Have you heard of Hurray for the Riff Raff or Dan Sartain by any chance? The former is a folk-indie group and the other is a electro/rock ar… moretist. Just asking, because I'm not sure what "indie" means to you, since today's definition of "indie" could mean a lot of things.
POP MUSIC, specifically, is less diverse than in the past. This has been proven through scientific study. Less experimentation, the repetitive use of the same chords, and so on. Pop music used to have much more variety and diversity. Most of pop music is produced by the same handful of producers working for a massive stable of pop artists that studios churn out and dispose of.
Because pop music is like cheap candy these days. Don't like one flavor, grab another. It's all basically just processed sugar and it's not like you paid for filet mignon.
You were actually kinda right, it's a bit confusing
Pop is a genre of popular music, it's derived from rock and roll. Popular music itself covers anything's that's popular. Though a lot of people don't know the difference so they use them interchangeably.
POP MUSIC, specifically, is less diverse than in the past. This has been proven through scientific study. Less experimentation, the repetiti… moreve use of the same chords, and so on. Pop music used to have much more variety and diversity. Most of pop music is produced by the same handful of producers working for a massive stable of pop artists that studios churn out and dispose of.
Because pop music is like cheap candy these days. Don't like one flavor, grab another. It's all basically just processed sugar and it's not like you paid for filet mignon.
Money and popularity doesn't mean there was innovation in his music. It's "pop" music for a reason. The actual composing elements of pop music are rather unchanging.
The mainstream is all mostly crap about the same things every time (money, sex and power). I'd agree with the sentiment that this is the worst generation of music in a long time, perhaps ever.
I definitely can't say I dislike all of it because I listen to all kinds of stuff. I have a lot of guilty pleasures in the music nowadays. E… morevanescence, Three Days Grace, Fall Out Boy, Marina and the Diamonds (no, it is not a band) are still pretty good to me. I still listen to Nirvana, My Chemical Romance etc....
Also, just because something is successful doesn't mean it's necessarily vastly different from things already in existence. It just means it was received better.
I don't know if someone has mentioned this on this thread, but there was a survey I read, I think it was made by NPR, can't really remember sorry, where they asked the youth generation if they were satisfied with the quality of current music and it was overwhelmingly: no. As technology has made it easier for skilled and talented artists to create more complex pieces easier and share it easier, it at the same time has opened the door wide open for people with no musical talent or skill to shove their said untalented asses into the door because it is so easy to create "music" and share it. And when you get so much of this low tier bs spammed out there, people's standards drop and why should artists slave away at trying to create high caliber art when they can milk a niche fanbase that will shell out so much money.
Now don't get me wrong, the pop music of previous generations were not some magnum opus machine. Popular music by nature is simplified for the sake of being marketable. Most great bands, from Beatles to Queen started with very shallow messages and just simple and catchy music and once they got popular pushed into experimenting with music and also giving a legit voice to their art. Also, back then, artists had to grind through clubs for years before a record company would give them the time of day to make an album with them. This already sifted out the shit so you got less of it becoming popular.
I really think that music today is both just as good and just as bad as music from before, it's all dependent on taste. There are Artists such as Adele, Ed Sheeran and Sam Smith etc. who make amazing music, even Bands such as One Republic. At least in my opinion they're great.
Comments
Indie = Independent
No, it says "modern popular music" not "modern pop music".
pop literally means popular
POP MUSIC, specifically, is less diverse than in the past. This has been proven through scientific study. Less experimentation, the repetitive use of the same chords, and so on. Pop music used to have much more variety and diversity. Most of pop music is produced by the same handful of producers working for a massive stable of pop artists that studios churn out and dispose of.
Because pop music is like cheap candy these days. Don't like one flavor, grab another. It's all basically just processed sugar and it's not like you paid for filet mignon.
It does?
Could care less.
You were actually kinda right, it's a bit confusing
Pop is a genre of popular music, it's derived from rock and roll. Popular music itself covers anything's that's popular. Though a lot of people don't know the difference so they use them interchangeably.
Pop music has become more stagnant, but it was never a revolutionary segment of music. It's changed the least out of all mediums and genres.
Michael Jackson wasn't revolutionary? His hundred million dollar estate disagrees.
Money and popularity doesn't mean there was innovation in his music. It's "pop" music for a reason. The actual composing elements of pop music are rather unchanging.
The mainstream is all mostly crap about the same things every time (money, sex and power). I'd agree with the sentiment that this is the worst generation of music in a long time, perhaps ever.
this year's music is slightly better than last year's.
tolerable, to say the least.
Also, just because something is successful doesn't mean it's necessarily vastly different from things already in existence. It just means it was received better.
There is great modern music, but you really have to dig for it.
I don't know if someone has mentioned this on this thread, but there was a survey I read, I think it was made by NPR, can't really remember sorry, where they asked the youth generation if they were satisfied with the quality of current music and it was overwhelmingly: no. As technology has made it easier for skilled and talented artists to create more complex pieces easier and share it easier, it at the same time has opened the door wide open for people with no musical talent or skill to shove their said untalented asses into the door because it is so easy to create "music" and share it. And when you get so much of this low tier bs spammed out there, people's standards drop and why should artists slave away at trying to create high caliber art when they can milk a niche fanbase that will shell out so much money.
Now don't get me wrong, the pop music of previous generations were not some magnum opus machine. Popular music by nature is simplified for the sake of being marketable. Most great bands, from Beatles to Queen started with very shallow messages and just simple and catchy music and once they got popular pushed into experimenting with music and also giving a legit voice to their art. Also, back then, artists had to grind through clubs for years before a record company would give them the time of day to make an album with them. This already sifted out the shit so you got less of it becoming popular.
I'm not really into it. Not my cup of tea.
Some of it is alright. Here is one of my favorite modern songs
enter link description here
I really think that music today is both just as good and just as bad as music from before, it's all dependent on taste. There are Artists such as Adele, Ed Sheeran and Sam Smith etc. who make amazing music, even Bands such as One Republic. At least in my opinion they're great.