Popular music.

[Sirrus]

Recently, I've been reflecting on the nature of popular music and I've been wondering what you guys might think about this.

I think that modern mainstream artists aren't necessarily talented, but have figured out what people want out of music and how to deliver and market this music.

This makes me think that it is impossible for an artist to be both accepted by the mainstream and to truly do their own thing musically. Which also makes me wonder what created the concept of "mainstream" because their are plenty of bands that are popular but definitely not mainstream.

Which leads me to think that if the mainstream decides whether or not music is good, is there any way to objectively measure the quality of music? Therein is the broader question, is music good because it is good, or is it good because a majority of people say it's good?

If you answered the latter, realize that, like anything, music can be marketed and sold along with a certain lifestyle and opinion. If popular music is popular only because a majority of people say it is popular, and if people can be made to think a certain way or want certain things through marketing, is it really even music any more? Can it really still be called a creative venture?

I'm done for now. Tell me what you think if you can make sense of my ramblings.

[Ad Bot]

[Bones]

Did you make this because of the Justin Beiber thread?

On Topic: You said how to measure how good music is, if it can be good, correct? You can determine if you like the music, but that is an opinion.

[Sirrus]

A little bit.

[Illidan]

Finally I agree with you on something related to music

Most mainstream music isn't really as original or talent-required as most non-mainstream stuff is. The reason I don't listen that much to any mainstream music is because of how generic it sounds. Most of it's been done before, but in some to many cases, it's being redone better.

Most people flock to these songs because they're very similar to something they heard a month ago, but it's just like a renewed version of what they heard. This is why I prefer listening to mainstream music once in a while, so I get the full experience after listening.

Then again, you can't deny that the mainstream stuff is probably popular because it's catchy and fun to listen to.

[A.R.C.]

i like unpopular music because i'm hip and edgy

[Bones]

i like unpopular music because i'm hip and edgy

I love your witty one-liners.

[A.R.C.]

http://www.wimp.com/fourchords/

[Sirrus]

Then again, you can't deny that the mainstream stuff is probably popular because it's catchy and fun to listen to.

I hear heroin is catchy, but that definitely isn't good for you.

[*Magick* Mage]

Recently, I've been reflecting on the nature of popular music and I've been wondering what you guys might think about this.

I think that modern mainstream artists aren't necessarily talented, but have figured out what people want out of music and how to deliver and market this music. I agree for the most part

This makes me think that it is impossible for an artist to be both accepted by the mainstream and to truly do their own thing musically. Which also makes me wonder what created the concept of "mainstream" because their are plenty of bands that are popular but definitely not mainstream. The concept of mainstream, I believe, really has been popping up in economics since the beginning of it. Those whom are willing to buy, endorse, and or sell different goods/services/entertainment make up the "mainstream", I suppose. The mainstream is, in basic, the majority. I'm no economist, though. :P

Which leads me to think that if the mainstream decides whether or not music is good, is there any way to objectively measure the quality of music? Therein is the broader question, is music good because it is good, or is it good because a majority of people say it's good?
The only people who can objectively measure the quality of music are the listeners. Everyone has that own bias(es) and opinions, there in turn will consider different factors at different viewpoints. For example, I personally love Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald, Bobby Darrin, etc. Some people feel that they are too old and not good, merely because they are unpopular. However, others feel, while talented, they would only listen to them when in a fancy restaurant or tuxedo shopping, as opposed to 50 years ago when they were the mainstream. Music is never a cut and dry subject, because it is almost completely based on opinion. Of course, however, our economic system encourages popular opinion the most. And Quite frankly, it isn't hard for record companies to shell out a few million to singers, when they are gaining several billion off the deal itself. So, companies, too would promote those they could pay the less to get the most. But I'm treading off topic.. :o
If you answered the latter, realize that, like anything, music can be marketed and sold along with a certain lifestyle and opinion. If popular music is popular only because a majority of people say it is popular, and if people can be made to think a certain way or want certain things through marketing, is it really even music any more? Can it really still be called a creative venture?
Music is an opinion, really. A culture in itself. Certain people like certain things for certain places at certain times. People are diverse, that is why we have so much music to listen to in the first place. And while meaningless to certain people, it may mean a lot to others. It all depends on your perspectives. Is one of those subjects that can be looked at economically, politically, religiously, culturally, etc. 

I'm done for now. Tell me what you think if you can make sense of my ramblings.

Excuse me if I don't make sense at points, but I do agree with how you are looking at this for the most part. :P

[Sirrus]

Everything looked fine except this.

The only people who can objectively measure the quality of music are the listeners. Everyone has that own bias(es) and opinions, there in turn will consider different factors at different viewpoints.

This isn't objectively judging something. I personally hate bananas, but objectively judging them I can say that they are good because of the potassium that they provide. Objectively judging something is literally judging something without any personal bias or preference.

[liamszalay]

KESHA IS AWESOME

[SpreadsPlague]

KESHA IS AWESOME

you know, I liked kesha until you posted that

thanks.

[A.R.C.]

http://www.wimp.com/fourchords/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I

Better version

[*Magick* Mage]

Everything looked fine except this.

This isn't objectively judging something. I personally hate bananas, but objectively judging them I can say that they are good because of the potassium that they provide. Objectively judging something is literally judging something without any personal bias or preference.

I add words sometimes. Sorry. But thanks for clearing that up. :3

[Sandvich]

The thing I hate about popular music is you can't get away from it.
It's on the radio, people's cellphones, everywhere

Of course I stick with my good ol' Classic Rock stations <3

One of the more "popular" bands I guess I've been listning to is 3oh!3
But what the hells up with the name