What's wrong with popular music?

  • Thread starter Thread starter InTheFire
  • Start date Start date
ok, devils advocate time. Whats wrong with popular music? Nothing. If we are all honest about what goals we had when we first picked up a guitar or whatever instrument and got a band together, we had two goals.. get laid and become a popular band. Does anyone want to play unpopular music?? Yes, there are compromises that a band that gets signed and promoted have to do, but I would have done anything to be in a popular band when I was 22 years old. I am really not talking about the teen queens, we all agree that is not really music,(although I wish I had the songwriting talent to write a #1 hit pop tune) but the current state of rock bands is fine. There are many here that would gladly take their place and not care if others thought we were considered sellouts. The indie scene has some cool stuff going on, but would any of those bands not want a top 10 hit??
 
Louddog said:
ok, devils advocate time. Whats wrong with popular music? Nothing. If we are all honest about what goals we had when we first picked up a guitar or whatever instrument and got a band together, we had two goals.. get laid and become a popular band. Does anyone want to play unpopular music?? Yes, there are compromises that a band that gets signed and promoted have to do, but I would have done anything to be in a popular band when I was 22 years old. I am really not talking about the teen queens, we all agree that is not really music,(although I wish I had the songwriting talent to write a #1 hit pop tune) but the current state of rock bands is fine. There are many here that would gladly take their place and not care if others thought we were considered sellouts. The indie scene has some cool stuff going on, but would any of those bands not want a top 10 hit??
Click to expand...
Hits the nail squarely on the head, and in the groin.... True as it is though, the music is still debatable. Popular still doesn't mean good, but that's all redundant, isn't it?
 
Louddog said:
ok, devils advocate time. Whats wrong with popular music? Nothing. If we are all honest about what goals we had when we first picked up a guitar or whatever instrument and got a band together, we had two goals.. get laid and become a popular band. Does anyone want to play unpopular music?? Yes, there are compromises that a band that gets signed and promoted have to do, but I would have done anything to be in a popular band when I was 22 years old. I am really not talking about the teen queens, we all agree that is not really music,(although I wish I had the songwriting talent to write a #1 hit pop tune) but the current state of rock bands is fine. There are many here that would gladly take their place and not care if others thought we were considered sellouts. The indie scene has some cool stuff going on, but would any of those bands not want a top 10 hit??
Click to expand...

By the definition of popular, no, nothing is wrong. Although, I don't think I speak only for myself when I say I couldn't take their place on stage. I've got a problem singing a cover if it doesn't feel genuine. It's the substance that is so astonishing(by the way, I was including teen queens in my original question). We hear the same stories all the time in the radio tunes. A few really popular ones are:

A relationship gone wrong

A relationship that could go right

"I hate you, dad"

I'm personally annoyed that in almost every one of these, if not all, a solution is never mentioned. The industry not only capitalizes on the ignorance of it's listeners, it capitalizes on their confusion and hopelessness.

One song that has impressed me is, The Reason, by Hoobastank. It's got an incredible hook and the author speaks of the love that he lost and is changing(but, not in the hopes of getting her back).

But, the rest of the record blows ass.
 
My two bits, because I've considered this question many times myself:

I think modern commercial music takes itself too seriously. There are other problems (many of them), but to me this is one of the biggest things. It seems like most big acts are busy a) churning out garbage, and b) singing and playing that garbage in a serious, heartfelt manner. If they knew that they were churning out garbage, and they took joy in the fact, the music might even be good. Singers (I focus mainly on the vocals because I'm a singer myself) try to get you to feel sorry for them, or to scare the crap outta you, or to convince you that they're the perfect person to hang out with to have a good time because they're just so gol-darned fun. In trying to convince the listener of something about himself, the singer never actually looks at himself and thinks, how should I respond to [whatever the song is about].

I don't know if that makes sense. Basically, I just think that too many acts are convinced that they're the greatest, most emotional phenomenon since The Perfect Kiss, and try to act like it.

Now, I know that that's not all of it. One of the best songs I've ever heard is by the Dresden Dolls, in which Amanda Palmer sings very emotionally about how worthless she feels. So taking oneself seriously isn't necessarily bad. But when one does it all the time, and is fully convinced that they can make the listener feel exactly as they do, it kind of goes downhill.

Hmm. Long, rambling, and not necessarily exactly how I feel. But it's the best that I can put into words. Hope I haven't offended any artists here.
 
"There's nothing wrong with pop music as a genre"

LOL how many times must I endure this misconception. POP is not a GENRE. If you wish to think the generic fodder stock whatever is in fact its own independent style, great. Pop is nothing more then POPLAR, nothing less nothing more.
 
ender4trackmind said:
"There's nothing wrong with pop music as a genre"

LOL how many times must I endure this misconception. POP is not a GENRE. If you wish to think the generic fodder stock whatever is in fact its own independent style, great. Pop is nothing more then POPLAR, nothing less nothing more.
Click to expand...

Poplar!?

Like

this? :confused:
 
ender4trackmind said:
Pop is nothing more then POP(U)LAR, nothing less nothing more.
Click to expand...

Mozart is popular. Is he pop?
Youssou N'Dour (sp?)... Pop?
Aphex Twin... Pop?
Keith Jarret...

You're right in saying that "Pop" is not a genre. But "Pop" refers rather to a sort of music that is readily available, easily consumable, generally replaceable (at worst, disposable).
"Pop" sits opposed to Jazz, Folk or "World" Music, Classical/Serious/Art music and Electronic Music. Some bands might straddle these divides.

The hamburger is popular. But McDonald's is "Pop", and Ruby's Diner (some of the best burgers in Jo'burg) is not.

I think the world can (very broadly) be divided into discerning listeners (Ruby's fans), and undiscerning listeners (McDonald's fans).

POP does not = POPULAR
 
Last edited:
Thanks for telling me IM right and correcting my English there ":)...No thanks for backpedaling and contradiction directly there after....

"You're right in saying that "Pop" is not a genre."

Then...the killer "but" Ill build on a foundation on what I just stated isn't true...

"But "Pop" refers rather to a sort of music that is readily available, easily consumable, generally replaceable (at worst, disposable)."

Now elements of what makes pop, that leads into it being a genre...post modern perspective ":P Hop in a time machine, check out some billboard charts, read up on interviews. Cause when "POP does not = POPULAR" comes out your mouth, you really need to check your stuff.

That is unless you disagree with Scotty Moore ( that has stated to me exactly what IM saying to you now )...after all what the heck would he know about pop/popular ":/
 
phew... don't get me started on post modern perspectives...

You said "Pop is nothing more or less than Popular." I.e. Pop = Popular. (Which infers that Popular = Pop, which is obivously incorrect.)

What I am arguing is that something situated as Popular constitutes so much more than something situated as Pop is. Or, better, Pop music isn't qualified by being Popular. As a matter of fact, I'd possibly argue that someone like Britney Spears isn't popular at all. But that would be lengthy and convoluted :)

Who is Scotty Moore?
 
Rokket said:
I heard the only thing missing in a Beatles reunion is three more bullets. Seriously, though, they wouldn't be the Beatles without John.... And I can see everyone pretty much has the same ideas that I do. It's the money driving the machine, and it always will be...
Click to expand...

3 more bullets? Do you mean 2?

*Seriously, though,* it wouldnt be the Beatles without Paul, George or Ringo either now would it?
 
NationalSandwic said:
As a matter of fact, I'd possibly argue that someone like Britney Spears isn't popular at all. But that would be lengthy and convoluted :)
Click to expand...

Britney isn't popular???? You mean that being on the cover of tons of different magazines, featured in Pespsi commercials, and selling gajillions of CD's isn't the very definition of popular???

Like her or hate her...but indisputably, she's popular!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top