[Snip - luv4u]

Dasein said:

paisleypark4 said:

Chile stop. I saw a old youtube commenter talking about the Jackson 5 and the Motown sound was shitty and not as good as music in the 50's. Its generation to generation.

[Snip - luv4u]

HEEEEEY!

Why was this snipped? There was no Org infraction on my part by guessing how old Carousal
and Laura was!

Dasein said:

Dasein said:

[Snip - luv4u]

HEEEEEY!

Why was this snipped? There was no Org infraction on my part by guessing how old Carousal
and Laura was!

Don't worry, Luv is old too! Hell, most of us are, me included I am still 19 inside though!!

let's look at this...

what demographic has the most disposable income? i would guess young adult white american women.

what is the purpose of mass media? to seperate people from their money.

who are the tastemakers for young adult white american women? mass media (terrestrial radio, entertainment tonight, awards shows...yadda yadda).

who does mass media market to the most heavily in order to maximize their income? young adult white american women.

are you a young adult white american woman? yes? then you are content. no? then why the fuck do you care what the mass media is telling you to spend money on? there is a shit ton of good music being made today. do you really think that good music is ending RIGHT NOW? that's lazy and dumb. you don't like the shit that is presented to you, but you'd rather complain than find what will satisfy you.

but, whatever...say again and louder how today's music is shit. the more and louder, the truer, right?

I think another reason the industry has gone down the toilet is the younger generations don't give a rat's behind about music. They simply don't take it as seriously as older generations. It's not important. Too much other crap to occupy their minds. They would rather chase pokomon than listen to music.

paisleypark4 said:

laurarichardson said:

No the music today is shit becauset it is shit. I know young people who listen to oldies instead of the music their generation

Chile stop. I saw a old youtube commenter talking about the Jackson 5 and the Motown sound was shitty and not as good as music in the 50's. Its generation to generation.

If you think trap music sounds good speak for yourself. The music can not give music away and that was never going on in previous generations. The music sucks and young people spend to much time on computers.

The combonation of these two things has a lot to do with poor sales. If the music industry makes very little profit that do not have the money to develop acts and bring them along. It is a vicious cycle.

Kids prefer video games and free videos and we are almost 40 years out from Pac-Man and MTV, so there should be no wonder why it is this way.

Pop music sounds like Start Screens sung with robot voices now, and that is no conicidence.

The other thing musicians need to do is put dumb skits and sound effects all over their music videos so you can't just rip their video audio.

(seriously though, that used to get in the way of taping it right off of MuchMusic too)

[Edited 7/25/17 12:36pm]

Cinny said:

The other thing musicians need to do is put dumb skits and sound effects all over their music videos so you can't just rip their video audio.

(seriously though, that used to get in the way of taping it right off of MuchMusic too)

[Edited 7/25/17 12:36pm]

OMG like an audio watermark!!

Cinny said:

Some great music has been released in the past decade. As good as anything in every decade in the 20th century. If you haven't found it its on you.

As for the lost megabands and megastars, that era is gone. Feel free to mourn it but it had nothing to do with intrinsic musical quality.

People who make excuses for todays shitty POP music are only reinforcing this bad epidemic. You're basically saying its OK to make generic music. Now I know a lot on the org likes mediocre music and talent, OK. HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that the music IS still mediocre though. People who know REAL music, artistry and talent and what it SOUNDS like will call it out. The problem is people NEED to start criticizing it, calling it out more and stop supporting this nonscence that is destoying the music industry. The youth today will not know what real music and artistry is unless you TEACH and expose it to them and the history. You can censor my posts all you want too, this site is shit and yall don't know what real music or what artistry is.

kitbradley said:

mjscarousal said:

People who make excuses for todays shitty POP music are only reinforcing this bad epidemic. You're basically saying its OK to make generic music. Now I know a lot on the org likes mediocre music and talent, OK. HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that the music IS still mediocre though. People who know REAL music, artistry and talent and what it SOUNDS like will call it out. The problem is people NEED to start criticizing it, calling it out more and stop supporting this nonscence that is destoying the music industry. The youth today will not know what real music and artistry is unless you TEACH and expose it to them and the history. You can censor my posts all you want too, this site is shit and yall don't know what real music or what artistry is.

I'd actually agree with almost all of this. The kids do, on occasion, need to be told both that they're wrong and why.

jaawwnn said:

Old Laura yells at cloud.

jaawwnn said:

mjscarousal said:

People who make excuses for todays shitty POP music are only reinforcing this bad epidemic. You're basically saying its OK to make generic music. Now I know a lot on the org likes mediocre music and talent, OK. HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that the music IS still mediocre though. People who know REAL music, artistry and talent and what it SOUNDS like will call it out. The problem is people NEED to start criticizing it, calling it out more and stop supporting this nonscence that is destoying the music industry. The youth today will not know what real music and artistry is unless you TEACH and expose it to them and the history. You can censor my posts all you want too, this site is shit and yall don't know what real music or what artistry is.

I'd actually agree with almost all of this. The kids do, on occasion, need to be told both that they're wrong and why.

Its not just kids though. Its grown adults too. There are actually a lot of kids and youth that don't like any of the music out now.

laurarichardson said:

jaawwnn said:

Some great music has been released in the past decade. As good as anything in every decade in the 20th century. If you haven't found it its on you.

As for the lost megabands and megastars, that era is gone. Feel free to mourn it but it had nothing to do with intrinsic musical quality.

--What is like to live in La La land.

LOL you took that line from me

mjscarousal said:

jaawwnn said:

I'd actually agree with almost all of this. The kids do, on occasion, need to be told both that they're wrong and why.

Its not just kids though. Its grown adults too. There are actually a lot of kids and youth that don't like any of the music out now.

What are you looking for in music? I'm not asking what it is you hate in modern music but what is it you're missing specifically? Are you able to define it?


Your profile says you like Jack White, Kelis, Fiona Apple and Janelle Monae, they're all relatively modern. Are you still a fan of them? Is there a cut off point? I'd be a huge fan of Fiona Apple and a minor fan of Janelle Monae myself. Not huge on Jack White although the White Stripes were the music of my college years and imho Kelis is never as good as I want her to be, fantastic live though.

[Edited 7/25/17 20:47pm]

jaawwnn said:

mjscarousal said:

Its not just kids though. Its grown adults too. There are actually a lot of kids and youth that don't like any of the music out now.

What are you looking for in music? I'm not asking what it is you hate in modern music but what is it you're missing specifically? Are you able to define it?


Your profile says you like Jack White, Kelis, Fiona Apple and Janelle Monae, they're all relatively modern. Are you still a fan of them? Is there a cut off point? I'd be a huge fan of Fiona Apple and a minor fan of Janelle Monae myself.

[Edited 7/25/17 20:40pm]

You picked 4 current artists out of the 40 something old acts I listed But to answer your question, yes I really love those artists a lot. With that being said, I think you are missing the overall point of this discussion. None of those artists are really pop stars or commercial. The focus of this argument that people are mostly referring to is the lack of quality in todays popular mainstream music.

[Edited 7/25/17 20:48pm]

mjscarousal said:

jaawwnn said:

What are you looking for in music? I'm not asking what it is you hate in modern music but what is it you're missing specifically? Are you able to define it?


Your profile says you like Jack White, Kelis, Fiona Apple and Janelle Monae, they're all relatively modern. Are you still a fan of them? Is there a cut off point? I'd be a huge fan of Fiona Apple and a minor fan of Janelle Monae myself.

[Edited 7/25/17 20:40pm]

You picked 4 current artists out of the 40 something old acts I listed But to answer your question, yes I really love those artists a lot. With that being said, I think you are missing the overall point of this discussion. None of those artists are really pop stars or commercial. The focus of this argument that people are mostly referring to is the lack of quality in todays popular mainstream music.

[Edited 7/25/17 20:48pm]

I'd consider those artists pretty mainstream tbh but ok they're not commercial pop.

In regards the point of the dicussion, the most mainstream of Pop music has pretty much always been 95% cash-in and trend following and I don't see it being any different right now. The difference now is I just had a glance at the top 20 Spotify tracks both worldwide and in my country and I hadn't heard of about 70% of them, that wouldn't have been the case even 10 years ago. Fact is they can't force songs on you everywhere you go like they used to so pop music just isn't that big a thing anymore.

jaawwnn said:

mjscarousal said:

You picked 4 current artists out of the 40 something old acts I listed But to answer your question, yes I really love those artists a lot. With that being said, I think you are missing the overall point of this discussion. None of those artists are really pop stars or commercial. The focus of this argument that people are mostly referring to is the lack of quality in todays popular mainstream music.

[Edited 7/25/17 20:48pm]

I'd consider those artists pretty mainstream tbh but ok they're not commercial pop.

In regards the point of the dicussion, the most mainstream of Pop music has pretty much always been 95% cash-in and trend following and I don't see it being any different right now. The difference now is I just had a glance at the top 20 Spotify tracks both worldwide and in my country and I hadn't heard of about 70% of them, that wouldn't have been the case even 10 years ago. Fact is they can't force songs on you everywhere you go like they used to so pop music just isn't that big a thing anymore.

I want to go back and answer your question in regards to what todays pop music is missing. Overall, pop music today is missing artistry and creativity. This is largely missing today because most of these pop stars are not geniune artists to begin with, their products AND before you say (the same thing went on back in the day) Back in the day most of the pop stars were actual artists that wrote and composed their own music (this makes a world of difference). Todays music lacks artistic depth, merit and intergrity. Music is more about branding, marketing and selling PR gimmicks compared to artistry. There is no effort, thought nor time put into crafting a good pop song. In addition, the songs lack soul and authencity. Also, I disagree with you that pop music has always been all about cash and trends. There is an obvious and visible difference from pop music from the 80s compared to now. To suggest, there was no creativity or artistry in pop music back then and it mostly focused on trends and cash is completely false. I would argue most of the pop music in the 80s was innovative, cutting edge and original. It was artistic and creative which is why most of the pop music from that era still influences and inspires music today.

Anybody who says "today's music is shitty pop" but has yet to listen to all of today's pop music so
as to not make assumptions about the whole from the parts; hasn't told us what standards of art/
music they are using for evaluative purposes; hasn't compared and contrasted today's pop music
with yesterday's; and hasn't defined and then identified "real music", has no idea what the hell they
are talking about.

All of this is disastrously conflated when these same "anybody's" declare that this site is "shit" whilst

continuing to post here, betraying they are living with a self-defeating personality disorder for why
persist with patronizing a shitty website about music to complain about shitty music?

I know for certain that once these "anybody's" start making distinctions between what is "real music"
and what is not, then we ought to rightfully question their self-professed or seeming expertness:
there is no fucking such thing as "real music." There is simply music you like, music you don't like,
and music you are "meh" about.

mjscarousal said:

jaawwnn said:

I'd consider those artists pretty mainstream tbh but ok they're not commercial pop.

In regards the point of the dicussion, the most mainstream of Pop music has pretty much always been 95% cash-in and trend following and I don't see it being any different right now. The difference now is I just had a glance at the top 20 Spotify tracks both worldwide and in my country and I hadn't heard of about 70% of them, that wouldn't have been the case even 10 years ago. Fact is they can't force songs on you everywhere you go like they used to so pop music just isn't that big a thing anymore.

I want to go back and answer your question in regards to what todays pop music is missing. Overall, pop music today is missing artistry and creativity. This is largely missing today because most of these pop stars are not geniune artists to begin with, their products AND before you say (the same thing went on back in the day) Back in the day most of the pop stars were actual artists that wrote and composed their own music (this makes a world of difference). Todays music lacks artistic depth, merit and intergrity. Music is more about branding, marketing and selling PR gimmicks compared to artistry. There is no effort, thought nor time put into crafting a good pop song. In addition, the songs lack soul and authencity. Also, I disagree with you that pop music has always been all about cash and trends. There is an obvious and visible difference from pop music from the 80s compared to now. To suggest, there was no creativity or artistry in pop music back then and it mostly focused on trends and cash is completely false. I would argue most of the pop music in the 80s was innovative, cutting edge and original. It was artistic and creative which is why most of the pop music from that era still influences and inspires music today.

There is no way for you to show and/or prove that today's music is missing "artistry and creativity."
You have no way to define "artistry" and/or "creativity" in such a way as to make it global and uni-
versal. You have no way to assess the "soul and authenticity" of songs; there is no fucking objective
test available that accurately gauges "artistry"; no test that accurately gauges "creativity"; no test
that accurately gauges "soul"; and no test that accurately gauges "authenticity"; no test that accu-
rately gauges "effort", "depth", or "integrity." You're simply making this up as you go while appealing
to your preferences. The music you grew up with is what you prefer. You think you have good taste
in art/music, so the music you prefer has all of these noble qualities. However, the music of today is
different and appeals to a different set of standards for what is "good/bad", but you just so happen to
not like it, so your preferences (i.e., biases) immediately frames contemporary music las acking those
noble qualities you imported into the music you grew up listening to.

But please stop acting like you are the sole purveyor of good taste in the Org; I say this as one who
recognizes his own bias for the music he grew up with over today's music that is not written for me
and does not abide by standards of artistry that I grew up with.

Dasein said:

Anybody who says "today's music is shitty pop" but has yet to listen to all of today's pop music so
as to not make assumptions about the whole from the parts; hasn't told us what standards of art/
music they are using for evaluative purposes; hasn't compared and contrasted today's pop music
with yesterday's; and hasn't defined and then identified "real music", has no idea what the hell they
are talking about.

All of this is disastrously conflated when these same "anybody's" declare that this site is "shit" whilst

continuing to post here, betraying they are living with a self-defeating personality disorder for why
persist with patronizing a shitty website about music to complain about shitty music?

I know for certain that once these "anybody's" start making distinctions between what is "real music"
and what is not, then we ought to rightfully question their self-professed or seeming expertness:
there is no fucking such thing as "real music." There is simply music you like, music you don't like,
and music you are "meh" about.

You are making this much more complicated then it really is.

1) I listen to a lot of music and I give new music and artist a chance. With streaming you cannot say people are not listening to all. A virtual jukebox is available 24/7 . Consumers have more access to music then every before in the history of recorded music. So no one is making an assumption.

2) Definition of real music. People that can actually sing without autotune, actual songs with melody and hooks, no one playing around on a casio keyboard like a five year old, no mumbling, something that can people can actually dance to instead of being coma inducing.

3) This website is about Prince so we come to this site to discuss Prince. I do not think the site is shit and I do not think Prince’s music was and is shit.

4) Many musicians,musicologist and music fans have the education, talent and ability to tell you what real music is. The public can tell you with their wallets and since we have seen such a dramatic drop in sales the public is telling us something. Popular music today sucks.

At the end of the day, in order to make a definitive statement about whether or not music has declined you need objective criteria. Not subjective (as everyone here has clung to), but objective.

It is fine to express distaste for modern music, but the problem is that the vast majority of people here are presenting their opinions as unequivocal facts, which leaves no room for argument or disagreement. Even worse, I see countless examples in this thread alone of members being chastised for daring to disagree, as if it is soooooo obvious that music has declined in quality. How, one may ask? Well, it just has! REAL musicians and REAL music consumers know this. It's plainly obvious, right?

This train of thought makes it impossible to have a fair and civil conversation. The fact of the matter is that aesthetic beauty is subjective. You have to introduce some form of criteria that we can discuss, such as musical complexity, or lyricism. Only then can we have a proper discussion. Barring that, all we have are a bunch of grumpy orgers shouting about how things were better in their time.

jaawwnn said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

At the end of the day, in order to make a definitive statement about whether or not music has declined you need objective criteria. Not subjective (as everyone here has clung to), but objective.

It is fine to express distaste for modern music, but the problem is that the vast majority of people here are presenting their opinions as unequivocal facts, which leaves no room for argument or disagreement. Even worse, I see countless examples in this thread alone of members being chastised for daring to disagree, as if it is soooooo obvious that music has declined in quality. How, one may ask? Well, it just has! REAL musicians and REAL music consumers know this. It's plainly obvious, right?

This train of thought makes it impossible to have a fair and civil conversation. The fact of the matter is that aesthetic beauty is subjective. You have to introduce some form of criteria that we can discuss, such as musical complexity, or lyricism. Only then can we have a proper discussion. Barring that, all we have are a bunch of grumpy orgers shouting about how things were better in their time.

Is money objective enough for you. People are not buying this stuff and have not been for sometime.

Music is know a loss leader for most companies. It is a by product of purchasing a phone.

laurarichardson said:

Dasein said:

Anybody who says "today's music is shitty pop" but has yet to listen to all of today's pop music so
as to not make assumptions about the whole from the parts; hasn't told us what standards of art/
music they are using for evaluative purposes; hasn't compared and contrasted today's pop music
with yesterday's; and hasn't defined and then identified "real music", has no idea what the hell they
are talking about.

All of this is disastrously conflated when these same "anybody's" declare that this site is "shit" whilst

continuing to post here, betraying they are living with a self-defeating personality disorder for why
persist with patronizing a shitty website about music to complain about shitty music?

I know for certain that once these "anybody's" start making distinctions between what is "real music"
and what is not, then we ought to rightfully question their self-professed or seeming expertness:
there is no fucking such thing as "real music." There is simply music you like, music you don't like,
and music you are "meh" about.

You are making this much more complicated then it really is.

1) I listen to a lot of music and I give new music and artist a chance. With streaming you cannot say people are not listening to all. A virtual jukebox is available 24/7 . Consumers have more access to music then every before in the history of recorded music. So no one is making an assumption.

2) Definition of real music. People that can actually sing without autotune, actual songs with melody and hooks, no one playing around on a casio keyboard like a five year old, no mumbling, something that can people can actually dance to instead of being coma inducing.

3) This website is about Prince so we come to this site to discuss Prince. I do not think the site is shit and I do not think Prince’s music was and is shit.

4) Many musicians,musicologist and music fans have the education, talent and ability to tell you what real music is. The public can tell you with their wallets and since we have seen such a dramatic drop in sales the public is telling us something. Popular music today sucks.

I'm not making this more complicated: I'm pointing out the groundless ground argument that there
is an inherent quality of contemporary music that is inferior to the music that was released in the
past. And, I can tell you that you do not understand my argument as Carousal's post, and yours,
does assume that today's music is "shit" just because of what is featured on the Billboard charts.
But, in order to lend credence to your claims about the quality of contemporary music, as a whole,
shouldn't you listen to ALL of it before making any generalizations about the status of contemporary
music? That is why I scolded her (and now you) for assuming that what is featured in the main-
stream (a part) stands for the whole of all recorded contemporary music being released by musicians.

Your definition of "real music" is arbitrary and reveals what YOU prefer to listen to, not what some
governing body of taste-making music professionals has told us how and what real music is. There is
no such thing as an "actual song" - you just made that up. There is no guild who tells us what an
"actual song" must be because that doesn't even fucking exist - look up the word, and you won't see
any goofy qualifiers that mentions a song "can't be made on a Casio keyboard; can't have any mum-
bling; must be danceable; must have a hook". All of those things you mentioned are simply what
YOU prefer.

You are making another assumption: that the lack of success of contemporary recording artists is
caused by "shitty music." That's another groundless ground argument that features you wrongly
equating correlation with causality. The reason why the music industry is not what it used to be is
not because of the quality of music being released; instead, it may have more to do with the advent
of the internet which greatly reduced the role of record companies. Here's another way your argu-
ment falls flat: how do explain Prince's recent lack of commercial success? Did he stop making
platinum records because he was all of a sudden a shitty musician? Of course not! The marketplace
changed because of the internet: why buy an album when I can download it for free? And, how do
you explain pop country artists still being able to sell records? Are you telling me that pop country
musicians are the only ones in the industry making "good music"? Of course not!

I'm talking about chess, and y'all are talking about checkers . . .