Is pop music inherently stupid?

[trimph1]

EDM is pop too...

[lectrixboogaloo]

I'd like to include Metallica because they are pop band as far as I'm concerned. Plus their music is sheet.

I'd also like to add all that 'bubble gum' punk as pop too.

I suppose, if you are bound to leper messiah. But they kind of invented what became 'pop' thrash and did some damn good proto sludge.. Of course they later sucked, but...

And U2. Maybe even Rage Against the Machine are pop. What a drag innovation is.

[ariston]

It takes intelligence to craft a good pop song. So, no.

[JJ_Jettflow]

It is hard to put the talent of Brian Wilson or Paul McCartney in the same category as Jay Z or One Direction.

I guess all of those are pretty good at what they're doing. The song i listened to yesterday was from P-Diddy btw, featuring Christina Aguilera. Tbh, i always felt it was a bit of a snobbery to say you can't compare the talents of artist X to artist Y, just because the musical genrey differs, and i simply favor one more, or feel like it needs more "musical skills" to write one. No offense. But i wonder how classical music lovers will think about other types of music. It must be all garbage for them then. But i bet it isn't for many/most of them.

When Mike Oldfiled performed Tubular Bells with whatever Symphony it was, the orchestra players would put their fingers in their ears every time Oldfield played a note so yes I am sure a lot of classical and jazz artists for that matter do not have a high opinion of modern pop.

I think I did not explain myself completely enough in my comparisons. I am referring to the singer/songwriter opposed to the artist with six producers for one song. But I do think there is a big difference between someone like Paul Simon writing a song on a piano or acoustic guitar and taking it to Muscle Shoals and having a collective of talented musicians basically create a hit out of a jam session as opposed to having something that has been quantized and auto-tuned to death. Having musical talent is what music is all about right?

[Robmobius]

I'd like to include Metallica because they are pop band as far as I'm concerned. Plus their music is sheet.

I'd also like to add all that 'bubble gum' punk as pop too.

I suppose, if you are bound to leper messiah. But they kind of invented what became 'pop' thrash and did some damn good proto sludge.. Of course they later sucked, but...

And U2. Maybe even Rage Against the Machine are pop. What a drag innovation is.

Hmmm.... Only innovation that spawned into more pop metal.

[chk071]

It is hard to put the talent of Brian Wilson or Paul McCartney in the same category as Jay Z or One Direction.

I guess all of those are pretty good at what they're doing. The song i listened to yesterday was from P-Diddy btw, featuring Christina Aguilera. Tbh, i always felt it was a bit of a snobbery to say you can't compare the talents of artist X to artist Y, just because the musical genrey differs, and i simply favor one more, or feel like it needs more "musical skills" to write one. No offense. But i wonder how classical music lovers will think about other types of music. It must be all garbage for them then. But i bet it isn't for many/most of them.

When Mike Oldfiled performed Tubular Bells with whatever Symphony it was, the orchestra players would put their fingers in their ears every time Oldfield played a note so yes I am sure a lot of classical and jazz artists for that matter do not have a high opinion of modern pop.

I think I did not explain myself completely enough in my comparisons. I am referring to the singer/songwriter opposed to the artist with six producers for one song. But I do think there is a big difference between someone like Paul Simon writing a song on a piano or acoustic guitar and taking it to Muscle Shoals and having a collective of talented musicians basically create a hit out of a jam session as opposed to having something that has been quantized and auto-tuned to death. Having musical talent is what music is all about right?

Do the people producing hit pop/EDM/Volksmusik/Happy Hardcore have any less musical talent, just because the music might require less musical theory, or skills to play an instrument? I don't think so. It's still music, and if it's popular then it's popular for a reason, despite what one thinks about mainstream taste.

[trimph1]

Some have a great desire for hipster status.

[chk071]

Some have a great desire for hipster status.

Surely. But without passion for the music you produce, a feel for it, or joy doing what you're doing,your stuff will suck, at least that's my conviction.

[ShawnG]

without an actual firm definition of what the hell "pop" music is in the context of this discussion, the whole thread is inherently stupid. I mean we'll have 11,000 seperate narrow interpretations of pop that are essentially just hipsters ragging on everything except their favorite chosen genre/artists. Or we could go with a broad definition of pop music in which we will all eventually realize covers 99 percent of all existing recorded music.

I don't personally believe any form of music is inherently stupid. my four and a half decades on the planet has taught me that in every genre of music there are true artists, and there are also musicians just trying to cash in on the "hip new thing". Sometimes even those people stumble on brilliance though, so it's tough to slag them off either. music that is made just to be popular and sell is much tougher to write than self indulgent artisty stuff. trying to put yourself in the emotions of others requires an empathy not present when an artist just transmits his own emotions. not to say its better or worse, but it is a tough assignment to write a hit, and people that can do it consistently are smart, talented people. But even leaving aside "good" pop music, even the worst sort of turgid lowest common denominator crap is no more inherently stupid than the music performed on the bleeding edge where the only real intention seems to be the musician indulging his own need to buck the status quo.

[chk071]

without an actual firm definition of what the hell "pop" music is in the context of this discussion, the whole thread is inherently stupid.

Well, one of those threads which initially started as a joke thread, but turned into a serious discussion i guess.

[IncarnateX]

Absolutely. Last time I did a WAIS-R on Miley's "Wrecking ball" the verbal score was way below 20 and performance score below 10. I am not even going to talk about the overall IQ but calling it "retarded" would be an insult to retards.

However, we do not really need a test to prove that. Just think of all the shitty synthpop from the 80s by retarded groups like Kazoo, Erectionure, Depeche Blow, Ultraearwax and Kraft Idioten.

What a pile of stoopid trash

[JJ_Jettflow]

Do the people producing hit pop/EDM/Volksmusik/Happy Hardcore have any less musical talent, just because the music might require less musical theory, or skills to play an instrument? I don't think so. It's still music, and if it's popular then it's popular for a reason, despite what one thinks about mainstream taste.

IMO yes. And I would hazard a guess it requires no theory what so ever and very little talent to make and just because something is popular does not make it good.

[deastman]

However, we do not really need a test to prove that. Just think of all the shitty synthpop from the 80s by retarded groups like Kazoo, Erectionure, Depeche Blow, Ultraearwax and Kraft Idioten.

What a pile of stoopid trash

Them's fighting words!

[JJ_Jettflow]

without an actual firm definition of what the hell "pop" music is in the context of this discussion, the whole thread is inherently stupid. I mean we'll have 11,000 seperate narrow interpretations of pop that are essentially just hipsters ragging on everything except their favorite chosen genre/artists. Or we could go with a broad definition of pop music in which we will all eventually realize covers 99 percent of all existing recorded music.

I don't personally believe any form of music is inherently stupid. my four and a half decades on the planet has taught me that in every genre of music there are true artists, and there are also musicians just trying to cash in on the "hip new thing". Sometimes even those people stumble on brilliance though, so it's tough to slag them off either. music that is made just to be popular and sell is much tougher to write than self indulgent artisty stuff. trying to put yourself in the emotions of others requires an empathy not present when an artist just transmits his own emotions. not to say its better or worse, but it is a tough assignment to write a hit, and people that can do it consistently are smart, talented people. But even leaving aside "good" pop music, even the worst sort of turgid lowest common denominator crap is no more inherently stupid than the music performed on the bleeding edge where the only real intention seems to be the musician indulging his own need to buck the status quo.

[IncarnateX]

If lack of intelligence and talent combined with delusive self-importance is the recipe for succesful pop productions, everyone at KVR would be a millionaire.