independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > When did mainstream music start suffering?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 3 of 3 <123
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #60 posted 03/16/06 3:44pm

Anx

i don't blame it on music video, because i have dozens of DVDs of AMAZING music videos by my favorite artists. if not for music video, i can't imagine how limited bjork's work would have been, for example. i mean, i do believe her music stands on its own merits, but she's always been very enthusiastic about creating visuals that compliment her work beautifully, and she's always very involved in the ideas and making of the videos. i consider it part of what she does, and i think it makes her an even more amazing artist. there are a lot of folks i could say that about...i mean, part of bowie's appeal has always been his stage presence and his theatricality. music video brought his best assets to people's living rooms. so no, i don't think music video made mainstream music suffer. i think it challenged it, for better and for worse.

and i don't blame it on rap, because just like every other genre, there's amazing rap and there's rotten rap. public enemy alone is reason enough to say that rap did not make mainstream music suffer.

again, i think the tame/lame state of mainstream pop is a reflection of the culture we live in. we live in conservative, repressed times. our art is a reflection of that.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #61 posted 03/16/06 7:02pm

squiddyren

Prospect said:

Whats wrong with today mainstream music you ask? Besides the fact it continues to evolve as always, nothing is wrong with it.


Yeah, evolving from real instrumentation, musicianship, and in many cases achieving classic status (think '20s to '40s jazz/swing, '50s rock n' roll, '60s Motown pop/R&B, the soul n' funk of the early '70s, etc., etc.) to plastic loops, derivative sampling, ass n' bling, teeny-bopper faux-rock, ProTools in studio, and just being so bad to a point where you have to resort to looking at the underground scene for the real stuff instead of just enjoying the great, creative music that was already there in the mainstream all those years ago.

Face it: Today, you can play an old jazz record, and old Elvis or Johnny Cash record, an old Supremes record, an old Marvin Gaye record, etc., etc.... and it still sounds timelessly fantastic. Who the hell, 30 years from now, is going to be playing an old 50 Cent, Ciara, or Black Eyed Peas to show their kids what 'great' music was popular back in the day? Yes, I DO acknowledge that mainstream music has never been completely without 'crap' or youth-caterers, but at least crap back then had to have talent to get a deal and was backed by real musicians/real producers. I'd rather listen to THAT crap 100X over than ever have to endure another Peas, Chris Brown, Ashlee Simpson, Good Charlotte, Avril Lavigne, the list goes on song once more.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #62 posted 03/16/06 7:28pm

squirrelscient
ist

Yeah, I'd even go so far to say 1997 and I was only 13 at the time. In my teens (I am 22 now) I never really listened to current mainstream music. It is crap and most people my age agree with me so I don't think it's a nostalgia issue or just older people not getting it --the music really suck ass.

Not enough funk. (That's also why I think kids are fat today, no music to shake their fat asses to.)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #63 posted 03/16/06 9:10pm

POOK

avatar


WELL IT NOT RECENT

REMEMBER ARCHIES?

HOW ABOUT FABIAN?

P o o |/,
P o o |\
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 3 of 3 <123
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > When did mainstream music start suffering?