Um, are there still any pop stars?

[.jon]

I always hated radio. From the music selection (after actual free-format DJs were killed off by corporatism), to commercials, to the sound of interference and bad tuning. Internet streaming "radio" isn't any better.

I never understood how people could listen to music like that. But most people weren't really into the music. They seemed to me to just want familiar noise and some kind of celebrity bond.

You're equating listening to a bad station with crappy equipment to "radio". There's still non-internet stations out there with DJs who do well prepared, specialist broadcasts live.

[IncarnateX]

God that is awful - and I think the 'dancing' is even worse than the song - wondering if the vocal similarities are due to the excessive autotune?

Beyond my point. Just for the record

[incubus]

God that is awful - and I think the 'dancing' is even worse than the song - wondering if the vocal similarities are due to the excessive autotune?

What are you saying? That there are pop stars that DON'T constantly use autotune?

[IncarnateX]

Unlike 30 years ago, people are no longer confronted with chart music against their will.

At least they can be ignorant if they want to. I don't listen to radio, I don't see award shows and I don't buy music anymore. My missus does all that and she is on par with everything that happens. For me it is all about coincidences. Zara Larsson went gold in my country with Bad Boys in 2013 (for God knows what reasons). I only found out last year because it was used in a gym show, where my oldest daughter participated. Thought it was Rihanna like many before me.

God that is awful - and I think the 'dancing' is even worse than the song - wondering if the vocal similarities are due to the excessive autotune?

What are you saying? That there are pop stars that DON'T constantly use autotune?

Ha ha! Good point But do agree that it sounds awful. Doesn't sounds like Kyla needs it though. Skinny voice but at least she can sing.

[counterparty]

I don't think that there are many (if any) pop stars nowadays whose popularity is as great as Michael Jackson or the Beatles.

The music industry has changed - more music and musicians are promoted, there are more ways to find and listen to music.

The way that people consume pop music in the era of social media is different too. Pop stars have their own 'fandoms' - the group of rabid fans who follow that star and discuss them on message boards, social media, etc. Each has a name, so Britney has the 'Britney Army' (now sadly dwindling), Beyonce has the 'Beyhive', Justin Bieber has his 'Beliebers', Rihanna has the 'Rihanna Navy', etc - it becomes an identity.

Pop fans refer to different 'eras' of their star, meaning a particular album and its accompanying promotional material such as chat show appearances and performances on TV, live performances or tours at that time with their merchandise, meet-and-greet packages, etc and so on, along with the persons voice, body, hair, dancing, etc. In the same way that people go online and discuss TV shows, people will discuss whether 'Britney'/'Slave-4-U' era Britney (or possibly even 'Snakeney') had better hair than 'Femme Fatale'-era Britney.

Maybe people have always done this and I'm too young to have experienced it before.

I love pop music, though. I kind of separate pop artists into different classes. There are people such as Zara Larsson who sing simple, catchy songs that I can take or leave (such as Zara Larsson - I like the intro guitar/pluck sound and some of the melodies from 'Lush Life', but a lot of her other music is pretty bad). It's the kind of thing that you can have on in the background.

However, I prefer (mostly lesser-known) artists who have their own kind of musical and thematic 'universe' and at least co-write their own songs.

Take Lorde for example. You've very probably heard 'Royals' somewhere. A lot of her music deals with being a teenager, and her lyrics often have a fragmented, stream-of-consciousness quality that really relects the slightly random nature of teenage life (or reflects the way that I personally experienced it, anyway). It also gives the songs a slightly mythical quality.
The production on her album is generally sparse with lots of space, and that really suits her deep, breathy voice. She also has a lovely voice, and AFAIK she wrote at least the lyrics for the songs.



Another pop artist I really like is Marina and the Diamonds. Her 3 albums have actually been quite different - her first album was a really nice set of largely piano-based pop songs, then her second album was an attempt to be a 'proper pop star' and veered off into electropop, then on her third album she kind of merged the two.
She writes her own material (and co-produced her third album), and I really like her voice.

I listen to her first album the most, and the songs on it centre around different kinds of brokenness in a way that make it hard not to speculate about whether they are autobiographical or not. For example, on 'Obsessions' she discusses an abusive relationship, 'Oh No!' focuses on being consumed by the quest for recognition, etc.





An artist who I've been listening to a lot recently is Melanie Martinez. I think she was a contestant on one of the American talent shows, which usually puts me off, but her music is actually very good.

Thematically, her album centres around childhood and especially f**ked-up, abusive childhoods, but it's paired with mainstream commercial pop production in a way that I find sligtly subversive. It'll be interesting to see what she does with her next album - she'll probably have to find something new to sing about.





I don't think that there are pop stars in the modern world who are as big/famous as the historical greats, but there are certainly people who are commercially successful and are doing interesting things. A lot of things are never going to be the same again - the industry and world are different now.

[highkoo]

Its not my world at all, and I dont know much current context, but Ariana Grande is a pop star. Damn.
Her craft really impresses the shit out of me. Which, feels really strange to say.

The last person I can recall that I thought was in that league as far as having the 'all around' talent and scope a "Pop Star" needs to have was Aguilera.

[highkoo]

Oh, right; Gaga.
Absolutely... But I also feel like she consumes and transcends Pop.

[incubus]

Lady gagme did the anthem, she's the best.

[Jace-BeOS]

I always hated radio. From the music selection (after actual free-format DJs were killed off by corporatism), to commercials, to the sound of interference and bad tuning. Internet streaming "radio" isn't any better.

I never understood how people could listen to music like that. But most people weren't really into the music. They seemed to me to just want familiar noise and some kind of celebrity bond.

You're equating listening to a bad station with crappy equipment to "radio". There's still non-internet stations out there with DJs who do well prepared, specialist broadcasts live.

Hmm, maybe in your area. The best I have in my area is one college radio station, as far as format goes (though honestly I've not checked lately, mostly because reception is so bad that I give up after a few tuning attempts).

The quality of the college radio broadcast is still not what I consider tolerable and I consider no radio tolerable while in motion.

My sensitivity to interference is quite high. CD was the format for my life; I'm holding on to the format like Trent Reznor is holding on to vinyl . Even if the music is full of noise, at least I know the artist intended it to be that way.

[mcnoone]

Lady Gaga
Beyonce
Justin Bieber
Adele
Pink
Rihanna

Surely at least a couple of those sound familiar.

All of them sound familiar, yet I can't recall a single song to associate with any of those acts. There are no pop stars anymore, we upgraded to celebrities.

Adele did a couple of half decent songs at the start, Beyonce had maybe one or two I liked long ago, the rest mean nothing to me either.

Pink had a great cd out in the early 2000s called Missundaztood, and it was amazing. I listened to it a lot at the time. Yet it was mostly due to Linda Perry who wrote and worked on the music with her.
After that, Pink's stuff was horrible pop drivel like the rest.
I was getting into this lately, but I don't think she is a future or present pop diva type at all.

[jancivil]

[Hink]

^^^^happy New Year Jan

[jancivil]

edit: no, it's easily the worst of my life.

wish I coulda not lost the two bags o' dope I copped today, it might have been enough to end this POS. glad you got yours tho. NICE VIEW!

FOR NOW I still have my SSDA and SSI and Medicare. (BTW, I paid in for years. There is no great boondoggle giveaway that's costing your ass.)

That's in jeopardy and I'm sick of it all anyway.

[emcee]

I'm getting Nostalgic.
"Back in the day", at least downunder we had a few Music TV shows, Countdown being the seminal one, where in between video clips there'd be bands of the day, either local or international perform live (or, often lip synced) and then sit down for interviews or even sometimes co-host the show. It was a good opportunity for local bands to get exposure, with them doing their current single before Duran Duran's latest clip for example. There were a few other shows that used those "popstar/band" names as their promo.. Where does that happen now? *shrug*
It's all very much corporate now, and if you have a good marketing ability that trumps musical ability it appears. "20,000 youtube hits" means a lot more than "played in front of packed audiences five nights a week for 6 months" - ok so the world has changed and I still have a few boxes of promo cassette tapes I recorded in the 80's, but back then I didn't have social media to spruik my band(s), it was all hard slog playing, rehearsing, sticking posters to phone poles late at night, and even long weekend drives to doorknock venues before I had the luxury of a manager to do all that.. And I'm a better person for it, and appreciate that time. So yes there are popstars, but not of the ilk that I/we consider popstars, as in your Michael Jackson's, Madonna, George Michael/Wham, Prince, even The Beatles (pre me but wow).. Now it's T Swift, K Perry, Gaga, Beyonce, Bieber.. Of which there's undeniably talent there, but of that list, there's not many I'd rush out and get their latest album as I would have for the previously mentioned.. Or digitally download
Oh and let's not mention William Hung. Seriously.

[.jon]

I always hated radio. From the music selection (after actual free-format DJs were killed off by corporatism), to commercials, to the sound of interference and bad tuning. Internet streaming "radio" isn't any better.

I never understood how people could listen to music like that. But most people weren't really into the music. They seemed to me to just want familiar noise and some kind of celebrity bond.

You're equating listening to a bad station with crappy equipment to "radio". There's still non-internet stations out there with DJs who do well prepared, specialist broadcasts live.

Hmm, maybe in your area. The best I have in my area is one college radio station, as far as format goes (though honestly I've not checked lately, mostly because reception is so bad that I give up after a few tuning attempts).

The quality of the college radio broadcast is still not what I consider tolerable and I consider no radio tolerable while in motion.

My sensitivity to interference is quite high. CD was the format for my life; I'm holding on to the format like Trent Reznor is holding on to vinyl . Even if the music is full of noise, at least I know the artist intended it to be that way.

Yeah, there's probably a lot regional variation, but interference issues are commonly solved by using adequate equipment. We have a charming vintage radio in the kitchen, which practically can tune into just two stations without intolerable hiss, but the main hifi system is connected to a roof antenna and outputs everything without interference.