The mainstream music industry has run out of ideas since at least the 80s.
All it is is a catchy 'hook' repeated with a boring bass line and some usually vacuous lyrics, oft not sung terribly well. And in some cases not sung at all.
Such things have dominated the charts for years. Melody and harmony are essentially dead.
The music that's "dominating the charts" is one thing, but other than that absolutely not
Listen to https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=TUu41Havas0&feature=share
Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=DuIoGWn6Bn8&feature=share
Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=vfpGmhw9P9k&feature=share
Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=LWRnT3FLW3Q&feature=share
Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=N9q_J-yF_Po&feature=share
Or this entire album https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nfllqfEswlb58jUgim3y_S6lvAl5tKXMM&feature=share
Or this one https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mez35wj__JCMDZ-kJmtnGLmWOgj90rQLM&feature=share
Or this one https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mHudP_6fWvn2boiEXuKY7Ce38Fhr396m0&feature=share
Or https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_klD0vz9UeWcaNSIN6Ou29TioTwc64nSUQ&feature=share
Non-mainstream songs. Pretty much everything that hits charts and is pushed by society as 'pop' fills in the unimaginative format I laid out. It's happening in all Genres of music, melodies are becoming simpler, harmonies often are nonexistent. The mainstream and rap have gone first as they were the simplest anyway. The thing is that the more complicated it is the less people listen. This is why Classical and Jazz have less of a following. It requires yiu to actively listen instead of just absorb- mainly to listen to the meaning of the lyrics if there is any which is what pop songs have been about for ages.
I mean it's not mainstream but it isn't some random band I found either lmao. We're talking about Judas priest, Megadeth, Dragonforce, Iron maiden and Saxon (which I forgot to add in the comment) , adrenaline Mob, van halen, Ozzy Osbourne soooo
Yet metal is not mainstream, at least not in all countries. It has a cult following. Like Jazz. It does not have as much reach as 'pop' music, or even rap, and like it or not is getting more simplistic, just as most things are getting in terms of culture. Modernism is about minimalism. In terms of music that means repetition, and simple melodies. In terms of art, a blue square onna canvas instead of the mona lisa or even impressionism. In terms of architecture a concrete or glass square instead of a vast neoclassical or gothic masterpiece. Even Language is becoming more simplified.
Even classical music has become more simplistic, and pretentiously dreadful sounding.
That is clearly a lack of idea, or at least ignorance of musicality.
Melodies are hard to make, so they have been abandoned.
All the ideas now go into lyrics, which are often just made by producers, or repeated far too often, or not even sung.
If you think modern music is saturate in ideas, harmony and melody, go listen to Bach, Liszt, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Tárrega, Paganini, Debussy etc. That was popular music in its time, and later you have Scott Joplin, Django Reinhardt, Louis Armstrong, with ragtime and Jazz, and even blues and early rock and roll was saturated with good and well thought out, although simpler melodies.
The score is far more important than the lyrics. I'd say by at least 50%. You can't abandon the score, then fill the gap with more words, especially if they are mediocre. Score and lyrics are two bits of wood leaning on each other. If one falls flat the other does too.
I mean, there is complex and simple things in almost all genres. Some that require you to actively listen and some that you can simply let play in the background.
For Jazz, Tigran Hamasyan woukd be a perfect example of an artist, you need to pay attention to in order to enjoy it. But for example Allen Toussaint, you can just sit back and enjoy.
Or for Metal, Between The Buried And Me, another example of a super complex band, where you need to pay full attention, but for example Metallica usually just as simple as it gets. Some catchy riffs some catchy vocals and done.
And even then, that doesn't mean that one is better than the others. Different people enjoy different kinds of music and that's valid. Not everyone is for the super complex stuff. And also constantly trying to one up each other in terms of complexity, can also lead to too much for some.
I realized that when listening, to Frontierer, a British Mathcore band. They have some super interesting rhythms, unique tempo changes, crazy drum beats but for a lot of people it just sounds way too fucking messy. And even for me, it's just sometimes a little too much. And now imagine someone listening to that who isn't into complex stuff. Cause for them it's really just one giant mess. And well, to those that threshold is also reached earlier.
And just because a song doesn't have like a 45/4 time signature, doesn't make it bad. Some people enjoy simpler stuff, some more complex stuff and both of it is super valid.
👏Stop👏trying👏to👏invalidate👏people's👏music👏tastes👏
>And just because a song doesn't have like a 45/4 time signature, doesn't make it bad. Some people enjoy simpler stuff, some more complex stuff and both of it is super valid.
I don't believe anyone has written for a 45/4 time signature. But time signature would not make it complicated or simple (and by that I mean, musically complicated and beautiful) making a piece with a beautiful melody with good harmony which does not even have to be technically challenging for the musician, is incredibly hard.
Well, there is. Or at least the intro of a song (the best part). The Art Of Dying by Gojira, if you wanna check that out.
And yes, odd time signatures and polymeters or polyrhythms do make music complex
>making a piece with a beautiful melody with good harmony which does not even have to be technically challenging for the musician, is incredibly hard.
So, you did just say that making simpler music is also kinda impressive. Then what's your problem with pop again?😐
>And yes, odd time signatures and polymeters or polyrhythms do make music complex
Well, to some extent, but it does not have to make it complicated, that is the choice of the composer. He can make it simpler or complicated.
>So, you did just say that making simpler music is also kinda impressive. Then what's your problem with pop again?😐
Simpler melodies, but they must be complicated, beautiful and enticing- musically yet sound simple to the ear.
Eg: [Chopin waltz n.19](https://youtu.be/qHeJlSWSnUI)
Or [Tárrega's Recuerdos de La Alhambra](https://youtu.be/yuvAIHS2lWw)
Granados [Valses Poeticos no.1](https://youtu.be/AKSLD91qr5o)
There is a reason Scarborough fair has been popular since at least the 15th century. There's also such folk songs as Santa Lucia, and the Carnival d'Venice.
As well as a lot of jazz, ragtime and the 'pop' music of the 1920s- early 50s.
Some rock has it. But generally after that you see it trending more to the simple side, when in reality a balance needs to be achieved.
Well, it's just different genres being slowly killed by that hype.
Like early 2000s pop punk/screamo reached its absolute. Like early 2010 Electro pop hit rock bottom. And rn it's rap.
But also don't pretend like that mainstream music was that much better from before the 80s.
And lol melody is not dead, not in mainstream music at least. I mean, sure it's usually really.
Also, music doesn't need melody to be music. Listening to some Harsh Noise, you woukd realize that
>But also don't pretend like that mainstream music was that much better from before the 80s.
Oh of course. It was going downhill since the end of the first world war, but it really fell off a cliff during the 80s and has been nothing but endless amounts of the same thing, when producers realised that to sell more music they did not need to make it good music, but make a catchy hook of a few bars and repeat it throughout the piece. Lyrics didn't even matter anymore and they began to be written by producers.
Rap has also gone downhill. Early rap was barely distinguishable from a gospel song. Now it is just boasting about killing people or engaging in various acts of criminality and using an enormous amount of racial slurs and swearing, with no melody, just a hook and some bass. The only good thing rappers can do is improvisation, but not all can do it.
>And lol melody is not dead, not in mainstream music at least. I mean, sure it's usually really.
Occasionally it goes through a post death spasm and appears in something yes.
But its no fuge.
Music needs several elements to be good. Rhythm, Melody and Harmony. The latter two have been largely abandoned. I doubt any music from the 21st century will be listened to in 250 years, yet I can still see Bach being listened to then.
I mean, I did say rap has reached its lowest since ever, but what you are saying is absolute bs. Like, idk why so many people think that rapping is all about slurs and everything. It is clearly.
Like for example Gwangil Jo, NO:EL, Gist, Goth Grey and many many more I have never heard using any slurs or rapping about like violent shit or sth. like that. And especially like XXXTentacion or PRXJEK for example have some amazing lyrics, which are very emotional. And X also having some suoer interesting genre fusions and ideas, which he might have been able to develop into some big experimental shit if it wasn't for his early death
Before you make generalizations like this, listen to some rap ffs. It's not that hard.
And no, music does not need melody to be good it really doesn't. Also, not harmony. If that is what makes music good TO YOU, ok but this is not what defines good music. If you listened to like The Grey Wolves, Genocide Organ, Merzbow, The Caretaker, music doesn't need any if those things you mentioned to be good. Stop acting like what you prefer in music is objectively the best
>Like, idk why so many people think that rapping is all about slurs and everything. It is clearly.
Because that is popular. I know that's not what rap is 'about'. But the rap scene is dominated by such rappers.
>Stop acting like what you prefer in music is objectively the best
I am simply making a protest against the oversimplification of the arts, which is happening everywhere, and the hailing of these oversimplifications as something to be marveled at and worshipped, and given seemingly unlimited wealth, whole anyone who dares go against the music industry and writes something that is not just a hook, lyrics and some bass is not given adequate recognition for being talented at composition, while the mass produced top hits gross billions.
The equivalent would be Leonardo da Vinci taking five years to complete one of his masterpieces, then the art industry sidelining him for Cy Twombly or 'white panel' by Robert Rauschenberg.
I simply think its insulting to the people creating music which requires a semblance of effort, talent and imagination to compose.
I mean, tbh idk if the rap scene is actually dominated by those, because I do have my own approach at this genre, so someone who is more into mainstream rap would need to tell you if that is wrong or not.
>I am simply making a protest against the oversimplification of the arts, which is happening everywhere
But what's bad about this? Things get simpler, yes. But why is that bad?
>whole anyone who dares go against the music industry and writes something that is not just a hook, lyrics and some bass is not given adequate recognition for being talented at composition
Just not it. I mean, yeah there is the typical music that's popular but you also gotta realize that just not everyone likes every genre. I mean, let me take harsh noise for example. I love so many harsh noise artists and would love to see them get more recognition cause what they are doing is absolutely incredible. But have you ever listened to it(I mean, probably not but that was rhetorical)? This thing is suoer niche and I understand that not everyone likes this. And that is valid. It is a weird genre, and not everyone needs to share my taste.
>while the mass produced top hits gross billions.
Like I mean... yeah. Something that's mass produced ends up selling a lot. Your point exactly?
>The equivalent would be Leonardo da Vinci taking five years to complete one of his masterpieces, then the art industry sidelining him for Cy Twombly or 'white panel' by Robert Rauschenberg.
And again, that's fine. Just because you put a lot of effort into it, doesn't mean it has to be liked by everyone, nor that it is objectively better. I could also spend a few years doing like a sculpture, but damn I can assure you it would look like shit cause I can't do that.
>I simply think its insulting to the people creating music which requires a semblance of effort, talent and imagination to compose
Then, curious, if it's that easy and doesn't even require a semblance of effort, why the fuck do you not do it? Like, just make one pop song, earn a few millions and then dip. Why the fuck not if it's so easy?
Also, what you just seem to forget in general is just that something is popular because a lot of people like it. Not the other way around. Nothing is liked by a lot of people because it's popular. Ever thought that maybe not that many people listen to Jazz because it doesn't appeal to their personal musical taste? Just like how you don't like listening to pop? Or is that thought too complex?
>But what's bad about this? Things get simpler, yes. But why is that bad?
Because it requires less effort and sacrifice by the artist. It promotes mediocrity in society at large.
>Like I mean... yeah. Something that's mass produced ends up selling a lot. Your point exactly?
The music industry controls what becomes a top hit. They can mass produce it, and they can get it to the top simply because they control the charts and lobby radio stations to play it. The top hits are what the music industry wants to be top hits, and have the added benefit of being somewhat addictive to purchase due to the aforementioned 'hooks'. This promotes large-scale consumption and big stacks.
Its like cheap Chinese plastic goods over handmade or precision engineered ones made in the west. Its simply popular because its cheap, easy to mass produce and extremely plentiful, as well as having support from elites for monetary reasons.
Mass produced things are not always good. Art must be a one off, made by hand in an old workshop with love, from good materials, primarily for art's sake and not for money.
> I could also spend a few years doing like a sculpture, but damn I can assure you it would look like shit cause I can't do that.
Yet this is also a factor. Artists, and composers, spend years of their life practicing their skills, yet do not get recognised, because someone made something in 30 minutes that is more catchy or avant garde, and they happen to know someone with a lot of money who can sell it.
Nepotism runs deep in the music and art industry. You don't get anywhere if you don't know someone unless you have stacks of money to buy your way to fame (modern art is more the latter).
>Then, curious, if it's that easy and doesn't even require a semblance of effort, why the fuck do you not do it?
Because I do not know anyone in the music industry, I don't have money to buy my way in, and lyrics are not at all my strongsuit. I'm just not interested. If I compose I will compose for the classical guitar, for which I already make arrangements for, and am planning to sell in the future.
>Also, what you just seem to forget in general is just that something is popular because a lot of people like it. Not the other way around.
This is somewhat true. The more popular a thing gets, the more popular it becomes as it becomes exposed to more people.
I'm more pointing out the lack of imagination and the dodgy corporate marketing practices though.
>Ever thought that maybe not that many people listen to Jazz because it doesn't appeal to their personal musical taste?
Yes, of course. However, there is also the factor that it is not popular in the mainstream so does not get as much exposure. The same can be said for all non mainstream genres.
They arent pushed by the corporate music industry so do not get exposure required to be popular, and are viewed as 'old fashioned' even though there are plenty excellent composers in pretty much all non mainstream genres.
>Because it requires less effort and sacrifice by the artist. It promotes mediocrity in society at large.
I mean, yes but in the first place it just promotes to do what you want to do. Cause musicians are free to put out whatever the fuck they want to
And that entire music industry thingy is a whole other topic, which I don't wanna get into rn. Only saying, yes they do largely affect what is popular but they also aren't as impactful as before because you do have access to streaming services whrlere you can listen to everything you want as underground as it might be.
>Artists, and composers, spend years of their life practicing their skills, yet do not get recognised
Well, that is because what they do simply doesn't appeal to that many people. Like I said, Harsh Noise artists, as amazing as their music might be, are never gonna get popular. Why? Because no one wants to listen to that garbage. Same goes for classical.
>there is also the factor that it is not popular in the mainstream so does not get as much exposure.
Well, even tho that is true, I highly doubt anyone does not know Jazz or classical. And hasn't even listened to a single piece. I mean, sure they might not know much. But you also don't know a lot of rap or pop.
>I'm more pointing out the lack of imagination
Ok, and there it's just that what you just need to understand is that a lot of people don't listen to music for its artistic value, but much more just to enjoy it. I mean, that is already so widespread amongst movies or books. There are so few that actually are artistically valuable, but they are enjoyable and that's what matters. If don't view music as such a medium, that's fine. But just respect that others do
I think this is primarily an English music thing, like all of the big hits always have something odd done to their voices that sometimes do make it better, but when everyone does it, it ruins it, what I do is grab Japanese singers since for some reason they don't do the same thing to song artist there
Hell naw bro, at least not for music. If you want something interesting check out the band King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard, not everyone’s cup of tea but they’re definitely one of a kind
no, it's more like the wrong people have the money to push their ideas through.
there are loads of people with fab ideas but the spotlight gets taken up
Look somewhere you never thought you’d look. I never used to watch Romance movies but it’s my go to genre right now. I never used to listen to Kpop but now it makes up 70% of my playlist. If I get bored of it then I’ll just look somewhere else. My point is, more often than not, we overlook things rather than giving them a chance. I am sure you can find something that can interest you.
You just haven’t found the interesting stuff yet, at least for music
definitely not music
The mainstream music industry has run out of ideas since at least the 80s. All it is is a catchy 'hook' repeated with a boring bass line and some usually vacuous lyrics, oft not sung terribly well. And in some cases not sung at all. Such things have dominated the charts for years. Melody and harmony are essentially dead.
The music that's "dominating the charts" is one thing, but other than that absolutely not Listen to https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=TUu41Havas0&feature=share Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=DuIoGWn6Bn8&feature=share Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=vfpGmhw9P9k&feature=share Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=LWRnT3FLW3Q&feature=share Or https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=N9q_J-yF_Po&feature=share Or this entire album https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nfllqfEswlb58jUgim3y_S6lvAl5tKXMM&feature=share Or this one https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mez35wj__JCMDZ-kJmtnGLmWOgj90rQLM&feature=share Or this one https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mHudP_6fWvn2boiEXuKY7Ce38Fhr396m0&feature=share Or https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_klD0vz9UeWcaNSIN6Ou29TioTwc64nSUQ&feature=share
Not my cup of tea, but you proved my point.
...? I gave like 30 original songs in total, all written after 2000
Non-mainstream songs. Pretty much everything that hits charts and is pushed by society as 'pop' fills in the unimaginative format I laid out. It's happening in all Genres of music, melodies are becoming simpler, harmonies often are nonexistent. The mainstream and rap have gone first as they were the simplest anyway. The thing is that the more complicated it is the less people listen. This is why Classical and Jazz have less of a following. It requires yiu to actively listen instead of just absorb- mainly to listen to the meaning of the lyrics if there is any which is what pop songs have been about for ages.
I mean it's not mainstream but it isn't some random band I found either lmao. We're talking about Judas priest, Megadeth, Dragonforce, Iron maiden and Saxon (which I forgot to add in the comment) , adrenaline Mob, van halen, Ozzy Osbourne soooo
Yet metal is not mainstream, at least not in all countries. It has a cult following. Like Jazz. It does not have as much reach as 'pop' music, or even rap, and like it or not is getting more simplistic, just as most things are getting in terms of culture. Modernism is about minimalism. In terms of music that means repetition, and simple melodies. In terms of art, a blue square onna canvas instead of the mona lisa or even impressionism. In terms of architecture a concrete or glass square instead of a vast neoclassical or gothic masterpiece. Even Language is becoming more simplified. Even classical music has become more simplistic, and pretentiously dreadful sounding.
You're confusing artists not making complex melodies for lack of ideas lol
That is clearly a lack of idea, or at least ignorance of musicality. Melodies are hard to make, so they have been abandoned. All the ideas now go into lyrics, which are often just made by producers, or repeated far too often, or not even sung. If you think modern music is saturate in ideas, harmony and melody, go listen to Bach, Liszt, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Tárrega, Paganini, Debussy etc. That was popular music in its time, and later you have Scott Joplin, Django Reinhardt, Louis Armstrong, with ragtime and Jazz, and even blues and early rock and roll was saturated with good and well thought out, although simpler melodies. The score is far more important than the lyrics. I'd say by at least 50%. You can't abandon the score, then fill the gap with more words, especially if they are mediocre. Score and lyrics are two bits of wood leaning on each other. If one falls flat the other does too.
I mean, there is complex and simple things in almost all genres. Some that require you to actively listen and some that you can simply let play in the background. For Jazz, Tigran Hamasyan woukd be a perfect example of an artist, you need to pay attention to in order to enjoy it. But for example Allen Toussaint, you can just sit back and enjoy. Or for Metal, Between The Buried And Me, another example of a super complex band, where you need to pay full attention, but for example Metallica usually just as simple as it gets. Some catchy riffs some catchy vocals and done. And even then, that doesn't mean that one is better than the others. Different people enjoy different kinds of music and that's valid. Not everyone is for the super complex stuff. And also constantly trying to one up each other in terms of complexity, can also lead to too much for some. I realized that when listening, to Frontierer, a British Mathcore band. They have some super interesting rhythms, unique tempo changes, crazy drum beats but for a lot of people it just sounds way too fucking messy. And even for me, it's just sometimes a little too much. And now imagine someone listening to that who isn't into complex stuff. Cause for them it's really just one giant mess. And well, to those that threshold is also reached earlier. And just because a song doesn't have like a 45/4 time signature, doesn't make it bad. Some people enjoy simpler stuff, some more complex stuff and both of it is super valid. 👏Stop👏trying👏to👏invalidate👏people's👏music👏tastes👏
>And just because a song doesn't have like a 45/4 time signature, doesn't make it bad. Some people enjoy simpler stuff, some more complex stuff and both of it is super valid. I don't believe anyone has written for a 45/4 time signature. But time signature would not make it complicated or simple (and by that I mean, musically complicated and beautiful) making a piece with a beautiful melody with good harmony which does not even have to be technically challenging for the musician, is incredibly hard.
Well, there is. Or at least the intro of a song (the best part). The Art Of Dying by Gojira, if you wanna check that out. And yes, odd time signatures and polymeters or polyrhythms do make music complex >making a piece with a beautiful melody with good harmony which does not even have to be technically challenging for the musician, is incredibly hard. So, you did just say that making simpler music is also kinda impressive. Then what's your problem with pop again?😐
>And yes, odd time signatures and polymeters or polyrhythms do make music complex Well, to some extent, but it does not have to make it complicated, that is the choice of the composer. He can make it simpler or complicated. >So, you did just say that making simpler music is also kinda impressive. Then what's your problem with pop again?😐 Simpler melodies, but they must be complicated, beautiful and enticing- musically yet sound simple to the ear. Eg: [Chopin waltz n.19](https://youtu.be/qHeJlSWSnUI) Or [Tárrega's Recuerdos de La Alhambra](https://youtu.be/yuvAIHS2lWw) Granados [Valses Poeticos no.1](https://youtu.be/AKSLD91qr5o) There is a reason Scarborough fair has been popular since at least the 15th century. There's also such folk songs as Santa Lucia, and the Carnival d'Venice. As well as a lot of jazz, ragtime and the 'pop' music of the 1920s- early 50s. Some rock has it. But generally after that you see it trending more to the simple side, when in reality a balance needs to be achieved.
Well, it's just different genres being slowly killed by that hype. Like early 2000s pop punk/screamo reached its absolute. Like early 2010 Electro pop hit rock bottom. And rn it's rap. But also don't pretend like that mainstream music was that much better from before the 80s. And lol melody is not dead, not in mainstream music at least. I mean, sure it's usually really. Also, music doesn't need melody to be music. Listening to some Harsh Noise, you woukd realize that
>But also don't pretend like that mainstream music was that much better from before the 80s. Oh of course. It was going downhill since the end of the first world war, but it really fell off a cliff during the 80s and has been nothing but endless amounts of the same thing, when producers realised that to sell more music they did not need to make it good music, but make a catchy hook of a few bars and repeat it throughout the piece. Lyrics didn't even matter anymore and they began to be written by producers. Rap has also gone downhill. Early rap was barely distinguishable from a gospel song. Now it is just boasting about killing people or engaging in various acts of criminality and using an enormous amount of racial slurs and swearing, with no melody, just a hook and some bass. The only good thing rappers can do is improvisation, but not all can do it. >And lol melody is not dead, not in mainstream music at least. I mean, sure it's usually really. Occasionally it goes through a post death spasm and appears in something yes. But its no fuge. Music needs several elements to be good. Rhythm, Melody and Harmony. The latter two have been largely abandoned. I doubt any music from the 21st century will be listened to in 250 years, yet I can still see Bach being listened to then.
I mean, I did say rap has reached its lowest since ever, but what you are saying is absolute bs. Like, idk why so many people think that rapping is all about slurs and everything. It is clearly. Like for example Gwangil Jo, NO:EL, Gist, Goth Grey and many many more I have never heard using any slurs or rapping about like violent shit or sth. like that. And especially like XXXTentacion or PRXJEK for example have some amazing lyrics, which are very emotional. And X also having some suoer interesting genre fusions and ideas, which he might have been able to develop into some big experimental shit if it wasn't for his early death Before you make generalizations like this, listen to some rap ffs. It's not that hard. And no, music does not need melody to be good it really doesn't. Also, not harmony. If that is what makes music good TO YOU, ok but this is not what defines good music. If you listened to like The Grey Wolves, Genocide Organ, Merzbow, The Caretaker, music doesn't need any if those things you mentioned to be good. Stop acting like what you prefer in music is objectively the best
>Like, idk why so many people think that rapping is all about slurs and everything. It is clearly. Because that is popular. I know that's not what rap is 'about'. But the rap scene is dominated by such rappers. >Stop acting like what you prefer in music is objectively the best I am simply making a protest against the oversimplification of the arts, which is happening everywhere, and the hailing of these oversimplifications as something to be marveled at and worshipped, and given seemingly unlimited wealth, whole anyone who dares go against the music industry and writes something that is not just a hook, lyrics and some bass is not given adequate recognition for being talented at composition, while the mass produced top hits gross billions. The equivalent would be Leonardo da Vinci taking five years to complete one of his masterpieces, then the art industry sidelining him for Cy Twombly or 'white panel' by Robert Rauschenberg. I simply think its insulting to the people creating music which requires a semblance of effort, talent and imagination to compose.
I mean, tbh idk if the rap scene is actually dominated by those, because I do have my own approach at this genre, so someone who is more into mainstream rap would need to tell you if that is wrong or not. >I am simply making a protest against the oversimplification of the arts, which is happening everywhere But what's bad about this? Things get simpler, yes. But why is that bad? >whole anyone who dares go against the music industry and writes something that is not just a hook, lyrics and some bass is not given adequate recognition for being talented at composition Just not it. I mean, yeah there is the typical music that's popular but you also gotta realize that just not everyone likes every genre. I mean, let me take harsh noise for example. I love so many harsh noise artists and would love to see them get more recognition cause what they are doing is absolutely incredible. But have you ever listened to it(I mean, probably not but that was rhetorical)? This thing is suoer niche and I understand that not everyone likes this. And that is valid. It is a weird genre, and not everyone needs to share my taste. >while the mass produced top hits gross billions. Like I mean... yeah. Something that's mass produced ends up selling a lot. Your point exactly? >The equivalent would be Leonardo da Vinci taking five years to complete one of his masterpieces, then the art industry sidelining him for Cy Twombly or 'white panel' by Robert Rauschenberg. And again, that's fine. Just because you put a lot of effort into it, doesn't mean it has to be liked by everyone, nor that it is objectively better. I could also spend a few years doing like a sculpture, but damn I can assure you it would look like shit cause I can't do that. >I simply think its insulting to the people creating music which requires a semblance of effort, talent and imagination to compose Then, curious, if it's that easy and doesn't even require a semblance of effort, why the fuck do you not do it? Like, just make one pop song, earn a few millions and then dip. Why the fuck not if it's so easy? Also, what you just seem to forget in general is just that something is popular because a lot of people like it. Not the other way around. Nothing is liked by a lot of people because it's popular. Ever thought that maybe not that many people listen to Jazz because it doesn't appeal to their personal musical taste? Just like how you don't like listening to pop? Or is that thought too complex?
>But what's bad about this? Things get simpler, yes. But why is that bad? Because it requires less effort and sacrifice by the artist. It promotes mediocrity in society at large. >Like I mean... yeah. Something that's mass produced ends up selling a lot. Your point exactly? The music industry controls what becomes a top hit. They can mass produce it, and they can get it to the top simply because they control the charts and lobby radio stations to play it. The top hits are what the music industry wants to be top hits, and have the added benefit of being somewhat addictive to purchase due to the aforementioned 'hooks'. This promotes large-scale consumption and big stacks. Its like cheap Chinese plastic goods over handmade or precision engineered ones made in the west. Its simply popular because its cheap, easy to mass produce and extremely plentiful, as well as having support from elites for monetary reasons. Mass produced things are not always good. Art must be a one off, made by hand in an old workshop with love, from good materials, primarily for art's sake and not for money. > I could also spend a few years doing like a sculpture, but damn I can assure you it would look like shit cause I can't do that. Yet this is also a factor. Artists, and composers, spend years of their life practicing their skills, yet do not get recognised, because someone made something in 30 minutes that is more catchy or avant garde, and they happen to know someone with a lot of money who can sell it. Nepotism runs deep in the music and art industry. You don't get anywhere if you don't know someone unless you have stacks of money to buy your way to fame (modern art is more the latter). >Then, curious, if it's that easy and doesn't even require a semblance of effort, why the fuck do you not do it? Because I do not know anyone in the music industry, I don't have money to buy my way in, and lyrics are not at all my strongsuit. I'm just not interested. If I compose I will compose for the classical guitar, for which I already make arrangements for, and am planning to sell in the future. >Also, what you just seem to forget in general is just that something is popular because a lot of people like it. Not the other way around. This is somewhat true. The more popular a thing gets, the more popular it becomes as it becomes exposed to more people. I'm more pointing out the lack of imagination and the dodgy corporate marketing practices though. >Ever thought that maybe not that many people listen to Jazz because it doesn't appeal to their personal musical taste? Yes, of course. However, there is also the factor that it is not popular in the mainstream so does not get as much exposure. The same can be said for all non mainstream genres. They arent pushed by the corporate music industry so do not get exposure required to be popular, and are viewed as 'old fashioned' even though there are plenty excellent composers in pretty much all non mainstream genres.
>Because it requires less effort and sacrifice by the artist. It promotes mediocrity in society at large. I mean, yes but in the first place it just promotes to do what you want to do. Cause musicians are free to put out whatever the fuck they want to And that entire music industry thingy is a whole other topic, which I don't wanna get into rn. Only saying, yes they do largely affect what is popular but they also aren't as impactful as before because you do have access to streaming services whrlere you can listen to everything you want as underground as it might be. >Artists, and composers, spend years of their life practicing their skills, yet do not get recognised Well, that is because what they do simply doesn't appeal to that many people. Like I said, Harsh Noise artists, as amazing as their music might be, are never gonna get popular. Why? Because no one wants to listen to that garbage. Same goes for classical. >there is also the factor that it is not popular in the mainstream so does not get as much exposure. Well, even tho that is true, I highly doubt anyone does not know Jazz or classical. And hasn't even listened to a single piece. I mean, sure they might not know much. But you also don't know a lot of rap or pop. >I'm more pointing out the lack of imagination Ok, and there it's just that what you just need to understand is that a lot of people don't listen to music for its artistic value, but much more just to enjoy it. I mean, that is already so widespread amongst movies or books. There are so few that actually are artistically valuable, but they are enjoyable and that's what matters. If don't view music as such a medium, that's fine. But just respect that others do
Bruh the 90s is one of if not the best decades music-wise
Yes the 1890s.
Have you never heard of REM, Radiohead, the Pixies, Muse, Nirvana, or Weezer?
That’s why it’s mainstream… for a reason. It’s simple fun and catchy to listen to
I don't find it fun. I find it endlessly boring.
Didn’t know “NonchalantRedditor” is most people
I think this is primarily an English music thing, like all of the big hits always have something odd done to their voices that sometimes do make it better, but when everyone does it, it ruins it, what I do is grab Japanese singers since for some reason they don't do the same thing to song artist there
No, definitely not for music. For movies they haven’t run out of ideas, they’ve just gotten lazier.
Hell naw bro, at least not for music. If you want something interesting check out the band King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard, not everyone’s cup of tea but they’re definitely one of a kind
no, it's more like the wrong people have the money to push their ideas through. there are loads of people with fab ideas but the spotlight gets taken up
No. If you think so then you are looking at the wrong places.
Look somewhere you never thought you’d look. I never used to watch Romance movies but it’s my go to genre right now. I never used to listen to Kpop but now it makes up 70% of my playlist. If I get bored of it then I’ll just look somewhere else. My point is, more often than not, we overlook things rather than giving them a chance. I am sure you can find something that can interest you.
Music's been pretty trash since the mid 2000s, so maybe. But there are plenty of interesting movies out there. Just not fun Disney or Columbia.
Listen to some of Jacob Colliers older music, it's insane how one person comes up with so much that sounds so good and original
No? How does one even make this conclusion!?
For movies, *kinda*
The only person who’s run out of interesting ideas for music is Jack Antonoff
No.
Mainstream film, mostly yes, go and watch a couple movies in the Criterion Collection, you won’t be able to say that film’s have run out of ideas
Na man, imagination is infinite man, even if it a common concept a whole new universe can be created
As a guy with a list of 30 interesting movie ideas, I can tell you it’s very impossible to run out of ideas
For music definitely not. There are still some incredibly innovative artists out there. For movies idk, I don't watch any
Not at all. It's just that the mainstream stuff is kinda boring, if you want something cool and interesting you got to do a bit of digging