s: The impact of psychedelic drugs on bands and listeners took experimentalism further, and a reaction against conservative politics. Weirdness reached a peak
-80s: Re-entry of conservative politics, hippie culture became unpopular and music became more simplistic and hedonistic with the topics becoming more about sex, money and fame
-90s: A kind of disillusionment of the world and the decadence of the 80s leading up to grunge, heavy rock, hip-hop. Much less optimistic than the 80s

You seem to be only looking at rock-ish type of music.
For example, the 70's was also the decade of disco and funk.
The 90's had shit like Dr Alban or Ace of Base. Stuff was everywhere. Not to mention the rise of boybands and girlbands.

 

[CityofTreez]

Not going to talk about Gaga or teh Beibs.

If you want a good feel of quality music over the past decade, look at groups such as: The Strokes, Franz Ferdinand, The Killers, Muse, Arctic Monkeys, Modest Mouse ect. You can find a ton of quality music, you just have to look past the "big names" of pop.

I would say most of these bands take from a good portion of 70's/80's stuff with nice experimentation and a face lift. (for good or bad)

so basically your opinion is anything not from the 70's and 80's or sounding like it is garbage?

What? No, not at all. There's a lot of music I like outside of 70's/80's stuff.

Sorry if I was implying that. Now what I meant..

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

You seem to be only looking at rock-ish type of music.
For example, the 70's was also the decade of disco and funk.
The 90's had shit like Dr Alban

(It's my life)
It's my life my worries
(It's my life)
It's my life my problems
(It's my life)
It's my life my worries
(It's my life)
It's my life my problems
(It's my life)

or Ace of Base.

She leads a lonely life
She leads a lonely life
All that she wants is another baby
She's gone tomorrow boy
All that she wants is another baby

Yep, seems to fit with what I said. I don't know about you but I find those lyrics depressing.

Stuff was everywhere. Not to mention the rise of boybands and girlbands.

I think we have to distinguish between genuinely composed music stemming from the youth culture rather than manufactured music by middle-aged men in suits. But even if we don't, if you look at the lyrics, they aren't a whole lot different. Even the most commercial music has to appeal with the mood of the times.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

This whole generation of mainstream music is defined by a single word: consumerism.

Basically, everyone's making the same generic, shallow-but-stimulative sounds in an attempt to appeal to the lowest common denominator and make as many sales as possible.

While this might be true, it can't be the whole story.

When you are trying to appeal to the 'lowest common denominator', you still have to succeed. They have to sell. That means whatever problems, desires, your audience has, you have to cater to them. I don't see that as shallow. If there's a world war and people just want to relax and forget about it through easy listening music, then can you blame bands for capitalising on that? It's like saying a restaurant shouldn't serve steak and chips to a person that wants it, because it's too bland and unsophisticated.

Culture is culture, It is what it is.

 

[Zen Bard]

...It's more of a pick-and-mix from each previous decade and blending of different sounds - electronica with real instruments, rap with rock, etc. Maybe that itself is the paradigm - rejection of boundaries, bringing together of people.

Yes. THAT'S your paradigm right now. A cross pollination and blending of sounds, genres and generations.

Though I'm not sure that has to do with an altruistic "Rejection of Boundaries" so much as simply higher accessibility.

People today have the ability to customize their musical preferences in ways that simply didn't exist before file-sharing, satellite radio and the internet. Now if someone is searching for a favorite band on Youtube, current data mining algorithms might pop up a suggestion based on his choices that take him to, say, Iron Maiden or Porcupine Tree.

So he has just as much access to music that was produced two weeks ago as he does stuff recorded twenty years ago.

As far as music being the voice of the current youth culture...this is where I'm at a loss. I'm really not sure what the current ideals are, and certainly can't discern that from the music. It all seems derivative to me. But I'm not sure how much of that is due to the "middle-aged men in suits" trying to target a demographic.

That right there, is the biggest inhibitor, I think. Too many artists want to be on the FastTrain to Wealthytown so they're more than happy to turn their musical voice over to the corporate authorities in order to generate more downloads.

If this generation really has a musical voice, don't by shy folks. Speak up.

 

[AnarchistFish]

ctrl f dubstep

11 results

not getting involved here cos trying to fight this tsunami of ignorance only serves to piss me off



What I will say though, is that people seriously overrate the music "crisis" of the modern age. Modern popular music has gotten worse, sure, but come on, it was never good anyway. To find truly great stuff you'd always have to look for it yourself and there's so much of that stuff coming out these days. There have been explosions of subgenres, especially during the 90s, so now there's shitloads of artists releasing underground classics across the map. The internet has boosted this. Bands that would have struggled to reach their audience beforehand because of their inaccessibility now can and you don't have to be a rock star or MTV cow to be listened to. And as for piracy, it weeds out those looking just to make a bunch of cash in favour of normal people who want to make music for people who love it. Killing the music industry to save music.

It irritates me when people complain about "the state of music" today. All it shows me is that they can't be bothered to find music they like but they're willing to take the high ground and complain about a small proportion they're exposed to via mainstream media. If anything, we're currently in a state of being "genre-less". Sure, you have your big electro producers like Skrillex and David Guetta and wishy washy house beat/auto tune riddled pop music, but if you think that's all there is to music these days you're an idiot.

So that's how I see it. We've entered a limbo, where music doesn't have to be defined by what's exposed on the TV or radio and it's been brought to the power of the audience and its creators. It's still a work in progress but the signs are evident. Which is why I completely disagree with claims that music is now more consumerist or shallow, that it's been dumbed down, or that it's even gotten worse.

 

[uneek]

This generation is only interested in sex and drugs, like j-e-f-f-e-r-s said. It's also repetitive and generally lacking in composition. The majority of teenagers out there are idiots, I tell you. Most of them don't even know that music can be meaningful beyond sex and drugs. I think it all comes down to the fact that my generation doesn't care, just like the people in Brave New World, who didn't care about how crapsack their life was because they were diverted by sex and happy pills.

I have no freaking idea why I hate my age group so much...

Dude, Sex and drugs are not new topics in music. In fact, that's like 50% of all music of all time.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

There is awful, shallow and just plain generic music in every decade of music, however through the magic of time passing and hindsight we are left with the quality to look back fondly on. The same will happen once this decade passes and people start looking back at the music created now. In retrospect the good music raises to the top, as good music is timeless regardless of when it was made. And I can say t easily that there is always good music if your willing to look for it, now more so than ever, there is a vast ocean of music at are fingertips nowadays. So much so that you may never have to turn on the radio and here the "shallow" and "souless" pop music of today ever again.

Another point to remember that back in the past the only ways to find about most bands was to hear them on the radio, mtv, concerts or having a good knowledge of the underground scenes, this lead to there being apparent unified musical movements in those decades. Now with the internet and technology that barrier for both finding and creating new basic is more open than ever. The advantage of this is that if there is a particular genre you really like, you will likely find many musicians doing that style for you to enjoy. The disadvantage is that it is know more difficult to have a unified musical movement as everyone is off in their own smaller circles now. Of course the pop charts have are the exception there, but really who care about them besides record company accountants. Since their inception the pop charts have hardly ever been a bastion of creative originally or artistic expression. History has shown that having number selling records means very little as often its the musicians how didn't sell any records or hardly released singles that get remember. So I'd say this decades music paradigm is quite fragmented, but perhaps music has always been that fragmented in the past also and it is just easier to see now with.

This generation is only interested in sex and drugs, like j-e-f-f-e-r-s said. It's also repetitive and generally lacking in composition. The majority of teenagers out there are idiots, I tell you. Most of them don't even know that music can be meaningful beyond sex and drugs. I think it all comes down to the fact that my generation doesn't care, just like the people in Brave New World, who didn't care about how crapsack their life was because they were diverted by sex and happy pills.

I have no freaking idea why I hate my age group so much...

To be fair every generation has been obsessed with sex and drugs. That's why there are so many songs about sex and drugs for last 60 years at least, more than likely even before that as well. Every generation goes through that same period, just with different soundtrack, clothes and weird hairstyles. We will be saying the same about the next generation, and they the same about the next generation after them and so on until our sun dies out.

 

[uneek]

snip

snip.

snip

Yes, that's what today's music is all about. Consuming! You can't go one day without hearing "Drink Mountain Dew" by the Doritos, "McDonald Rocks" by Big Mac, and of course the #1 Song in America, "Drive a Prius Today" by the Toyota!


Give me a fucking break guys.

(And I know you meant music for selling music rather than music for selling products, but that still doesn't make sense. Music has been used to make money ever since we figured out we could. They still had to be about something)

 

[Alandoril]

So yeah... all in all, I'd say this decade has been a bit crap in terms of musical movements.

Music nowadays is a reflection of consumerism in our society. It's like junk food. Easily consumed, but with no soul or passion. It's just a discardable product, made by producers with different target markets in mind. There's little artistic value in music these days and it reminds a bit of pop in the 80s, except that during that time it may have been commercial music, but it had an artistic vision and musicians were really talented in many cases.

Oh, I didn't mean to say anything about the quality of today's music. I don't listen to much of it so I don't have an opinion. Musical quality is all taste anyway. I don't regard political or meaningful music as 'superior' to music about sex and fashion.

Whatever the music is, it's an expression of the Being of the musicians of the day. It's never about nothing, nor can it be. If it's popular and listened to on a large scale then there's something in it that resonates with the audience. I just want to know what that is.

Really? Because music that is political or meaningful IS superior.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

While this might be true, it can't be the whole story.

When you are trying to appeal to the 'lowest common denominator', you still have to succeed. They have to sell. That means whatever problems, desires, your audience has, you have to cater to them. I don't see that as shallow. If there's a world war and people just want to relax and forget about it through easy listening music, then can you blame bands for capitalising on that? It's like saying a restaurant shouldn't serve steak and chips to a person that wants it, because it's too bland and unsophisticated.

Culture is culture, It is what it is.

Ah, but see, here you're saying that the art should be led by the audience. Whereas I'm of the opinion that the audience should be led by the art.

There's a famous saying that's been paraphrased by a whole bunch of famous writers, musicians and artists: It is not the job of the artist to give the audience what they want. The audience don't know what they want. If they did know what they want, they wouldn't be the audience, they would be the artist.

While there's nothing wrong with catering to the audience's expectations to a degree, ultimately it falls to any musical artist to consistently grow, explore and challenge what their audience expects. Without doing that, bands and artists simply end up rehashing their sound, getting predictable and boring in the first place. Look at the likes of David Bowie, Radiohead, Pink Floyd, King Crimson, The Red Hot Chilli Peppers... these are all bands who drastically reinvented themselves during their career, and managed to help usher in new musical movements in doing so.

If al you do is cater to what your audience wants to hear, you'll never surprise them with something they didn't know they wanted to hear.

I don't think I'm saying the art should be led by the audience. Personally I hold the same opinion as you: the composer should be entirely in charge of his or her creation, and any pandering or catering to anyone else takes away from their creative potential.

My OP wasn't necessarily about the music itself on its own, but more about the phenomenon of music as a form of communication between the creator and the listener. I'm interested in what kind of communication is going on in today's music. Because in past decades of music I see fairly clearly broad musical trends and tendencies that I can trace to social feelings of the times, but I don't see any today. So I think we have to put the very vaguely drawn categories of commercial music and art music in the same perspective, in the sense that both are appreciated and enjoyed by the listener - and if that is the case then there is a kind of dialogue going on between the music and the audience, one that is meaningful to the listener otherwise it wouldn't be appreciated.

There's a famous saying that's been paraphrased by a whole bunch of famous writers, musicians and artists: It is not the job of the artist to give the audience what they want. The audience don't know what they want. If they did know what they want, they wouldn't be the audience, they would be the artist.

I think this is only partly true. If this were completely true, any music would be as popular as any other. Why has Gangnam Style received a billion hits and some random rock band out of San Francisco got nothing? Even if the answer is marketing and commercial potential and that the main reason people "like" music today is because its trendy, there's a reason why when your friend says "hey check out this song" and tells you about it, you either are interested in checking it out or you aren't.

If the artist tells the audience what they want, there's a recipe for success which depends on the way the audience responds to music internally. Aggressive music about war wouldn't have been popular in the 50s - why? Because they had just been through a traumatising war. If the audience were 'told to like' heavy metal, it would have been a total failure. It is the constantly shifting social conditions affecting the individual which determines what they like, as well as the artist.

 

[Alex Baas]

Music nowadays is a reflection of consumerism in our society. It's like junk food. Easily consumed, but with no soul or passion. It's just a discardable product, made by producers with different target markets in mind. There's little artistic value in music these days and it reminds a bit of pop in the 80s, except that during that time it may have been commercial music, but it had an artistic vision and musicians were really talented in many cases.

You summed it up. My bed time prayer every night is that all the BS of the times forces a comeback of political punk rock. We can all dream...