DiscoFunkChick said:

vainandy said:

It would be good to try a tactic that has worked in the past and see if it works this time. To get rid of shit hop, they should try the old "Disco Sucks" routine and give it a shot. DJs need to create a whole "Shit Hop Sucks" hype and a major well known coast to coast DJ, someone like Tom Joyner, should have a big blowing up of shit hop CDs at a major event. To kill something, you have to make it seem "uncool". Hell, it worked for disco which was actually music, so it sure wouldn't hurt to try it on shit hop which actually ain't shit.

Not only do I agree with this...I started a thread about it not long ago! In this day and age, a "Mainstream/Shit Hop Demolition Night" would make the world a better place

People's dissatisfaction with the music that is popular in the mainstream is going to give themselves a heart attack worrying about killing "shit hop". This sentiment is cyclical. Throughout music history there has always been segments of people complaining about popular music. In the fifties, jazz lovers hated rock n rollers for changing the tide of pop music to rock n roll; rock artists bitched about disco music; disco music retreated then morphed into electronica, house and hip hop music. People act like they don't have choices when it comes to the music.

There are music genres I am not a fan of, but who is anyone to "kill" a genre or a culture. The spirit of early rock n roll music was to embrace their own ethos and be the opposite of what many outside the music did: be judgemental and act as the be all and end all of music. Then 20 years later the rock n roll community did the same thing they always railed against.

bashraka said:

DiscoFunkChick said:

vainandy said: Not only do I agree with this...I started a thread about it not long ago! In this day and age, a "Mainstream/Shit Hop Demolition Night" would make the world a better place

People's dissatisfaction with the music that is popular in the mainstream is going to give themselves a heart attack worrying about killing "shit hop". This sentiment is cyclical. Throughout music history there has always been segments of people complaining about popular music. In the fifties, jazz lovers hated rock n rollers for changing the tide of pop music to rock n roll; rock artists bitched about disco music; disco music retreated then morphed into electronica, house and hip hop music. People act like they don't have choices when it comes to the music.

There are music genres I am not a fan of, but who is anyone to "kill" a genre or a culture. The spirit of early rock n roll music was to embrace their own ethos and be the opposite of what many outside the music did: be judgemental and act as the be all and end all of music. Then 20 years later the rock n roll community did the same thing they always railed against.

Well, considering that shit hop has killed every other form of R&B on the radio for the last 20 years, I think it's only fair that it gets killed itself. Hell, it won't go away and let styles change on their own naturally like they always have so if people have ideas on how to kill it, by all means, try because it needs to be killed some kind of way. And seeing that killing a genre (killing meaning driving it off the radio and sending it back underground) has been done successfully in the past with disco, which was good music, then why not try the same successful tactic with shit hop, which isn't even music at all and is a bunch of "nothing". Hell, it's not a matter of being right or wrong by encouraging such an event as "Shit Hop Demolition Night" because I don't give a damn if it's right or wrong. I just want it gone. And if it should piss some shit hoppers off in the process, oh well, that's just one of the fringe benefits of it.

jeidee said:

I am unsure if this strays from the "blame the machine" argument (which is so hard to deny) but WHY does a majority of the newer music that is "popular" sound like what used to be the "club/dance" remix? When did this become the golden rule? Also when did the guest rapper become a requirement? The problem on the artists end is lack of originality/ creativity. I hear tune after tune bout hands in the air, DJ this DJ that, and "the floor". I almost consider it subliminal advertising directing the younger audiences to the "club". I know club songs have been around forever "le freak" but it is getting a bit ridiculous. Plus the clubs and drinks cost so much.

It always trips me out when I hear new artists refer to "the floor" in their lyrics or refer to their song as a club song because there's nothing rhythmic or danceable about their music whatsoever. The last place it's suitable for is a club. If it actually was suitable for a club, I'd praise it instead of hating it.

The Hot 97 brand of hip-hop has definitely ran its course but so has classic rock radio and so-called pop music. It's easy to blame the artists but the culprit harder to tackle is radio. There will always be artists who make bad music in any genre, but as long as radio stations play a narrow selection of songs by the same artists over and over again, people will always belly-ache over these issues.

silverchild said:

But then again, the radio industry has "shot itself in the foot" unknowingly. Remember these? (this is for all my old school peoples, ya'll will know what I'm talking about...)

Anyways, it's just history repeating itself, because these corporate dudes (AHEM, Viacom) really think that the public is stupid.

Dude, you had to go with the 90-minute UDXL IIs. You could get an album on each side!

I blame rap and hip-hop. Not because of the intrinsic ridiculousness of both genres per se, although of course that plays a large part in this.

Mainly I blame them because musically, there's nothing there. Now, if you are not a musician and you get mad at that statement, then leave the room now or be quiet, for your anger would be misplaced.

Here's what I mean:

Rap and hip-hop are basically nothing but beats played over one minor chord. You want to write a rap song? Hey, all you need to know is how to make an E minor! Easiest chord in history! Just throw some drum beats and assorted noises over it, and you too can have bitches and Rolls Royce automobiles!

Which is great as far as making money is concerned (plus, don't forget obtaining bitches!), but what musical development has been passed on? What will the 10-year-old future musicians learn from your song? Basically nothing, as far as musical knowledge is concerned (they will, however, learn a lot about bitches!).

Musicians in the old days learned from masters who knew all about chord changes, key changes, inversions, counter melodies - all stuff that was lost when rap and hip-hop came to popularity.

Y'all should go listen to obscure, one-hit or no-hit wonder bands from the '70's. What these also-rans knew about music puts today's Kanyes and Jay-Zs to absolute shame. This is to say that Kanye and Jay-Z don't know much about music (they do know how to make money, though).

And unfortunately, it's Kanye and Jay-Z that are "passing the torch" to the next generation. The next generation is going to be GREAT at using sound effects, loops and artificial drums, but they aren't going to know squat about how to write a song that lasts.

Why do you think there are no oldies rap stations? Rap has been around for 30 years, but no one plays old rap songs! Because, as Gertrude Stein once said, "There is no 'there' there".

I don't know what it's going to take to get young people to actually learn about music and instruments. Maybe it can't be done. Prince tried his hardest for many years, especially with his "Musicology" tour and promotion, but that was 8 years ago and I don't see the fruits of his efforts anywhere.

So it is what it is. Rock isn't much better. The musical sophistication in what passes for rock and roll these days is just barely ahead of rap and hip-hop's non-sophistication.

Luckily, we have all the artists from days gone by to listen to. So that's what I do.

^^^There's other kinds of music besides rock and rap. There's tejano, tropical, country, bossa nova, rancheros, salsa, afro-pop, jazz, blues, etc.

MickyDolenz said:

^^^There's other kinds of music besides rock and rap. There's tejano, tropical, country, bossa nova, rancheros, salsa, afro-pop, jazz, blues, etc.

Sure, but very few kids listen to that and learn the musicology involved in it. Think of it like this:

Paul McCartney and John Lennon created tens/hundreds of thousands/millions of young musicians who, after learning how to play Beatles' songs, obtained an incredible education in musical theory and song structure.

Same with Prince, Steely Dan, etc.

How many musicians did Jay-Z educate through HIS music? None.

This is why the future - or the present, I guess - is bleak with regard to new music sales. Again - there just isn't any "there" there.

[Edited 7/16/12 14:33pm]

RodeoSchro said:

MickyDolenz said:

^^^There's other kinds of music besides rock and rap. There's tejano, tropical, country, bossa nova, rancheros, salsa, afro-pop, jazz, blues, etc.

Sure, but very few kids listen to that and learn the musicology involved in it. Think of it like this:

Paul McCartney and John Lennon created tens/hundreds of thousands/millions of young musicians who, after learning how to play Beatles' songs, obtained an incredible education in musical theory and song structure.

Same with Prince, Steely Dan, etc.

How many musicians did Jay-Z educate through HIS music? None.

This is why the future - or the present, I guess - is bleak with regard to new music sales. Again - there just isn't any "there" there.

Decades ago, kids didn't have many choices for entertainment. Now there's video games, internet, DVD's, cable/satellite, and many other things that can keep their attention. Why would kids today stand out on a corner to sing doo-wop or sit around trying to figure out what someone is playing on a record so they can play it on an instrument? Many kids don't even go outside and play like in the past. Music is just something playing in the background or to exercise with for a lot of people, it doesn't have the same importance. There's a difference in buying a few 45s/LPs at a time and downloading a bunch of songs that are stored on a computer and not listened to. You can't just blame it on a certain music. When The Beatles were around, there was also Frankie Avalon, Bobby Sherman, and Nancy Sinatra, who's music is mostly forgotten today. Besides, what is the incentive for being a professional musician, since many people today download music for free, and the record companies have always ripped off the acts. You can go to college for business, and then work for the record company since that's where the money is. I'm sure Russell Simmons, David Geffen, and Berry Gordy are richer than most their acts.

Also, many acts in the past like The Beatles & Jackson 5 were kids/teens performing in bars and strip joints for many hours. That won't fly today.

[Edited 7/16/12 15:15pm]

MickyDolenz said:

RodeoSchro said:

Sure, but very few kids listen to that and learn the musicology involved in it. Think of it like this:

Paul McCartney and John Lennon created tens/hundreds of thousands/millions of young musicians who, after learning how to play Beatles' songs, obtained an incredible education in musical theory and song structure.

Same with Prince, Steely Dan, etc.

How many musicians did Jay-Z educate through HIS music? None.

This is why the future - or the present, I guess - is bleak with regard to new music sales. Again - there just isn't any "there" there.

Decades ago, kids didn't have many choices for entertainment. Now there's video games, internet, DVD's, cable/satellite, and many other things that can keep their attention. Why would kids today stand out on a corner to sing doo-wop or sit around trying to figure out what someone is playing on a record so they can play it on an instrument? Many kids don't even go outside and play like in the past. Music is just something playing in the background or to exercise with for a lot of people, it doesn't have the same importance. There's a difference in buying a few 45s/LPs at a time and downloading a bunch of songs that are stored on a computer and not listened to. You can't just blame it on a certain music. When The Beatles were around, there was also Frankie Avalon, Bobby Sherman, and Nancy Sinatra, who's music is mostly forgotten today. Besides, what is the incentive for being a professional musician, since many people today download music for free, and the record companies have always ripped off the acts. You can go to college for business, and then work for the record company since that's where the money is. I'm sure Russell Simmons, David Geffen, and Berry Gordy are richer than most their acts.

Also, many acts in the past like The Beatles & Jackson 5 were kids/teens performing in bars and strip joints for many hours. That won't fly today.

[Edited 7/16/12 15:15pm]

The reason I highlighted this line is because it illustrates what many people believe anyways; You have to HAVE to be a musician to want to do it, even moreso now then ever. Which is good because now maybe really talented people with a CALLING will do it as opposed to a career opportunity.

I just finished an article with Jimmy Iovine and he talked about how hard is was and how hard he worked with some artists to get their classics recorded. With technology letting anyone and their grandmother record a clean sounding record with manageable editing you know these people aren't digging for greatness or have any "ear". He said most albums shouldn't even be made, one reason being that the artist hasn't even earned the right.

MickyDolenz said:

RodeoSchro said:

Sure, but very few kids listen to that and learn the musicology involved in it. Think of it like this:

Paul McCartney and John Lennon created tens/hundreds of thousands/millions of young musicians who, after learning how to play Beatles' songs, obtained an incredible education in musical theory and song structure.

Same with Prince, Steely Dan, etc.

How many musicians did Jay-Z educate through HIS music? None.

This is why the future - or the present, I guess - is bleak with regard to new music sales. Again - there just isn't any "there" there.

Decades ago, kids didn't have many choices for entertainment. Now there's video games, internet, DVD's, cable/satellite, and many other things that can keep their attention. Why would kids today stand out on a corner to sing doo-wop or sit around trying to figure out what someone is playing on a record so they can play it on an instrument? Many kids don't even go outside and play like in the past. Music is just something playing in the background or to exercise with for a lot of people, it doesn't have the same importance. There's a difference in buying a few 45s/LPs at a time and downloading a bunch of songs that are stored on a computer and not listened to. You can't just blame it on a certain music. When The Beatles were around, there was also Frankie Avalon, Bobby Sherman, and Nancy Sinatra, who's music is mostly forgotten today. Besides, what is the incentive for being a professional musician, since many people today download music for free, and the record companies have always ripped off the acts. You can go to college for business, and then work for the record company since that's where the money is. I'm sure Russell Simmons, David Geffen, and Berry Gordy are richer than most their acts.

Also, many acts in the past like The Beatles & Jackson 5 were kids/teens performing in bars and strip joints for many hours. That won't fly today.

[Edited 7/16/12 15:15pm]

If people keep downloading, the record companies will eventually go out of business which I'd love to see. Yeah, they charge for the downloads but the same music they charge for is also out there for free. You just have to "search" for it.

But you're working on the assumption that everything will be better with the industry gone.

I'm starting to think that things will probably not be that different except for the one thing that a record company used to have that will be totally gone once they disappear; promotion.

Without promotion we just have a bunch of musicians struggling to be heard.

But yeah I have no sympathies for the record co's.

CynicKill said:

But you're working on the assumption that everything will be better with the industry gone.

I'm starting to think that things will probably not be that different except for the one thing that a record company used to have that will be totally gone once they disappear; promotion.

Without promotion we just have a bunch of musicians struggling to be heard.

But yeah I have no sympathies for the record co's.

Musicians are already struggling to be heard and have been for 20 years. If record companies go broke, nothing will change for musicians because they weren't being signed and promoted by these companies anyway. People have had to "search" for them. If the record companies go broke, the thing that will change is that people will have to also start "searching" for the shitty so-called "music" also so the playing field will finally be even.

MickyDolenz said:

RodeoSchro said:

Sure, but very few kids listen to that and learn the musicology involved in it. Think of it like this:

Paul McCartney and John Lennon created tens/hundreds of thousands/millions of young musicians who, after learning how to play Beatles' songs, obtained an incredible education in musical theory and song structure.

Same with Prince, Steely Dan, etc.

How many musicians did Jay-Z educate through HIS music? None.

This is why the future - or the present, I guess - is bleak with regard to new music sales. Again - there just isn't any "there" there.

Decades ago, kids didn't have many choices for entertainment. Now there's video games, internet, DVD's, cable/satellite, and many other things that can keep their attention. Why would kids today stand out on a corner to sing doo-wop or sit around trying to figure out what someone is playing on a record so they can play it on an instrument? Many kids don't even go outside and play like in the past. Music is just something playing in the background or to exercise with for a lot of people, it doesn't have the same importance. There's a difference in buying a few 45s/LPs at a time and downloading a bunch of songs that are stored on a computer and not listened to. You can't just blame it on a certain music. When The Beatles were around, there was also Frankie Avalon, Bobby Sherman, and Nancy Sinatra, who's music is mostly forgotten today. Besides, what is the incentive for being a professional musician, since many people today download music for free, and the record companies have always ripped off the acts. You can go to college for business, and then work for the record company since that's where the money is. I'm sure Russell Simmons, David Geffen, and Berry Gordy are richer than most their acts.

Also, many acts in the past like The Beatles & Jackson 5 were kids/teens performing in bars and strip joints for many hours. That won't fly today.

[Edited 7/16/12 15:15pm]

Good point, but what I meant was that there are kids who will hear music and say, "I'd like to be a muscian like that artist!"

In the old days, that meant that you'd learn and play songs that had many levels of musical theory and sophistication about them. One reason - maybe THE reason - that I'm a good guitar player is that I learned to play all the songs on "Purple Rain" first, and then I learned some Steely Dan songs. Those were my favorite songs, and ALL of them became that way because I heard those artists on pop radio.

I didn't know I was learning really sophisticated stuff, but what a benefit it was to me!

But today, a kid in the same position is going to learn how to play an E minor and rant about his bitches. That's what he hears on pop radio.

Doesn't bode well for future music, IMHO.

RodeoSchro said:

Good point, but what I meant was that there are kids who will hear music and say, "I'd like to be a muscian like that artist!"

In the old days, that meant that you'd learn and play songs that had many levels of musical theory and sophistication about them. One reason - maybe THE reason - that I'm a good guitar player is that I learned to play all the songs on "Purple Rain" first, and then I learned some Steely Dan songs. Those were my favorite songs, and ALL of them became that way because I heard those artists on pop radio.

I didn't know I was learning really sophisticated stuff, but what a benefit it was to me!

You don't have to do all that nowadays. Just buy these:

I think supermarkets are keeping the old hits alive!

Imagine, a whole new generation introduced to this classic which I heard on Sunday...

Musicians are already struggling to be heard and have been for 20 years. If record companies go broke, nothing will change for musicians because they weren't being signed and promoted by these companies anyway. People have had to "search" for them. If the record companies go broke, the thing that will change is that people will have to also start "searching" for the shitty so-called "music" also so the playing field will finally be even.

Is an even playing field really what we want?

The downturn has hit everybody from Sony and Universal right down to indie labels working with $3000 budgets for albums. Those are the labels that always did take chances on new things and helped them find an audience, and let the music culture evolve. They're also dying.

I think the labels served a purpose that gets overlooked. With so many mediocre talents in the world it actually helped to have someone managing the flow.

If you got a vinyl record pressed in 1989, it meant you had either gotten someone to believe - and invest - in you, or that you made a superhuman effort to put it out yourself. People tended to trust labels like SST, Def Jam and Wax Trax, that the people doing them had good taste & were working with good stuff. A new band that had gotten the blessing from a label I liked, I'd pay attention.

That's mostly gone now. It's replaced by a million faceless bands promoting themselves.

I agree that corporate music is probably worse now than ever. But I'm not surprised. There's no money to spend on anything risky. And with so little money being spent on new music don't be surprised that the few acts that get funded are really generic. The only ones getting pushed are the ones felt to be a "sure thing" so they are probably doing the most generic same-old same-old shite that's "guaranteed" to be a hit.

The people holding the money are more likely to invest it in hologram tours of Elvis and Hendrix and Michael Jackson, and more likely to re-issue their greatest hits ten more times than invest in one new act. Because those old artists have audiences that EXPECT TO PAY for stuff. We're Old people that grew up collecting records and still do, and we want to see our favorite dead singer on stage one more time and have the money to pay for it.

Why invest in something that's going to appeal to young people? They're just going to rip you off.

That's the problem in a nutshell. The people holding the money are more interested in art created in the past than in the future because everyone has just given up and decided there IS NO FUTURE for the recording industry.

bobzilla77 said:

Musicians are already struggling to be heard and have been for 20 years. If record companies go broke, nothing will change for musicians because they weren't being signed and promoted by these companies anyway. People have had to "search" for them. If the record companies go broke, the thing that will change is that people will have to also start "searching" for the shitty so-called "music" also so the playing field will finally be even.

Is an even playing field really what we want?

The downturn has hit everybody from Sony and Universal right down to indie labels working with $3000 budgets for albums. Those are the labels that always did take chances on new things and helped them find an audience, and let the music culture evolve. They're also dying.

I think the labels served a purpose that gets overlooked. With so many mediocre talents in the world it actually helped to have someone managing the flow.

If you got a vinyl record pressed in 1989, it meant you had either gotten someone to believe - and invest - in you, or that you made a superhuman effort to put it out yourself. People tended to trust labels like SST, Def Jam and Wax Trax, that the people doing them had good taste & were working with good stuff. A new band that had gotten the blessing from a label I liked, I'd pay attention.

That's mostly gone now. It's replaced by a million faceless bands promoting themselves.

I agree that corporate music is probably worse now than ever. But I'm not surprised. There's no money to spend on anything risky. And with so little money being spent on new music don't be surprised that the few acts that get funded are really generic. The only ones getting pushed are the ones felt to be a "sure thing" so they are probably doing the most generic same-old same-old shite that's "guaranteed" to be a hit.

The people holding the money are more likely to invest it in hologram tours of Elvis and Hendrix and Michael Jackson, and more likely to re-issue their greatest hits ten more times than invest in one new act. Because those old artists have audiences that EXPECT TO PAY for stuff. We're Old people that grew up collecting records and still do, and we want to see our favorite dead singer on stage one more time and have the money to pay for it.

Why invest in something that's going to appeal to young people? They're just going to rip you off.

That's the problem in a nutshell. The people holding the money are more interested in art created in the past than in the future because everyone has just given up and decided there IS NO FUTURE for the recording industry.

I dont fully understand the hatred towards hiphop and the community it represents, because there's much creativity in the hiphop community. Why not bash the disney generation with all it's fake artists like Selena Gomez, Britney Spears and so on - that's not creative at all - pure brainwashing of young minds. Hiphop isnt even mainstream in many parts of the world. But lets go to the REAL problem for a sec, since many are talking shit about hiphop that originates from new york (started in the black and latino community similar to disco music), lets ask us why they arent producing "real" music, perhaps because of the lack of fundings of instruments in the hoods and because of the Reagan adminstration in the 80s cutting much of the help to kids who wanted to know how to play instruments in schools and other urban areas.

Hiphop music has meant so much for young black & urban people of the US the last 30 years, they've been able to express themselves through grafitti art, dancing, rapping and despite the fact that they don't have the instruments (they might have wanted to learn) they've managed to somehow be innovative in their own way.

I just had to say this but the problem is a political problem and it's affected the urban communities (who are the ones that have contributed with music in the US) because they cant afford buying an instrument that costs 50-300 (the cheapest instruments) and who's willing to teach them? When their parents can't play no instruments and can't afford them to go a nice music school. In the past it was a family tradition and many kids learned to play instruments through their parents, who had a guitar, piano, trumpet and so on but the last 20 yrs has been a decline of that.

[Edited 7/17/12 16:31pm]

GoldDolphin said:

I dont fully understand the hatred towards hiphop and the community it represents, because there's much creativity in the hiphop community. Why not bash the disney generation with all it's fake artists like Selena Gomez, Britney Spears and so on - that's not creative at all - pure brainwashing of young minds. Hiphop isnt even mainstream in many parts of the world. But lets go to the REAL problem for a sec, since many are talking shit about hiphop that originates from new york (started in the black and latino community similar to disco music), lets ask us why they arent producing "real" music, perhaps because of the lack of fundings of instruments in the hoods and because of the Reagan adminstration in the 80s cutting much of the help to kids who wanted to know how to play instruments in schools and other urban areas.

Hiphop music has meant so much for young black & urban people of the US the last 30 years, they've been able to express themselves through grafitti art, dancing, rapping and despite the fact that they don't have the instruments (they might have wanted to learn) they've managed to somehow be innovative in their own way.

I just had to say this but the problem is a political problem and it's affected the urban communities (who are the ones that have contributed with music in the US) because they cant afford buying an instrument that costs 50-300 (the cheapest instruments) and who's willing to teach them? When their parents can't play no instruments and can't afford them to go a nice music school. In the past it was a family tradition and many kids learned to play instruments through their parents, who had a guitar, piano, trumpet and so on but the last 20 yrs has been a decline of that.

[Edited 7/17/12 16:31pm]

As if the death of hip hop will be the cure all for what's wrong with music today.

Granted it has degenerated into worthlessness, but there's some good stuff too (Frank Ocean, J Cole).

New article in The Village Voice about the 7 Innovations That Ruined Music.

http://blogs.villagevoice...totune.php

GoldDolphin said:

I dont fully understand the hatred towards hiphop and the community it represents, because there's much creativity in the hiphop community. Why not bash the disney generation with all it's fake artists like Selena Gomez, Britney Spears and so on - that's not creative at all - pure brainwashing of young minds. Hiphop isnt even mainstream in many parts of the world. But lets go to the REAL problem for a sec, since many are talking shit about hiphop that originates from new york (started in the black and latino community similar to disco music), lets ask us why they arent producing "real" music, perhaps because of the lack of fundings of instruments in the hoods and because of the Reagan adminstration in the 80s cutting much of the help to kids who wanted to know how to play instruments in schools and other urban areas.

Hiphop music has meant so much for young black & urban people of the US the last 30 years, they've been able to express themselves through grafitti art, dancing, rapping and despite the fact that they don't have the instruments (they might have wanted to learn) they've managed to somehow be innovative in their own way.

I just had to say this but the problem is a political problem and it's affected the urban communities (who are the ones that have contributed with music in the US) because they cant afford buying an instrument that costs 50-300 (the cheapest instruments) and who's willing to teach them? When their parents can't play no instruments and can't afford them to go a nice music school. In the past it was a family tradition and many kids learned to play instruments through their parents, who had a guitar, piano, trumpet and so on but the last 20 yrs has been a decline of that.

[Edited 7/17/12 16:31pm]

Well, let's see now.....glorifying thugs and criminals to the point that people can easily immitate it because any fool can afford oversized jeans and a T shirt and if they can't, they can go to Goodwill and get those things for free. Promoting and encouraging ignorance. Promoting massive homophobia and I do mean massive. I used to think that country was the most homophobic genre there was but that was strictly a lot of the fans of it. At least it didn't have idiots preaching it in their lyrics, on the stages, and in ignorant conversations to each other. The homophobia aspect alone is enough to hate it enough to stomp it in the ground. But then to top it all off, it is the biggest bunch of "nothing" genre there is when it comes to music and is the most boring genre in the history of recorded music.

vainandy said:

glorifying thugs and criminals

I've never understood people complaining about gangsta rap doing this, when they praise Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino for doing basically the same thing. What makes a movie different? As far as violence goes, I remember having to read things like Shakespeare in school.

MickyDolenz said:

vainandy said:

glorifying thugs and criminals

I've never understood people complaining about gangsta rap doing this, when they praise Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino for doing basically the same thing. What makes a movie different? As far as violence goes, I remember having to read things like Shakespeare in school.

Personally I feel minority groups have to be protective of thier images since they have little control over what images are out there of them.

vainandy said:

GoldDolphin said:

I dont fully understand the hatred towards hiphop and the community it represents, because there's much creativity in the hiphop community. Why not bash the disney generation with all it's fake artists like Selena Gomez, Britney Spears and so on - that's not creative at all - pure brainwashing of young minds. Hiphop isnt even mainstream in many parts of the world. But lets go to the REAL problem for a sec, since many are talking shit about hiphop that originates from new york (started in the black and latino community similar to disco music), lets ask us why they arent producing "real" music, perhaps because of the lack of fundings of instruments in the hoods and because of the Reagan adminstration in the 80s cutting much of the help to kids who wanted to know how to play instruments in schools and other urban areas.

Hiphop music has meant so much for young black & urban people of the US the last 30 years, they've been able to express themselves through grafitti art, dancing, rapping and despite the fact that they don't have the instruments (they might have wanted to learn) they've managed to somehow be innovative in their own way.

I just had to say this but the problem is a political problem and it's affected the urban communities (who are the ones that have contributed with music in the US) because they cant afford buying an instrument that costs 50-300 (the cheapest instruments) and who's willing to teach them? When their parents can't play no instruments and can't afford them to go a nice music school. In the past it was a family tradition and many kids learned to play instruments through their parents, who had a guitar, piano, trumpet and so on but the last 20 yrs has been a decline of that.

[Edited 7/17/12 16:31pm]

Well, let's see now.....glorifying thugs and criminals to the point that people can easily immitate it because any fool can afford oversized jeans and a T shirt and if they can't, they can go to Goodwill and get those things for free. Promoting and encouraging ignorance. Promoting massive homophobia and I do mean massive. I used to think that country was the most homophobic genre there was but that was strictly a lot of the fans of it. At least it didn't have idiots preaching it in their lyrics, on the stages, and in ignorant conversations to each other. The homophobia aspect alone is enough to hate it enough to stomp it in the ground. But then to top it all off, it is the biggest bunch of "nothing" genre there is when it comes to music and is the most boring genre in the history of recorded music.

First of all not all hiphop/rap music is about glorifying thugs & criminals. Get educated before you start talking about things you don't know. Again lets take you back to class as to why the trend with the oversized jeans & t-shirted started - well sir - it started with poverty. Kids would pass on clothes from older siblings and give it to their younger brothers and because of that, they started using oversized jeans and then in the 90s Designers such as Tommy Hilfiger caught on with that trend and made it commerical with the help of the looser fit fashion era. How is that promoting and encouraging ignorace? So I suppose you could say that to rappers Public Enemy, The Pharcyde, A tribe called quest, Nas, Krs One, to name some? The ones who rap about getting their people out of ignorance and injustice, I guess they must be reallly ignorant. Again lets take you back to the school bench, you say hiphop is to blame for homophobia but what about the churches people attend to every sunday? The church is the one teaching these values on urban communities around the US, it's not Hiphop/rappers, they're just repeating what the pastor says every freaking sunday. If you got a problem with rappers who come from mostly conservative -religious homes then blame it on the black church for being so backwards. That's YOUR opinion and it doesn't mean it's true, you have a biased opinion and I'm sure you have never actually listened to the music, you're just one of those people who've heard a song on the radio and went on the bandwagon of hating on hiphop/rap. And just like MickyDolenz mentioned, I would think that movies like Scarface & The Godfather are on the same level of damage to society like rappers like 50 cent. But then again 50 cent/Curtis Jackson travels to Africa to give money to UNICEF and encourage african kids to believe in their dreams (that's why he has a HUGE fanbase in Africa) , pays trips for kids in the inner city of NYC to see how the world looks outside the ghetto. It's alright to be negative to the current state of Hiphop and have an open discussion, like you should have in all musical genres but to bash a culture and make it less than what it is - is just wrong.

GoldDolphin said:

vainandy said:

Well, let's see now.....glorifying thugs and criminals to the point that people can easily immitate it because any fool can afford oversized jeans and a T shirt and if they can't, they can go to Goodwill and get those things for free. Promoting and encouraging ignorance. Promoting massive homophobia and I do mean massive. I used to think that country was the most homophobic genre there was but that was strictly a lot of the fans of it. At least it didn't have idiots preaching it in their lyrics, on the stages, and in ignorant conversations to each other. The homophobia aspect alone is enough to hate it enough to stomp it in the ground. But then to top it all off, it is the biggest bunch of "nothing" genre there is when it comes to music and is the most boring genre in the history of recorded music.

First of all not all hiphop/rap music is about glorifying thugs & criminals. Get educated before you start talking about things you don't know. Again lets take you back to class as to why the trend with the oversized jeans & t-shirted started - well sir - it started with poverty. Kids would pass on clothes from older siblings and give it to their younger brothers and because of that, they started using oversized jeans and then in the 90s Designers such as Tommy Hilfiger caught on with that trend and made it commerical with the help of the looser fit fashion era. How is that promoting and encouraging ignorace? So I suppose you could say that to rappers Public Enemy, The Pharcyde, A tribe called quest, Nas, Krs One, to name some? The ones who rap about getting their people out of ignorance and injustice, I guess they must be reallly ignorant. Again lets take you back to the school bench, you say hiphop is to blame for homophobia but what about the churches people attend to every sunday? The church is the one teaching these values on urban communities around the US, it's not Hiphop/rappers, they're just repeating what the pastor says every freaking sunday. If you got a problem with rappers who come from mostly conservative -religious homes then blame it on the black church for being so backwards. That's YOUR opinion and it doesn't mean it's true, you have a biased opinion and I'm sure you have never actually listened to the music, you're just one of those people who've heard a song on the radio and went on the bandwagon of hating on hiphop/rap. And just like MickyDolenz mentioned, I would think that movies like Scarface & The Godfather are on the same level of damage to society like rappers like 50 cent. But then again 50 cent/Curtis Jackson travels to Africa to give money to UNICEF and encourage african kids to believe in their dreams (that's why he has a HUGE fanbase in Africa) , pays trips for kids in the inner city of NYC to see how the world looks outside the ghetto. It's alright to be negative to the current state of Hiphop and have an open discussion, like you should have in all musical genres but to bash a culture and make it less than what it is - is just wrong.

Oh really, so I said that shit hop started homophobia? Well, I'd sure as hell like to see where I siad that. Point it out to me. No, I said it promotes and encourages it. And Lord knows it encourages it more than any other form of music in music history. And you don't have to tell about these damn churches either because I know about them. But at least a church doesn't carry itself in a violent way looking like the damn criminal on the corner that's trying to either con or rob you.

And you don't have to school me on the history of it because I was there from day one from the Fatback "King Tim III" days. No, it didn't used to be what it is now. Hell, the early days of it didn't even use to be like it was in the 1990s which was when it changed and became the bullshit that it is now. You trying to point out the good things of it in the old days and act like nothing has changed since then, is just like these damn Republicans who try to blur things by pointing out that the Democratic party was the racist party in control back in the 1960s during the segregation era and then conveniently leaving out the fact that those former Democrats coverted over to the Republican party after integration. Shit hop has changed from what it used to be. If it hadn't changed, it would still be called hip hop and not shit hop. Yes, it did originate in the disco era so naturally it was about fun and partying and the music sounded like fun party music. And when it stopped being about a party in the 1990s, that's when it became shit hop. But then again, considering that they stripped the music down so much and slowed the tempo down to nothing but a boring ass slow beat with some talking on top of it, I guess they would become bored and start having to make hate lyrics since the music itself was certainly nothing to occupy their time.

And as for Scarface and the Godfather, I have yet to see anyone on these streets from the 1990s on up to present day robbing, fighting, shooting, killing, or committing any other violent act dressed as those characters. But I have seen endless people committing crimes and violent acts dressed like these no good, gutter trash, scum of the earth, scrape the shit off the bottom of your shoe, shit hop rappers.

.

.

.

[Edited 7/19/12 6:32am]

^^The "pants on the ground" came from prisons, it had didn't really have anything to do with hip hop, especially since it meant that a prisoner was "available".

MickyDolenz said:

^^The "pants on the ground" came from prisons, it had didn't really have anything to do with hip hop, especially since it meant that a prisoner was "available".

Oh, well that just makes it soooooo much better. Such wonderful role models to for entertainers to follow and pass down to fans.