New-age hip hop, or at least what they’re still trying to pass off as “hip hop” and they’re succeeding because no one bothers to study its roots.
[quote]Shadowzz4 wrote:
The thing about it is, when almost any genre begins to appeal to a very large audience, it begins to turn into commercial pop music. Look at almost any genre. Often its lowest form quality-wise, is that which appeals to the masses. Some genres have a very large percentage of music in this crappy, commercial form. Country fits into this.[/quote]
BINGO! Yep that’s right. The worst example of all time: Alternative rock.
[quote]Shadowzz4 wrote:
Here’s an example of what I consider to be good music.
[/quote]
dang. bingo again. BOC is SO great. I love that stuff and every genre and type of music like it.
The worst music ever devised is reggaeton, and there’s nothing anyone can do or say to refute that 'cause it’s been proven by science.
Absolutely cannot fucking stomach Scooter. If there is a hell, this would be the elevator music:
There is nothing I’ve ever seen that is worse than trying to mix pop, rap and children music:
Pop Country hands down is awfull. Seems like they are metal guys who couldn’t cut it so they go country. Was at my neigbhors and he had that goat roppin’ shit on, don’t know who it was but the lyrics were something like “God is good, beer is great and people are crazy” WTF? Dosen’t take much talent to come up with those lyrics. I’ve always wondered if this genre was the easiest way to make a living as a song writer.
To each his own I guess. I listen to music, mostly metal and metal lyrics are pretty lame sometimes ie: and he looked up to the sky and read the words from the black book etc.
Like someone said earlier, theory of a dead man and nickleback suck balls and old country is atleast tolerable.
[quote]bond james bond wrote:
Pop Country hands down is awfull. Seems like they are metal guys who couldn’t cut it so they go country. Was at my neigbhors and he had that goat roppin’ shit on, don’t know who it was but the lyrics were something like “God is good, beer is great and people are crazy” WTF? Dosen’t take much talent to come up with those lyrics. I’ve always wondered if this genre was the easiest way to make a living as a song writer.
To each his own I guess. I listen to music, mostly metal and metal lyrics are pretty lame sometimes ie: and he looked up to the sky and read the words from the black book etc.
Like someone said earlier, theory of a dead man and nickleback suck balls and old country is atleast tolerable. [/quote]
My girl listens to this shit and it literally drives me crazy, like I starting getting antsy and feel claustrophobic. It’s like I can’t get out of my own skull. If we’re not in the car I can just walk away, but if we’re driving I want to drive the car off a cliff. Old country is badass. Patsy Cline, Hank Sr., Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard,etc… Those guys are the shit.
Also, it’s definitely the easiest way to make a living as a song writer. Every song - I’m not exaggerating, every song - revolves around god/jesus, beer, relationship problems and sometimes dip. Now that I think about it pop country and reggaeton are tied for the worst thing to ever happen.
nu-metal.
Hands down. The worst genre.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Totally skipping all the posts. Country is awesome, that is, OLD COUNTRY. Not this pop country bullshit that sucks.
REAL COUNTRY: Johnny Cash, Hank Williams Sr., Patsy Cline, Lefty Frizzell, Johnny Horton, Bob Willis, Buck Owens, Marty Robbins, Ray Price, Porter Wagoner.
Seriously, so many people love pop rock (or any rock) and pop country, but can’t appreciate the music of these folks listed above, and others like Elvis, Jerry Lee, Wanda Jackson, Bill Haley & The Comets, Buddy Holly, Carl Perkins, etc.[/quote]
x3
And the worst music ever devised is anything ever produced by Nickleback, with rap music a close second.
[quote]sevenmoist wrote:
PB Andy wrote:
Totally skipping all the posts. Country is awesome, that is, OLD COUNTRY. Not this pop country bullshit that sucks.
REAL COUNTRY: Johnny Cash, Hank Williams Sr., Patsy Cline, Lefty Frizzell, Johnny Horton, Bob Willis, Buck Owens, Marty Robbins, Ray Price, Porter Wagoner.
Seriously, so many people love pop rock (or any rock) and pop country, but can’t appreciate the music of these folks listed above, and others like Elvis, Jerry Lee, Wanda Jackson, Bill Haley & The Comets, Buddy Holly, Carl Perkins, etc.
x2
Also love some good rock a billy and psych-billy, especially live.
off topic: am I the only one who finds it annoying when people quote pages of shit, I mean who can read all that shit.
[/quote]
Haha, I’m a big fan of rockabilly and psychobilly, a lot of my good friends are in the subculture scene somehow. Hell I used to be a psychobilly (at least I had the hair and dressed like it). In fact I’d still say I am still a “psycho” at heart.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Old country is badass. Patsy Cline, Hank Sr., Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard,etc… Those guys are the shit.[/quote]
Oh yeah! - YouTube
Beautiful.
And of course the king: elvis presley blue suede shoes color - YouTube
[quote]Therizza wrote:
Dude wtf is that Goatbomb shit?
[/quote]
It’s my band! I decided to do this when I realized that the music my other bands’ fans hate with an insane passion is a hell of a lot more fun than anything else I’ve ever played.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Totally skipping all the posts. Country is awesome, that is, OLD COUNTRY. Not this pop country bullshit that sucks.
REAL COUNTRY: Johnny Cash, Hank Williams Sr., Patsy Cline, Lefty Frizzell, Johnny Horton, Bob Willis, Buck Owens, Marty Robbins, Ray Price, Porter Wagoner.
Seriously, so many people love pop rock (or any rock) and pop country, but can’t appreciate the music of these folks listed above, and others like Elvis, Jerry Lee, Wanda Jackson, Bill Haley & The Comets, Buddy Holly, Carl Perkins, etc.[/quote]
Agree totally. There’s a difference between the fake cowboy who buys a giant dually to haul nothing more than his fat ego around in and the Honky Tonkers who lived it hard and for real. The early country stars lived what they wrote and sang.
Reggaeton is the worst genre ever. It just sounds like noise without any harmony in lyrics or beats.
It was “created” so Puerto Ricans can say they have a musical genre of their own and try to get air time on the radio for the claim.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Reggaeton is the worst genre ever. It just sounds like noise without any harmony in lyrics or beats.
It was “created” so Puerto Ricans can say they have a musical genre of their own and try to get air time on the radio for the claim.[/quote]
I agree, so sad. Literally, literally, they have the exact same beat in 90% of their songs. LIterally.
LIsten to that. Skip through each song, it’ll only take a few seconds of each song to hear the exact same beat.
Dun Dika Dun dun, dun dika dun dun. EVer single one. LIterally.
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
For fucks sake use the quotes properly or just respond entirely outside the quotes.
will you teach me???
jasmincar wrote:
I like serious music as a whole, you just don’t like the same serious music as I do, or just don’t appreciate it the same way. My problem is you deciding what counts as serious music. you don’t. You only decide what you like and appreciate. <–You’re only response to this has been to tell me that I have to learn to appreciate it. I turned that around and said maybe you had to learn to appreciate my music, and you laughed.
LOL . Art music - Wikipedia
you fail at musicology. It is like an ignorant trying to argue about physic with a someone who has a phd. (ok maybe not that much maybe just a college education)
And again using your reasoning that you have to get this serious music the right way to like it you’re not ready to appreciate Frank. Based on your understanding of the English language you aren’t ready to fully understand your Frank Zappa like his other fans seem to. You dismissed his lyrics and concept saying he doesn’t care about them and you don’t either, but according to his OTHER ADMIRERS (never mind the critics) who show similar tastes to yourself and should be considered able to ‘get art’ by yourself they are one of his strong suits. So they themselves would tell you you didn’t get it, and I’m sure many of these people experience a similar ‘thrill’ that you don’t when listening to the musical aspects of his work alone.
As I said a dozen of time what I like is music. I don’t understand the lyrics when I first hear them but it doesnt do any difference. When I read them after I dont get a new thrill. You are basing your argumentation on things that don’t exist, because you never experienced it yourself. Your whole reasoning is standing on nothing. I am more connected than you with other fans and there is no powerful art in lyrics. again you are inventing stuff for the purpose of not losing your face
That’s why I specifically picked something done by the critics that has no ties to the award shows or promotion of albums. The Pazz & Jop poll is not an award show, it’s a poll of critics that most music industry people don’t really give a shit about. Look at the albums that won those polls, not all of them were big sellers anyway.
great. So what? All this stuff is still weak to me and any of the serious music listener
Again, you keep mentioning things about some people being better suited to appreciating this stuff, and then turning away from critics who appreciate music for a living. The only reason you do this is because they don’t like the same music as you. I did not like bringing the critics into the argument, you keep attacking me for doing this even though you were the one espousing this belief that some people are more qualified listeners than others and you appreciate something on an ‘intellectual’ level, which as it turns out you didn’t understand.
first of all: ‘‘critics’’ appreciate music for a living. How does that turn into a living? There must be something to sell. And as I said I never readed any critics and I dont care. You are bringing something I never even came close to mentionning and you are trying to do a point with the fact that I used the word ‘‘intellectual’’ to illustrate a concept of creating art that in the end wasnt intellectual (it is artistic). what the fuck. What are you trying to do?
Maybe by your own standards, they GET pop music in way you haven’t LEARNED to? Just using your own words here.
No. When I was a kid I liked pop music. It didnt learned to like it, it was just catchy and easy. What are you trying to defend is non-sense
No, this is that close-mindedness I keep talking about. Who says you can’t sell art? Just tell me why you can’t sell something that someone has put work into as a piece of art. Art can definitely be a product and you do not have the right to tell artists that their work is not art because they can sell their work easily.
This is not close-mindedness it is just how it is. You are drowning into your reasoning. For example: the pussycatdolls. All the groups that are created in reality show. No matter what tricky reasoning you might oppose commercial music is a product made to sell.
jasmincar wrote:
hummmm. If you don’t like complex art then maybe you just don’t like art. It is like if you like better a child drawing instead of a picasso painting. But it is the same thing, it only depends of the criteria. incredibly shortsighted.
Or maybe art that’s not complex structurally or in a tanglible way may be complex conceptually? Not all art is like a picasso painting. A lot of Pop Art comes to mind. Oh wait I forgot, YOU decide what’s art not anyone else. You’re damn right it depends on the criteria of the person experiencing the art. Nothing shortsighted about that.
it is still complex. It is organised in a way to make you experience a thrill. If the thrill is good that means the art is good.
Great, then if something is conceptually complex then maybe you should realize that those lyrics you so conveniently ignore may add concept to the music you find so simple. And given your understanding of the word ‘intellectual’ I would question your ability to understand these lyrics in their entirety even if you tried. This isn’t to be rude, it’s just that.
what do you don’t understand in getting a thrill from complex piece of art? You don’t enjoy the intellectual implication of a piece of art. And now you are trying to make a point with the fact the english is my second language…I could say that you don’t even have one but it’s not related so I’ll just say that you don’t make a point
jasmincar wrote:
No I’ll enjoy a good pop song that packs a message and is cleverly made on repeated listens. But again you said you don’t like lyrics, and your understanding of the Enlgish language seems to be the source of this disregard for the words. Sorry but a lot of the new thrills that come on those songs are from the lyrics, since many use music as a means of personal expression, just like a lot of other art.
jasmincar wrote:
No people do a lot of research, it’s just their tastes lead them to appreciate artists that express thing that they are familiar with. Again, you do not have a complete grasp of the English language, and seeming don’t like lyrics anyway.
people don’t do a lot of research. what are you saying is plain false and you know it. You are only trying to win this argumentation even if what you are saying is false. or if you really think what you are saying you need to observe to world a little bit.
I won’t go so far as to say you don’t get pop music since you said you listen for the music alone. But I will say you don’t get why other people get that music and have no right to calim they don’t get art because of that. The lyrics are a part of the art, you choose not to appreciate the dynamics of lyrics and music together. Fine, but if others do and choose their music accordingly, don’t claim they don’t get art. They just like art that your don’t like. That’s been my point entirely.
The dynamics of lyrics and music together is an organisation and it gives thrill. I am repeating but lyrics by themselves on paper are not music.
Your point is that everything is subjective and most people chose to listen to the radio because it is the art they like even if they all know what they are not exposed too and that they get. I don’t know what to respond to that. Again if you really believe this and not only trying to win the internet argumentation you are a lunatic.
jasmincar wrote:
that’s bullshit. You want to make me believe that you liked really sophisticated stuff and that finally you choosed kanye over that. hahahaha. So if I focus really hard on something simple on the radio like everyone do finally it will reveal it’s hidden value? HAHAHAHA
See, you say this, but then I have to listen real hard to the stuff you recommend. See, you really aren’t in the same group as those cultural critics. They have readers to answer to, you are clearly in your first real argument over this stuff.
You said that you like these guys better than the hard stuff now you say you have to listen to the hard stuff? You say I am in my first real argument over this stuff, I say that you don’t know anything about music but you like to argue
The line where I said “but then I have to listen to the real hard stuff you recommend”, was sarcasm. VERY SIMPLE SARCASM. Again, there seems to be a language barrier here between this and your misuse of the word intellectual (damn near using that word for the opposite of what it meant).
You are really not trying. I was pointing out something simple you never even tought about creating music and the only thing you can come up with is the misuse of a word. You are not even debating the whole thing (understandable because you just don’t know). I know you will come up with a little thing I wrote and try to point something with twisted reasoning just to argue but in fact you know that you don’t know
This is why you so handily don’t want to accept that lyrics to add an element to pop music, and use that to denounce it’s status as art. But then why judge other people who choose to appreciate the music for it’s lyrics AS WELL. You have trouble with English, so you listen to music by English artists for the music alone. No one told you that you didn’t appreciate art, all I said was that you had no right to tell other people they didn’t.
It’s obvious some people don’t appreciate art. What are you trying to say is that every one in the world gets fine art. Your whole theory that pop music is art because of it’s lyric is bad from the start. Most songs have lyrics such as ‘‘My hump my hump my hump my hump my lovely lady hump’’ and you are trying to make this an art. You are intellectually dishonest.
And Frank Zappa seems to be a very sarcastic, ironic person too. There’s a good chanced you have ignored a large part of what his music was about, whether he put an effort into it or not. But I never told you you didn’t get it, other than saying by the stndards you place on others you would be considered someone who didn’t get it. I personally think it’s fine that you like him without understanding his lyrics.
If you really knew FZ you would know what are you saying is completely off the track.
The fact that you couldn’t understand a simple sarcastic comment should open your eyes to what you may be missing in pop music. And if you aren’t taking that into account, you shouldn’t tell people they are not qualified to appreciate art. That idea could easily be turned around on you since you have trouble with the English language and still judge music that is heavily dependent on the words. Maybe you’re not qualified to appreciate the art that is pop music?[/quote]
yeah so every pop music is sarcastic and there is really something in it that I dont get…your whole argumentation is dirt. You’ll never admit it but you are only trying to not lose your face. Then you start pointing about my english seeing that you cant get away with music. Really even if you take this for 10 pages long you are still off the track
Oh and on a side note, relativism is worthless. Saying there is no bad music, only music you dislike is crap. As worthless as saying there is no good or bad, only morals that are right for each group of people.
Here I’m getting too lazy to use separate quotes too…
[quote]jasmincar wrote:
LOL . Art music - Wikipedia
you fail at musicology. It is like an ignorant trying to argue about physic with a someone who has a phd. (ok maybe not that much maybe just a college education)
Great. So you avoid critics, because other peoples opinions do not matter. But then you post a wikipedia article that is can be written by anyone and is susceptible to many biases that occur with established publications.
As I said a dozen of time what I like is music. I don’t understand the lyrics when I first hear them but it doesnt do any difference. When I read them after I dont get a new thrill. You are basing your argumentation on things that don’t exist, because you never experienced it yourself. Your whole reasoning is standing on nothing. I am more connected than you with other fans and there is no powerful art in lyrics. again you are inventing stuff for the purpose of not losing your face
Great, but a good part of Mr. Zappa’s work is his concepts and lyrics. So by your own standards you are not capable of fully grasping his art since you disregard this part of his work. You only like the music. From that very wikipedia article you linked they mention ‘art music’ mixing with popular music. Guess who’s a big figure in that? FRANK ZAPPA. And you do not accept a big part of his art music since a big part of it combines elements with elements of pop music. So not by my standards, but by yours, you are not qualified to like Frank Zappa and you do not know about his art. You can keep claiming you don’t care about lyrics, but you just shot yourself in the foot with that link. Frank Zappa is exactly what they were talking about in that article and apparently you don’t fully grasp his work and never will because you cannot grasp the experimentation he did with pop music elements.
great. So what? All this stuff is still weak to me and any of the serious music listener
It’s simple, you don’t get to decide who the serious music listeners are, nor do I. The critics were there to frustrate you with your own notion of qualified listeners and it seems it worked. Keep dismissing their work, just remember that all you have is an opinion, not rules.
first of all: ‘‘critics’’ appreciate music for a living. How does that turn into a living? There must be something to sell. And as I said I never readed any critics and I dont care. You are bringing something I never even came close to mentionning and you are trying to do a point with the fact that I used the word ‘‘intellectual’’ to illustrate a concept of creating art that in the end wasnt intellectual (it is artistic). what the fuck. What are you trying to do?
They are not paid for that poll from what I know. That’s why I linked it, it was devoid of commercial influence. Again, the critics were brought up since you didn’t know what the word intellectual meant and tried using it to describe the way you listened to music. All in the efforts to denounce other people’s opinions on art. If you want I won’t bring up the critics anymore, just apologize for using the word intellectual in the wrong, no scratch that-opposite way from the way it should be, k :)?
No. When I was a kid I liked pop music. It didnt learned to like it, it was just catchy and easy. What are you trying to defend is non-sense
There is much more to that pop music than you understood as a kid, and understand now. Again, you don’t even listen to lyrics, so by your standards you are not in the position to call pop simple. It’s only simple sonically [not always], but it’s big on concept and lyrics when done right.
what do you don’t understand in getting a thrill from complex piece of art? You don’t enjoy the intellectual implication of a piece of art. And now you are trying to make a point with the fact the english is my second language…I could say that you don’t even have one but it’s not related so I’ll just say that you don’t make a point
For fucks sake stop using the word intellectual, wht you described in an earlier post is NOT intellectual appreciation of art. It’s appreciating it the same damn way most people do. That’s why I keep questioning your English. You described your appreciation as just ‘in your head’ and something you ‘feel’. That’s not intellectual. I went into this more in my second post that you haven’t replied to.
No I’ll enjoy a good pop song that packs a message and is cleverly made on repeated listens. But again you said you don’t like lyrics, and your understanding of the Enlgish language seems to be the source of this disregard for the words. Sorry but a lot of the new thrills that come on those songs are from the lyrics, since many use music as a means of personal expression, just like a lot of other art.
*****Hey I’m still waiting for the reply to this
people don’t do a lot of research. what are you saying is plain false and you know it. You are only trying to win this argumentation even if what you are saying is false. or if you really think what you are saying you need to observe to world a little bit.
No they definitely do, they just don’t like “serious music” as you define it. Your views are not the law, I hope that this point has been driven home.
I won’t go so far as to say you don’t get pop music since you said you listen for the music alone. But I will say you don’t get why other people get that music and have no right to calim they don’t get art because of that. The lyrics are a part of the art, you choose not to appreciate the dynamics of lyrics and music together. Fine, but if others do and choose their music accordingly, don’t claim they don’t get art. They just like art that your don’t like. That’s been my point entirely.
The dynamics of lyrics and music together is an organisation and it gives thrill. I am repeating but lyrics by themselves on paper are not music.
Your point is that everything is subjective and most people chose to listen to the radio because it is the art they like even if they all know what they are not exposed too and that they get. I don’t know what to respond to that. Again if you really believe this and not only trying to win the internet argumentation you are a lunatic.
No, my point is that pop music can be a serious form of art too. So you agree that “The dynamics of lyrics and music together is an organisation and it gives thrill”? Good, then you should appreciate the ‘thrill’ it gives others even if it doesn’t ‘thrill’ you. You agree that it’s an ‘organization’ which is another thing you seem to value in your art music? Good, so therefore you by your own standards aren’t ready to appreciate the art that is pop music. This sealed it bro, you agree that pop music can be art. And now if you wish to be consistent with your self-made rules, you shouldn’t disregard it as art, you should just realize you ‘don’t get it’ because the lyrics ‘fly above you’.
jasmincar wrote:
You are really not trying. I was pointing out something simple you never even tought about creating music and the only thing you can come up with is the misuse of a word. You are not even debating the whole thing (understandable because you just don’t know). I know you will come up with a little thing I wrote and try to point something with twisted reasoning just to argue but in fact you know that you don’t know
No, your whole argument was based on listening to music in an intellectual manner, and you defined ‘intellectual’ as the opposite of what it’s definition was. Look back at your earlier posts. You still haven’t responded to my second post.
It’s obvious some people don’t appreciate art. What are you trying to say is that every one in the world gets fine art. Your whole theory that pop music is art because of it’s lyric is bad from the start. Most songs have lyrics such as ‘‘My hump my hump my hump my hump my lovely lady hump’’ and you are trying to make this an art. You are intellectually dishonest.
No I’m trying to say that ‘powerful music’ can indeed be commercially viable as well. READ THE VERY FIRST POST I MADE IN RESPONSE TO ONE OF YOUR POSTS. What does it say?
There are indeed popular songs that can be appreciated as works of art. Why would you deny that just because a lot of pop may seem crass to you. This is why I call you close minded.
And Frank Zappa seems to be a very sarcastic, ironic person too. There’s a good chanced you have ignored a large part of what his music was about, whether he put an effort into it or not. But I never told you you didn’t get it, other than saying by the stndards you place on others you would be considered someone who didn’t get it. I personally think it’s fine that you like him without understanding his lyrics.
If you really knew FZ you would know what are you saying is completely off the track.
See the article you LINKED for a small description of how art musicians experimented with pop music to get why Frank’s lyrics mattered. And it’s not me, I’m sure you get Frank more than me, but his other followers and critics [yup] who have admired his work say this.
yeah so every pop music is sarcastic and there is really something in it that I dont get…your whole argumentation is dirt. You’ll never admit it but you are only trying to not lose your face. Then you start pointing about my english seeing that you cant get away with music. Really even if you take this for 10 pages long you are still off the track
Nope, but a lot of pop music is art as well. See above. Your English is a problem, it stops you from caring about the ‘dynamics of lyrics and music’ that you have just admitted is artistic by your standards.
[/quote]
Sorry about responding in the quotes, if you won’t make an effort I won’t either. Read the first post I made in response to yours where I asked why pop music can’t be artistic too. In the past few reponses you made, you have denounced lyrics, admitted they are part of the art->and that pop music is indeed artistic.
That’s all I wanted you to say. That line about the dynamics of lyrics and music being an organization and thrill was really all I needed. You kept mentioning that your music was an organization that is thrilling, and now you’ve admitted that pop songs have a dynamic that is also thrilling in that way. So you think that some very good pop songs are artistic, but not all? Good, so do I. I just wish you would say that earlier.
And feel free to respond to the points you missed anyway.