Get off my lawn!

[hibidy]

I'm 47 and feel completely the opposite. I've been blessed (or cursed) with a desire to hear new music my whole life. There have been phases where I thought the current crop of new music was somewhat lacking, but now isn't one of those times. I'm excited about more new bands now than I have been in at least 15 years, maybe ever. I'm lovin' it!

It's not "new" that I'm opposed to (we are the same age) It's just that the current "new" is the most stale, predictable, homogenized placid plastic stuff I can ever remember. You think about country and how they churn that out, or disco which I mentioned which was ALL about copycat.... and it's got nothing on the rap/"r/n/b" of the last decade. So for me when you say "new" it's NOT new, the trend has been TOO intense for TOO long. It's burnout of the highest order and I never liked it to begin with

[tapper mike]

All I have to say is....

I"m rather annoyed when someone approaches me and tells me I must love the same music they do. Not just like, they expect me to bow down and worship what they are into.

[hibidy]

All I have to say is....

I"m rather annoyed when someone approaches me and tells me I must love the same music they do. Not just like, they expect me to bow down and worship what they are into.

And I STILL expect it EVIL GRIN

[tapper mike]

LOL

[sqigls]

The thing that cheeses ME about all this new fangled shennanigans, is that musical elements (such as sidechaining, stuttering/glitching etc) have almost become genres in themselves. Personally, as techniques they can be enjoyable and add flavour, as the basis for the song they are terribly annoying. I'm glad music production is accessable to everyone now, but wading through the glitchy, ducking, gangster shuffling bass wobble can be somewhat tiring.

Wise engineer once say, is better for music to be enjoyable than to be impressive.

[SadPuppyBlues]

I'm calling Bullshit. First off, in this day and age infinitely more timbres of instrumentation are not only possible but constantly employed. Consider granularizing, wave-shaping (new types of distortion), increasingly powerful synthesizers, and the massive wealth of sampled instruments. In the click of a button I can call up an oud, shakuhachi, pipe organ with any number of registers and pipe styles, electric pianos, prepared pianos and synthetic choirs. Then in a second click I can chorus and flange my new banjo/celesta combo instrument and a third click later I've applied the amplitude envelope of drum track to it. How much of that shit could you do 80 years ago? About zero.

And how much of it makes it to top 40? About zero.
How much of it makes it to the surface of independent / underground music (which makes up most of the body of it)? Just about zero.

And sameness of beats? Really? Jesus so we're ignoring things like dubstep, hip-hop, latin, experimental, and progressive rock then? Sure, 4 on the floor is really popular now but so was shitty endless noodling guitar solos of the 70's and 80's that went absolutely nowhere for minutes on end and made your brain turn off. Come'on. That's seriously shit research and shit journalism in my opinion. Grill those "researchers" what the f**k they know about actual music theory and I'm sure you'll get some real whoppers back.

Well, since the article was talking about pop music, we probably are at least ignoring prog rock, latin, and experimental.
Dubstep and Hip Hop both use the same metronome and very similar instruments, though.

Go back to the swing/big-band era of music and tell me you're not bored to effing tears within 10 minutes. How many baroque era classical pieces also sound exactly the same? (Hint, the answer is "almost all of them"). LOL. Ad naseum.

The reason why baroque era music is rated so high is because of how limited it was. The composer had an idea of what people expected of him, so he could get really good at doing that. But even then, there were great composers who broke that mold.

I don't prefer it that way. But what's frustrating is that we don't have the same limitations we did then, and we CHOOSE to keep doing the same shit. It might not even be so bad as the swing/big-band era, and it might just be that the great items from that time are recoverable (which might not be the case for us, given all the quantity and praise of complete bullshit that buries our good music). But the trajectory we have vs. the big band era is definitely not in our favor.

I agree the journalism and "science" is complete BS, though.

[tapper mike]

I love all music. I like Renee Olstead, Josh Groban, Metallica, Ke$ha, Justin Timberlake, DragonForce, Evanescence, Selena Gomez, Hans Zimmer, Edward Shearmur, Rascal Flatts, CunninLynguists, ICP, Beastie Boys, Chopin, Gustav Holst, Skrillex, Porter Robinson, DJ Tiesto, Hayley Westenra, Lacuna Coil, BT, Bond, Keane, Jordon Sparks, Kelly Clarkson.

.

If you had thrown in Journey I'd swear you were from Flat Rock

[SecondSkin]

rifftrax, I can't say I've listened to that Salena Gomez track that closely, but I certainly believe your post. I find a lot of the modern pop to be extremely well written and produced. Even the LMFAO stuff has exquisite production. Yeah, they have great big obvious hooks, but everything below those ripping synth lines is well crafted. My daughter has a deep love for Lady Antebellum, and while I don't do country, they have some wonderfully produced and written pop.

I think the worst stuff on the airwaves these days is the cock-rock stripper alternative that my local "alternative" station plays. Puddle of Mud, Saving Abel, My Darkest Days....total crap.

[SecondSkin]

I love all music. I like Renee Olstead, Josh Groban, Metallica, Ke$ha, Justin Timberlake, DragonForce, Evanescence, Selena Gomez, Hans Zimmer, Edward Shearmur, Rascal Flatts, CunninLynguists, ICP, Beastie Boys, Chopin, Gustav Holst, Skrillex, Porter Robinson, DJ Tiesto, Hayley Westenra, Lacuna Coil, BT, Bond, Keane, Jordon Sparks, Kelly Clarkson.

.

If you had thrown in Journey I'd swear you were from Flat Rock

GD, I AM from Flat Rock! F'real.

[SecondSkin]

It's not "new" that I'm opposed to (we are the same age) It's just that the current "new" is the most stale, predictable, homogenized placid plastic stuff I can ever remember. You think about country and how they churn that out, or disco which I mentioned which was ALL about copycat.... and it's got nothing on the rap/"r/n/b" of the last decade. So for me when you say "new" it's NOT new, the trend has been TOO intense for TOO long. It's burnout of the highest order and I never liked it to begin with

Define "the current new" for me. Is it really any more placid and homogenized than Rick Astley or anything produced by Paul McCartney after 1968?

[rifftrax]

And how much of it makes it to top 40? About zero.
How much of it makes it to the surface of independent / underground music (which makes up most of the body of it)? Just about zero.

What? Stuff from people like Timbaland, Wyclef Jean, Shakira, Imogen Heap and Dr. Luke appears on charts all the time. They (just as examples) are all insanely talented producers or artists that have insanely talented producers backing them. And then you have stuff like Adele which is definitely at least a step in the right direction (i'm not such a fan of the style per say but it's extremely well-made music to be sure). Bands like NIN make incredible use of complex modular synths and the kind of synthetic textures that you find in modern music in general is something of a marvel really.

Then you have stuff like Porter Robinson, Deadmau5 and Skrillex. Tell me that isn't inventive.

Well, since the article was talking about pop music, we probably are at least ignoring prog rock, latin, and experimental.
Dubstep and Hip Hop both use the same metronome and very similar instruments, though.

But look at the sheer variety of instrumentation you'll find in a single genre like hip-hop. How many sub-genres are there of hip-hop? Like a metric shit-ton because there is literally just so much variety there.

The tempo for most dubstep can vary as far as hip-hop does (at least for hip-hop it's anywhere from slow r&b at around 80 - 100bpm to upper 130's for fast trip-hop and hyphy stuff). That's apples and oranges really.

The reason why baroque era music is rated so high is because of how limited it was. The composer had an idea of what people expected of him, so he could get really good at doing that. But even then, there were great composers who broke that mold.

Sure, there were and they were typically the ones that were seen as too radical and often ignored. There is some fantastic music that is rarely if ever played even on classical stations that IMO trumps 99% of the well-know classical crap out there. I think today is a much different day and age. People don't have to fight against conventions anymore there is so much innovation in music period.

I don't prefer it that way. But what's frustrating is that we don't have the same limitations we did then, and we CHOOSE to keep doing the same shit. It might not even be so bad as the swing/big-band era, and it might just be that the great items from that time are recoverable (which might not be the case for us, given all the quantity and praise of complete bullshit that buries our good music). But the trajectory we have vs. the big band era is definitely not in our favor.

Well, I'd have to disagree there. If I was stuck in an era like the 80's after experiencing the wealth of music available right now I'd be pretty effing furious. That would seriously suck ass. I'd say from an era like the big-band era or especially the 80's our trajectory is pretty damn awesome.

[skipscada]

... Rick Astley ...

As I see it, there is a before and after "Never gonna give you up". It was the first chart-topping Stock, Aitken & Waterman single, and the next few years would be dominated by manufactured SAW acts. Other acts who wanted to top the charts would of course look to these for ideas. That whole thing segued into New Kids on the Block and the boyband phenomenon, which grew into enormous proportions and dominated charts completely. Cookie-cutter songs with increasing emphasis on glitzy production, dance routines, manipulation of media and charts. Again, even artists with artistic pretentions felt they had to take all this on board if they were to reach the top of the charts.

The music in the charts has always been mostly pap, but I see an increasing uniformity after Astley. However, charts are less important now, the emphasiss being on media exposure. In the increasingly crowded media landscape, commercial music is forced to be ever louder (in all meanings of the word) to turn heads. Happily, the varied media landscape makes it easier to tune out of the mainstream. Beyond mainstream media and the charts, there is more diversity than ever. I can't dedicate as much time and money as before on finding new, interesting music, but whenever I feel the need, I find something pretty easily thanks to various internet sites, streaming services.

All the same, I was sad to see my local alternative music shop close this week. It sympbolises how more and more of our lives are spent sitting in front of a screen and not in contact with other people.

[tapper mike]

I see we have a live ammo dance competition heating up here.

[SadPuppyBlues]

Timbo, Wyclef, Shakira, Imogen Heap, Dr.Luke

You're kidding, right?

Those people are soul-depleted, sterilized abortions of Babyface, who all had the history of the R&B they came from callously wiped. Those people are why R&B hasn't really changed since New Jack Swing. Two decades of this bullshit is exactly why, now that the hood can make their own music without majors cherry picking over them and dictating how things will come out, only WANT to make shit like this. Because their identity was stolen, bastardized, and handed back to them for so long, they don't know anything else. And you're serious about their insane talent.

Wasted talent, at best.

Imogen is a different kind of trite from the rest. But she's also culturally dead slop meant to pick all the low hanging fruit it possibly can. Like uhhh that other chick... Amanda Palmer.

Adele, Porter Robinson, NIN, Deadmau5, Skrillex

Okay, let me at least tell you about Skrillz.

Sonny Moore (Skrillz) used to be the singer of a really horrible Post-Hardcore band whose purpose was to cash in on the Myspace-core trend of last decade. And when that trend peaked, he quit the band. Creative differences, he says. He spent a few years attempting to break into the vintage-indie schtick that was growing in popularity during the end of last decade. He failed miserably, but it'd just be unfair to assume it was because he had nobody to carry him this time. Now, wouldn't you know, he's interested in Dubstep! What a coincidence that he's always involved in hyped up genres with the biggest buzz of the moment. Anyway, after about a year hanging out with the biggest bottom feeder of house music, our buddy Deadmau5, his electronic music is all of a sudden on the bleeding edge of already hashed-out music the mainstream is ready to fork up!

I'm not sure how to begin describing how uninventive it all is.

How many sub-genres are there of hip-hop? Like a metric shit-ton...

Been listening to Hip Hop since I was eight years old.
Give me two dozen sub-genres. Give me ONE dozen good artists / groups making waves for Hip Hop right now.

Bonus points: Explain in what way they're making waves.

The tempo for most dubstep can vary as far as hip-hop does...

I mean, it's cool and I realize tempo affects how an idea is gonna come off. But it just seems like a really weak way to defend a genre.

By the way, I've noticed you seem really preoccupied with dubstep, along with a lot of other people in this thread. Were you this interested and vocal about the genre ten years ago, or is this a recent thing for you?

I'd say from an era like the big-band era or especially the 80's our trajectory is pretty damn awesome.

Yeah?
You're thinking Women beats Sonic Youth? That Shinsight Trio beats NWA? Mono beats TalkTalk? Shakira beats Talking Heads? That last one was unfair.

I'm glad I missed '80s radio. But the '80s wrecked what we have now. In raw output and potential, and it's hard to make an argument otherwise. Maybe the '60s had a bigger explosion, but the '80s were so massive, maybe they didn't.

[osiris]

That Selena Gomez song is one of the few that makes me want to shoot my radio...
The other one is Wiz Kalifa - Young, Wild & Free. Worthless, useless, most lazy excuse for a tune I've ever heard.
Now, get off my lawn.