Why does old music equal superiority?
- Thread starter DesiPrinceX09
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I tend to see more of "my music is better because its obscure" than what your talking about.DesiPrinceX09 said:
People you say that are being anti-conformist by listening to old music tend to forget that bands like iron maiden, judas priest exc are really popular bands. I think its just nostalgia. A bunch of old guys running around wearing leather jackets playing anarchist before they go back to there desk job in the morning.
As I kind of got into earlier most people are elitist pricks about the music they listen to. Its kind of in the nature of liking things. nobody thinks there taste in music sucks. Its sad to say but the majority of people operate under the assumption that everything they like is awesome and if you dont like it then your obviously not awesome like me.
As far as what i listen to. Most of it falls under the broad category of alternative rock. I dislike most modern country but like bands that incorporate some country sounds into a soft punk mix. the gaslight anthem are a good example of that.
Honestly, i like to stay to underground rap. no stupid ass auto tune there. oh and ben folds modest mouse arcade fire the decemberists and whatnot
To be fair, Mythbusters isn't exactly that scientific, to determine if this is true it'd require a lot more study and research then just one or two tests by Jamie and Adam haha. I'm talking a full lab system with multiple control groups, different kinds of death metal, different kinds of classical, etc.Scars Unseen said:
Where did you get a time machine?Reaper195 said:
I know what you mean. I'm like that too, as in, I stick to the classics, and sometimes argue with people about music. But I don't argue like "My music's better", but rather more in defense. I have to come up with fabricated arguments as to why I don't like heavy metal or hip-hop or what have you. When it becomes obvious to people that I don't know the name of the song that's playing in the background, they will sometimes try to give me a crash-course in the genre, as if I just had never heard that music before.
Trust me, I've heard it before.
I don't like most modern music. Most of the themes are far to extreme for me. Most modern metal I've heard is far too hateful and angry. But then take metal I like such as "Bark at the Moon". It's got a pretty mean sound as far as I can tell, but there's actual tones coming out of Ozzy's mouth, and the theme isn't especially angry either. Then most of that Indie stuff doesn't appeal to me because I can't really relate, and the music is often boring to me. I'll admit, some of it is pretty good. But whatever.
And don't get me started on pop music.
All in all, I think people like me can often just be pretentious. I mean, it's like reading the Illiad or something. If someone went around telling people that they read the Illiad and created some very specific opinions on it, you know you'd probably look at them like they're just a pretentious jerk. But I'm sure they feel pretty fancy because they just read the Illiad. Age in our society tends to equal wisdom and such. They must just do it to feel fancy.
Trust me, I've heard it before.
I don't like most modern music. Most of the themes are far to extreme for me. Most modern metal I've heard is far too hateful and angry. But then take metal I like such as "Bark at the Moon". It's got a pretty mean sound as far as I can tell, but there's actual tones coming out of Ozzy's mouth, and the theme isn't especially angry either. Then most of that Indie stuff doesn't appeal to me because I can't really relate, and the music is often boring to me. I'll admit, some of it is pretty good. But whatever.
And don't get me started on pop music.
All in all, I think people like me can often just be pretentious. I mean, it's like reading the Illiad or something. If someone went around telling people that they read the Illiad and created some very specific opinions on it, you know you'd probably look at them like they're just a pretentious jerk. But I'm sure they feel pretty fancy because they just read the Illiad. Age in our society tends to equal wisdom and such. They must just do it to feel fancy.
Because the older music has the Beatles. And today's music (with it's arsenal of Miley Cyrus and Justin Bieber) can't even begin to hold a candle to the Beatles, the Eagles, CCR, and Bon Jovi, amoung countless others.
True, but it's something I like to throw out there any time someone tries to use classical music's extramusical properties as a point of superiority. Also:Blind Sight said:
From what i've managed to glean it goes something like this:
Music from those times was all about fighting the man and doing what you want to do but over time it's become that the very music meant to symbolise freedom from the oppression of the music industry has become the industrys biggest money spinner.
People from those times see all this easy to access modern rock music created by the music industry purely to sell and think back to a time where it meant something different, where music people had known growing up was in turmoil and changing into something new and different.
They often don't see the absolutely amazing music lesser known artists have come up with because it's behind the scenes where their music was right at the front of it all.
EDIT: My taste in music? I like post-rock which has mostly remained outside of the corrupting grasp of the music industry so there isn't really much division between the decades.
Music from those times was all about fighting the man and doing what you want to do but over time it's become that the very music meant to symbolise freedom from the oppression of the music industry has become the industrys biggest money spinner.
People from those times see all this easy to access modern rock music created by the music industry purely to sell and think back to a time where it meant something different, where music people had known growing up was in turmoil and changing into something new and different.
They often don't see the absolutely amazing music lesser known artists have come up with because it's behind the scenes where their music was right at the front of it all.
EDIT: My taste in music? I like post-rock which has mostly remained outside of the corrupting grasp of the music industry so there isn't really much division between the decades.
Technology back in the day was less capable, thus musicians had to rely on skill, not auto-tunes, corrections and effects to mask their bland, boring voice.
Couple that with the music industry being a massive money-driven monster that shits out cookie-cut music, as opposed to genuinely talented/original musicians who worked their ass off and has passion about their sound.
Couple that with the music industry being a massive money-driven monster that shits out cookie-cut music, as opposed to genuinely talented/original musicians who worked their ass off and has passion about their sound.
Basically this. However, that is generalizing, because not all music is Auto-Tuned.insaneHoshi said:
Some people grew up with certain music, and they are not used to the new stuff because it has, well changed so much.
Me, I'm a good ol Classic Rock/Metal head myself, but usually anybody that is overly aggressive about anything is a major douche. If someone tells you, the music you listen to is shit, they are bashing your own opinion.
My best bet, ignore them. Or if you want to be a douche in return, you might as well deck them.
It doesnt per se. A lot of music that has survived since the 60s has survived because it IS good, but a lot disappeared, regardless of how popular it is then (every one hit wonder of the time)and the same will happen to a lot of todays music. in 20 years, the good music of today will be like the good music of yesterday
anyone who makes pretensions about old music being better than modern music who isnt actually from the era is a pretentious idiot
anyone who makes pretensions about old music being better than modern music who isnt actually from the era is a pretentious idiot
The notion that a particular type of music is superior in shape form or function to another is patently ludicrous. I really should not even have to given an example but here is a nice analogy.
Suppose I bang my spoon against my pot and proclaim this "music" to be superior to all other forms of sound arrangements that you have or will ever come up with. Then I am quite clearly mad, as is anyone who would _assert_ (not claim, or opine, or any other form of speech) that any kind of music is superior to another.
Those who would pretend that there is some inherent quality, or feature, that distinguishes their candidate from the spoon bang and that the analogy is therefore false are missing the point - which is that such qualities, or features, are _absolutely_ arbitrary and that furthermore this defines _exactly_ the issue we are debating. It's like saying blue is superior to green, for whatever inane or insane reason.
Suppose I bang my spoon against my pot and proclaim this "music" to be superior to all other forms of sound arrangements that you have or will ever come up with. Then I am quite clearly mad, as is anyone who would _assert_ (not claim, or opine, or any other form of speech) that any kind of music is superior to another.
Those who would pretend that there is some inherent quality, or feature, that distinguishes their candidate from the spoon bang and that the analogy is therefore false are missing the point - which is that such qualities, or features, are _absolutely_ arbitrary and that furthermore this defines _exactly_ the issue we are debating. It's like saying blue is superior to green, for whatever inane or insane reason.
I agree, somewhat. I don't feel that the best musicians of today are worse than the best musicians from the past. In fact, I believe the talent and understanding of music amongst these rare individuals have excelled. However, the shit music has had way too much exposure and this starts a trend of people making more shit. There will always be hacks and the terrible musicians will always outweigh the good ones. It takes elite talent to be a good musician but now more people feel that they can do it and have a means of getting heard.Novskij said:
I HATE to bring this example up, but I'm being lazy and will do it. The Twilight movies are shit. Terrible. Poor acting, writing, photography, and editing (I have seen them just to see if my preconceived notions were justifiable). However, they are beyond popular. I feel that this will just encourage more bad film making due to it's success and being a hit. People will start thinking that "Hey, Twilight is a hit. It's considered good and I could do that! I have talent!" I know this is slightly silly comparison but it goes back to all it takes is shit to become slightly successful and people who are in the same talent pool will be encouraged.
