Britney Spears, 'N Sync and others

OldGrover said:
I guess I can sum this thread up... Britney et al are employees who are being given credit for the work of an awful lot of very talented people. They are a product, they are not artists. There may be artists involved, but they are not them.

Now, is the package a bad thing? That seems to be a seperate question, but in my opinion, with the quality music out there, both new and old, the resources being put into this package could be better (better as in, better for society, better for the music ART as opposed to necessarily for the music industry) used in letting people know what the options are.

But guess what, it won't be. Do you know why? Sturgeon's law - 90% of everything is crud. OldGrover's corollary : That includes people. 90% (and I think that is generous to the masses) of all people do not think for themselves, do not want to think for themselves and are not capable of thinking for themselves. Elitist? Sure. But I'm elite (Give me warez, d00d (sorry)). I can think, I can reason and I make up my own mind. I listen to a huge range of music and none of it because someone tells me to. I walk into used record stores and buy CDs at random on the off chance they might be worth listening to (90% of them really aren't, but you get the occasional gem :) )

Corporations are taking their position as the governing force in peoples lives. Governments are getting less and less relevent (segue into a discussion on the Quebec conference if you like here). It used to be communities built culture - now it is people in boardrooms. <shrug> The packaged crap is not the problem, the problem will come when the packaged crap is all you can find.

We, the Home Wreckers, are the new terrorists of the music industry. Sure, some of us will sell out - more power to us if we can :) - but some of us will make sure that real music, music from the soul, music from the heart, still gets made.

And that - my friends - is something that neither the corporations nor most of society gives a rat's ass about.

<end rant?>
Click to expand...

I absolutly agree with this, I have noticed how the media tells people what to like, And it disgusts me how many people take those words like a bible.

Music died when It turned into a bussiness. When people who love music work in music, they do what they can to keep the music 'true'. but now music is run by people who have no reguards for what they put out, just how much money it makes them. As for the artist them selves on the most part all the artist cares for is fame. Is there any need to make good music when in the process of making music the music is the after thourght
 
Its simple

"Video killed the radio star"

Kids listen to these fluffy bands because the people singing are good looking...you will also notice 5 or 10 years later those same people will deny they even listened to those songs...lol

Also what sounds new now will sound old later if your using keyboard sounds and stuff...in 10 or 20 years the stuff out now will sound like the 80's stuff sounds to us now.

Your basic drums,guitar,bass,piano and vocal are more timeless and less dated it seems in the long run.

I never really followed the trends even back when I was a teen...I listened to 70's music when I was growing up in the 80's,90's ect.

I didnt like 90's music

I liked some 80's stuff...Van Halen,ACDC...various one hit wonders...overall the 80's was a bit to Gay for me "Not that theres anything wrong with that."...When i say gay I mean the way the guys dressed like girls and tried to pose and look sexy like women and wearing makeup and had girl hairdo's.

Music out now in the 2010's is better than music from the 90's (didnt like grunge music and that boy band stuff)

Nothing beats the 70's though because there was more originality...every band seemed to have their own sound unlike today where it seems like everyone is copying the latest sound and trend...you get a few new artists that have their own sound but for the most part they copy whats selling.
 
Why Britney and N'Sync type bands suck (and they do):

It's the same as the Bay City Rollers in the 70's. This has been going on forever.

It's not the lyrics, chords, any of that. You can find tunes from great artists with worse.

It's because sound is secondary to feel in music. And when you listen to those type bands, the actual feel is "give me your money". It's all about greed hiding behind so-called "art".

Even if the art is great you'll still feel the primary motivation and that's money. And thinking that way is about as unmusical as it gets.

It doesn't come from the heart, that's why it sucks.
 
The Dairy Queen:

There was a Dairy Queen near where I grew up and the guy that ran it was so gung ho and had such a great attitude that everybody who worked there picked up on it. Even though he was the owner he still made ice cream cones and said "thank you" from his heart to customers. He was great and the place was super popular.

What I learned from that is that energy trickles down from the top. If the manager of a store is a prick, the store will reflect that and not do well. If the owner is a nice person and treats everybody with respect then his employees pick up on that too.

Britney Spears: if you didn't know who she was and you auditioned her you'd probably be blown away. What a fuckin' singer, and hotter than shit is probably what you'd come away with. I don't think she's fake. She would probably want to smoke a doober and jam like most musicians. Same with N'Sync.

But the energy comes down from the top, just like the Dairy Queen, and what you "feel" with those bands is at odds with what you hear. It sounds great but the feel sucks.

exhibit A:

lou-perlman.jpg
 
Last edited:
kcearl said:
id like to see some older threads to see if the Akai S900 was really value for money in 1988
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that - a couple of months ago I bought about 8 editions of a free magazine I used to read circa '89-2000 -ish called "Making music". Best music mag I ever came across, I paid £12 for the thing to be delivered throughout the year. I never kept them once read and ten years on, I got curious. The copies I bought are random ones starting at Feb '89 and the last one is from '98 sometime. It's really odd reading up on what was going on then because all the digital developments of the day passed me by totally. Samplers were about all I'd heard of and I wasn't interested then. Anyway, the AKAIs being advertized in the one I'm reading {Feb '89}are the S-950, the S-1000PB and the S-1000HD. The prices are astounding, £1399, £2899 and £3999 respectively !
 
dintymoore said:
Why Britney and N'Sync type bands suck (and they do):

It's the same as the Bay City Rollers in the 70's. This has been going on forever.

It's not the lyrics, chords, any of that. You can find tunes from great artists with worse.

It's because sound is secondary to feel in music. And when you listen to those type bands, the actual feel is "give me your money". It's all about greed hiding behind so-called "art".

Even if the art is great you'll still feel the primary motivation and that's money. And thinking that way is about as unmusical as it gets.

It doesn't come from the heart, that's why it sucks.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure of that. Songs are such a weird thing because even some "songwriting by numbers" songs that are written purely clinically to sell and not stretch can contain something of the writers and performers' soul. People do work while recording. Rarely do people honestly take a 'couldn't give a ship' view. It's really hard, even in a song one hates, to totally disconnect oneself. I can't tell that John Lennon and George Harrison hated "Maxwell's silver hammer" or "Obladi oblada" just by listening. And if a song isn't "from the heart" but millions of people love it over decades and for decades, does that disqualify the song from some sort of authenticity and purity ? I've long felt that the artist/performer is not necesarilly the best judge of their own work.
Opinions, opinions....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top