Musicians have been pressured into doing what's popular long before disco. It was just a particularly obvious shift, especially for you Kennybro. Sure things became more focused on dancing and beat, but this doesn't mean people couldn't be creative or that it's lesser music. The shift to disco is a creative shift in itself.
George Martin's autobiography highlights how much control producers had in earlier times, and you often hear of the Beatles themselves copying sounds and ideas. It's easy to go back hundreds of years and see musicians constantly copying popular music. Think about how easily identifiable most baroque music is even though it lasted for well over a hundred years instead of the handful of years disco lasted alongside other genres.
The point of all this is I don't look down on Baroque music because of homogenisation so I don't do it for other genres either.
It also should be completely obvious that there are completely different styles of popular music running concurrently. R&B pop can sound wildly different to say Gotye, which can sound wildly different to country tinged pop and etc.
I really don't care if people despise pop, I can't bear to listen to much of it myself, I just don't think this scientific study can be used as evidence against it.
I agree with most of what you say here. Yeah, even Disco can be seen as a creative move during the era before mass proliferation, like Isaak Hayes in the early 70's and Harold Melvin's, "Don't Leave Me This Way" in '75. Of course, disco did include a lot of quality melody too. Bee Gee's and all. But remember, Bee Gees were not a product of the Disco era. They came from melodic-centered music influences, as did many of the disco stars that shifted over.
But it's rise to mainstream in the later 70's, to the exclusion of so much melodic-based music had nothing to do with musician's desire to shift the pop scene to Disco. The most horrid example was that Beatles remix to disco beat. God awful stuff that totally de-emphasized those great melodies and slaved everything to the almighty beat. I don't recall one musician in any genre during that era who supported or spoke well of Disco, because we all recognized that it shifted the celebrity focus off the stage and to the floor. Not good for us. We weren't so much worried about overall music quality, as much as the quality of our own careers going forward. We were all melody and content centered artists, and we recognized the sea change away from melody and individuality toward homogenization and standardization in service of the dance floor.
I do agree that there is always a healthy mix of creative and fluff in the pop market, but it's a matter of percentage and who's controlling most of the product. It's been a battle for control since before Tin Pan Alley. And all music genres sound similar within the genre. That's what makes them genres, but entering the debate of Baroque vs. Disco in artistic and aesthetic content is way beyond any two-minute chat post. You could write a college text and develop a legitimate course of study just inside that bubble. And you don't really want to get into J.S. Bach vs. K. C. & Sunshine band, do you?
The Blue posted an interesting article in another thread. This was not how most music was created in the 50's through the 90's, even those terrible, forgettable songs of the 50's-60's. It is now.
Look back at the charts for the 1960s, and you'll see a load of stuff you recognise, and an awful lot you won't.
Because, believe it or not, crap forgettable pop existed pre 2000/1990/1980/whatever era you turned 20something in.
__________________
<Shameless Plug>
If I've ever helped you with a technical problem or provided you with advice you found useful, you can more than repay me by checking out, and maybe buying a couple of songs, by a singer I'm working closely with. It would be much appreciated!
Music (movies, paintings, literature,...) is a representation of the interestingness of the world on a given period. Maybe 2012 isn't as interesting as 1965 in the grand scheme of things.
Music (movies, paintings, literature,...) is a representation of the interestingness of the world on a given period. Maybe 2012 isn't as interesting as 1965 in the grand scheme of things.
It is, and it ain't. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I agree with most of what you say here. Yeah, even Disco can be seen as a creative move during the era before mass proliferation, like Isaak Hayes in the early 70's and Harold Melvin's, "Don't Leave Me This Way" in '75. Of course, disco did include a lot of quality melody too. Bee Gee's and all. But remember, Bee Gees were not a product of the Disco era. They came from melodic-centered music influences, as did many of the disco stars that shifted over.
But it's rise to mainstream in the later 70's, to the exclusion of so much melodic-based music had nothing to do with musician's desire to shift the pop scene to Disco. The most horrid example was that Beatles remix to disco beat. God awful stuff that totally de-emphasized those great melodies and slaved everything to the almighty beat. I don't recall one musician in any genre during that era who supported or spoke well of Disco, because we all recognized that it shifted the celebrity focus off the stage and to the floor. Not good for us. We weren't so much worried about overall music quality, as much as the quality of our own careers going forward. We were all melody and content centered artists, and we recognized the sea change away from melody and individuality toward homogenization and standardization in service of the dance floor.
I do agree that there is always a healthy mix of creative and fluff in the pop market, but it's a matter of percentage and who's controlling most of the product. It's been a battle for control since before Tin Pan Alley. And all music genres sound similar within the genre. That's what makes them genres, but entering the debate of Baroque vs. Disco in artistic and aesthetic content is way beyond any two-minute chat post. You could write a college text and develop a legitimate course of study just inside that bubble. And you don't really want to get into J.S. Bach vs. K. C. & Sunshine band, do you?
The Blue posted an interesting article in another thread. This was not how most music was created in the 50's through the 90's, even those terrible, forgettable songs of the 50's-60's. It is now.
the only good music is was from the 90s... the early 20s..
and the rest ****ing sucks, i dispite dubstep!
we need more songs like this
what the **** happened to real music? is dubstep music? its a noise! in the next 10 years we will hear pop songs made of 3 minutes white noize coming out of the ****ing speaker!
Here's an interesting CNN article. The issue is becoming more and more known in the mainstream (see the comments to the article) and it feels like something may pop before too much longer and get the pendulum swinging back the other direction, maybe, possibly.
BTW, impressive performance by Pink that he mentions in the article. It's like doing Cirque du Solei while singing really hard at the same time. Even if you don't like her particular type of music, it's an impressive physical performance. I couldn't keep my voice steady just walking. And she's clearly singing live.
__________________
Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd www.charmedquark.com
Here's an interesting CNN article. The issue is becoming more and more known in the mainstream (see the comments to the article) and it feels like something may pop before too much longer and get the pendulum swinging back the other direction, maybe, possibly.
BTW, impressive performance by Pink that he mentions in the article. It's like doing Cirque du Solei while singing really hard at the same time. Even if you don't like her particular type of music, it's an impressive physical performance. I couldn't keep my voice steady just walking. And she's clearly singing live.
I just saw that, too. One of my 3DW friends posted it on FB.
It is, indeed, an interesting -- and clearly difficult -- performance. My ears perked up when she let out a clearly audible 'oof' when the male dancer threw her on the pillow/bed thing. Now that's visceral.
I, too, thought more of Cirque du Soleil [I'm a big fan] than of conventional jazz dance... there was a fair bit of waiting on marks for cues and that sort of thing. (Now, if they were doing it on stage every night, a la Broadway, I'll bet they'd have it nailed to the beat in a few weeks.)
That said, it's really not my kind of music -- but clearly lots of folks still like that big pop rock sound.
With regard to crap and pop music -- it's always been my position that they are pretty well inseparable (as I define 'crap' anyhow ).
That's not to say that I don't think that there are sometimes brilliant, beautiful, sublime, and/or just damned ingratiating songs that rise out of the pop morass for me from time to time. From time to time, some tune is just so good, the pop audience can't ignore it, even when it doesn't have all the current sales features. This seems to me as it has always been -- and I've been paying attention since about 1959.
the only good music is was from the 90s... the early 20s..
and the rest ****ing sucks, i dispite dubstep!
we need more songs like this
what the **** happened to real music? is dubstep music? its a noise! in the next 10 years we will hear pop songs made of 3 minutes white noize coming out of the ****ing speaker!
if you really think that Melanie C song you posted is an example of good pop songwriting (I hope you are joking), than you need some education. Try some songs from 30's and 40's for example. I'll be seeing you again, or Moonlight in Vermont, list is very very long. And when you delve into it a bit, and realize limitations even of people like Lennon and McCartney, go back a bit more, for example opera was the pop music in it's day, check out Verdi, Bellini, Donizetti and so on. There is some real writing there.
It's just simply too complicated and long winded for most of us today, like it or not.
Times change that is all. Scientists like those quoted in Reuters, and journalists like those in Reuters talk utter sh*te most of the time. Not just about music.
Dean, I can assure you that Pink is not singing the track you hear while doing acrobatics in that vid. I do acrobatics and sing myself. Some things are not possible.
Most of these dancing artists (Madonna for example) mime on the stage to prerecorded track. Sad, I know, but that is show business.
__________________
"You've got to Dig it to Dig it, you Dig?"
Thelonious Monk
Dean, I can assure you that Pink is not singing the track you hear while doing acrobatics in that vid. I do acrobatics and sing myself. Some things are not possible. Most of these dancing artists (Madonna for example) mime on the stage to prerecorded track. Sad, I know, but that is show business.
I'm pretty sure she is indeed singing. From what I've read she refuses on principle to lip sync.
The song "SHINE" (Lew Brown / Ford Dabney / Cecil Mack) was copyrighted in 1910.
It has EIGHT chords not including some that are 7ths of the same chord.
Name a modern pop song that has more than four.
Still, people are happy.
Some only eat at McDonald's, too.
What ever satisfies your mind.
Some people don't care too look very deep in life.
Well there are certainly many pop songs that use more than four chords! If you count bridges and pre-choruses...
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
You betcha!
