It is time to change the current mainstream music

[Avenger]

Except he wanted to know if he was originally from Romania. Would have been better to not be rude :\

It certainly would have. I just consider stupidity worse than rudeness, so it's a personal bias of mine.

 

[Deverz]

Except there is nothing anywhere on these forums stating birthplace

I understand where you both are coming from but can you both go about it nicer. I'm getting complains about you both and I'm going to need to start actioning it soon which I don't want to do.

 

[Avenger]

I've been perfectly civilized in this thread! Last time I tried to be nice, I got reported twelve times in a week...

 

[Deverz]

I've been perfectly civilized in this thread! Last time I tried to be nice, I got reported twelve times in a week...

You have, I never said you weren't.

I've already given someone a warning this week for misuse of the report system so that won't be an issue.

 

[Chakra-X]

It would probably have been even easier to look under his avatar. Just saying.

I actually would have made the same mistake! Did not even notice the location is listed under the avatar (probably because my avatar doesn't have one). But is it really that big of a deal that one should go out of their way to be rude over something as trivial as missing a location on the avatar? I don't even see the point of being rude over something like this. "Hey, let me be a little ****ish to you right now, maybe you'll learn next time" doesn't seem to help anybody.

 

[sub]

In my view, music is one of the most interesting concepts out there. It's just air vibrating, changes in air pressure that we perceive and react to. How beautiful is it that air vibrating has the power to not only change your mental state through mood and emotions, but also your physical state by changing your blood pressure and heart beat. Ever get goosebumps just by listening to music? This vibrating air can communicates ideas and thoughts to you without the use of any tangible language. It sounds corny, but I'm constantly blown away that there groups of people that get together for the sole purpose of creating sounds, just because we think that they're beautiful. That's the purest form of art.

And here you guys are, using this topic to trade bull**** insults to each other. Stop.

@Deco, I will tell you EXACTLY how it happened. It is due to a little chemical that is heavily overused and kills youngsters braincells. Talking about alcohol obviously. Oh and retarded TV cartoons like SpongeBob. But seriously I think that the music that people started listening to in clubs and stuff started degenerating along with the increase support regarding the idea of "getting smashed" or obscenely drunk 'till a person can not remember anything that happened while in that state as an awesome thing to do. People acting stupid like it is the best thing in the world to get like that, I simply can not understand it and never will. But the beats started reflecting more of a trance state where your brain doesn't really need a lot of function to "boogie", just bob your head and throw your fists up, so that even the most drunk person can do it while maintaining balance...

It's nothing to do with cartoons, it's all substance abuse.
The beat in alot of older music matches a heart beat (Or so I was told) So does new "music"... when you've popped a few pills. And when you're high who cares about sounds

I don't think it has anything to do with alcohol, and certainly nothing to do with cartoons. Do you think that alcohol and drugs were not popular with young people during the 60's, 70's, 80's, or whatever era of mainstream music you like? Because all I can think is that Woodstock says hi. I think part of it is nostalgia, but part of it is also that only the best music of any given era is remembered. Today we're not exposed to the worst of the mainstream music from the 70's, where as today we're exposed to the all the music that the mainstream has to offer right now. In 30 years, they won't be playing the questionable hits from this era, only the best of it will be remembered.

I think part of it is also that the music has simply changed. I have nothing to back this up, but it's my pet theory that music is a disease that you catch when you're young. The music you like is the music you're exposed to, mostly the music you're exposed to when you're young. Once you're sufficiently exposed to a certain type of music enough, it can become hard to adapt and enjoy other types of music.

But why does mainstream music suck? I don't know, does it suck? I don't listen to mainstream music, but I'm not going to claim that it's terrible, music is highly subjective and mainstream music just doesn't happen to be the type of music that I enjoy. I can claim mainstream music sucks, but that claim will be no more valid than someone who enjoys mainstream music claiming that the music I like sucks. The song why can't we be friends should probably be played in the background right about now.

I want to know why people like music. What is it inside our brain that causes us to like it. Do any other animals enjoy music? For how long have our ancestors been creating and enjoying music? Why do different people like different types of music? So many questions.

 

[Deverz]

I don't think it has anything to do with alcohol, and certainly nothing to do with cartoons. Do you think that alcohol and drugs were not popular with young people during the 60's, 70's, 80's, or whatever era of mainstream music you like? Because all I can think is that Woodstock says hi.

I meant drugs are destroying todays music not the music I like

 

[sub]

I meant drugs are destroying todays music not the music I like

What music do you like if you don't mind me asking? I'm under the impression that most music is influenced by drugs, and has been for quite a while, so I have a hard time believing that drugs are the reason that mainstream music is the way it is today.

 

[Damaera]

I don't mind the current mainstream music, I think a lot of it is actually really good. A lot of people dislike some of the genres, especially things like hip-hop/rap, which is completely understandable. I think the main problem with people hating these kinds of genres though, is because of the untalented artists that somehow manage to get their songs incredibly popular.

 

[sub]

I'm being entirely serious here, but does the creator need to be extremely talented in order for them to create good music, or is it that some of the value we get out of music based on how talented we feel the person who created it is? For example, there can be an incredibly hard piece of music to play that requires you to be extremely good in order to perform it, but that doesn't mean I'll like the song, it's just hard to play.

 

[macdaddymario]

Well Sub, that leads to the question of how do you feel about auto tuning? I feel that if it is used in a song, it shows total lack of talent and tells me that, that artists, while they may be able to write songs, should NOT be singing them. They can write all the lyrics and music to go with them that they want, but do like they use to.. and sell it to an artist that does not use this crutch.

 

[sub]

Auto tune can be good if it's used properly, although it can ruin a song if it's too much.

I'm glad it was you who posted that though. Look at the band fun. I think the guy who sings and writes songs for that band is amazingly talented, he was in a band called the format before fun and they were a great band too. That guy can sing, he doesn't need much auto tune, yet some of the songs on their newest album use it to the point where I don't even like the songs anymore. Go two minutes into this song or 3:30 in and listen from there. Although it's probably the most at 5 minutes in. It just sounds like a computer is being raped.

http://youtu.be/YeaVfVhq1AE?t=2m01s

Someone on youtube said it sounds like hes being mauled by a comptuer.

 

[macdaddymario]

I would agree with that youtuber, and will be the reason I no longer listen to that song. I avoid any and all songs that use that style of 'sound'. You think it can be used properly, and I wont try to take your opinion away from you, I feel though that it ruins the rest of the song all together even if it is used in the slightest. How artists like... oh gosh, what's his name.. T-Pain? How artists like him can get away with what he does, astounds me to no end -_-.

Edit

I feel that I should add that my prefered (that a real word?) sound would be that of 'classic' rock bands along the lines of AC/DC, Van Halen, Led Zepp, and so on. Those are bands I like. When it comes to today's music, it is on a song by song basis.

 

[sub]

Well, the guys who make auto tune the news are my heroes.

http://youtu.be/FCSBoOcGFFE

http://youtu.be/BZnDt2wEFjk

 

[macdaddymario]

Preface: see my previous edit

On the note of your last post, see now you're venturing into the direction of auto tune for comedy. They are serious artists in their own right, but they are not like main stream music artists who find it to be a legit 'sound'. I know that I now sound hypocritical, but something like that, I don't totally mind. I can't listen to it all the time, but for example 'Bedroom Intruder' I find to be a hilarious song.

 

[Baaja]

I thinking exactly the same thing as Sub back there. The difference in time has a huge impact on what you hear now from today, and from 30 years ago. It's a great argument that you brought up, and it's totally understandable! I mean, how many songs do you know from 20-30 years back then, and then compare that number to how many were produced. I also think that you are more exposed to songs now, because of Spotify etc, with that exposure you can listen to both bad and good songs....from each year that progresses.

Another thing I liked about Subs post is the subjectivity. A thread like this will always just be a thread of opinion and no one will ever win an argument of what is the correct type of music to listen to.

I would like to say something about talents. In my opinion, I find Skrillex to be very talented, and he is a musical genius. It all came into perspective when I heard:
[video=youtube;ryR9A8-Nl0Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryR9A8-Nl0Q[/video]

When dubstep was converted into something like this which is very beautiful. (I know Skrillex didn't make this) But music is evolving and I couldn't resist to think that Skrillex is a music producer that today can be compared with what Mozart, Chopin and Beethoven were then.

 

[macdaddymario]

I wouldn't go as far to place Skrillex in the realm of Mozart, Chopin or Beethoven, as those were timeless classics back then, and still are today. They have had literally hundreds of years to prove this, and no one knew at the time that their classical pieces would still be listened to this far into the future. It's a bit early to place any musical talent of 'today' (and I use that term loosely), into the realm of classical pieces by those previously mentioned.

Note, I'm not saying it can't or wont happen at some point, I can't see the future. I can say that I personally will never view it as such, but I'm just one of 6+ billion people.

 

[sub]

I also think that you are more exposed to songs now, because of Spotify etc, with that exposure you can listen to both bad and good songs....from each year that progresses.

That's a great point. People probably consume a lot more music today than they did 40 years ago thanks to ipods and computers. On last.fm, its logged 142,322 songs that I've listened to since July 8, 2007, and that doesn't count things like music I listen to in the car or at work.... thats a lot of songs. Probably too much.

I wonder how many songs were created in the 1960's or 70's compared to today. In that same vein, I wonder how many different genres there were in the 70's compared to today. Going to try to find the answer on google, really curious how many more songs are produced today when compared to the past.

Also, that Skillrex orchestral song was great. This is another similar one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg290v572Zw

 

[Baaja]

Macdaddymario! You bring such a good argument! And you are truly right in what you say, that it isn't realistic to compare Skrillex to timeless classics, as you put it. But what I'm comparing between them is the complexity and the sounds, melodies etc. I might be inexperienced, but I've listened to a lot of classic music, Subs piano cover makes me feel it even more, that they are quite alike and on the same "level". I however understand what you are trying to say, but I find Skrillex songs, in their purest form exclusive to the dubstep, quite fascinating. Even somewhat timeless.

 

[Damaera]

I honestly find Skrillex's **** interesting. As for most dubstep, I used to be into it because it was new, "exciting", and different, but now.. not so much. There are the occasional songs that I do enjoy, but really it's pretty stupid to see that this type of music seems to have leaked into mainstream ****.

And as much as people give Skrillex **** for the stuff he makes, when you really think about it, the stuff he does seems like it would require a bit of talent. So yeah, props to him and stuff.