When humans hear birds singing, we hear music and melody. When birds hear birds singing, they hear male birds hitting on female birds, and aggressive battle/territorial cries.
Music is personal experience...period....Yes, it is true....experience is part of it...memories another and so on. I like what makes me feel....I don't want to think so much about music and how excellently and perfectly the music is written...it is not a cerebral experience for me at all...There are some classical pieces,too, that can bore me to tears....where others make me feel happy to be alive.... I like melodies......that is why I am not much in to rap , for instance. There are some more modern bands I liked right off the bat at first hearing.... Train, The Church with Under the Milky Way, Adele, Daughtry, Crowded House with Don't Dream that its Over, One Republic and Hoobastank to name a few. Again.....comparing music to art...I can see how some art pieces are so perfectly executed ...the human body could be a photograph of someone , ect.....anatomically correct....and so on....but if the piece does not make me feel anything...so what?
At least "Yellow Polkadot Bikini" was poppy and upbeat. If you turn on a modern rock station you just get depressing song after depressing song about what a loser you are.
^ Yah that's a pretty horrible song, Sisqo's "Thong song" popularized the Thong, doesn't equate to good music.
and a few days before anyone mentioned that song......just a few days....I was thinking about this song and was going to add it to a music thread. Glad I didn't now...LOL
well if you're listening to a modern rock radio station you probably are a depressing loser. that's irrelevant though, it has been pointed out time and again in this thread that you're not going to hear any good music on the radio.
I'm noticing a trend: people who are saying modern music sucks are consuming their music via radio; people saying modern music is awesome are consuming their music via online streaming services, YouTube, etc. I'm not going to disagree with anyone saying Top 40 radio sucks. It does. I'll n the past, good music was served to you; today, it isn't. You have to go out and hunt for it. Some are out off by that idea, and I really think that's the cruxt of the argument here: the delivery mechanism of "good" music has changed. Some of us easily adapted to that change, some of us resisted it. Not picking on anyone here...just stating what I see. Good music isn't gone. It's just harder to find these days. That's all that's really changed.
In the past, popular music reached a unified young audience. Everyone listened to basically the same thing. A much more homogeneous market. Today the market is severely fragmented.
I wonder if that is cause or effect. As I mentioned in another post in this thread, we have many more music genres today than we did in the days of The Doors and The Rolling Stones. I wonder if the splintering of musical genres was a response to a fracturing fan base. Or, is the market fractured today as a result of ever-evolving music?
I don't know, there were a lot of genres back then too. More now I agree, but there was classical, jazz, country and western, blue grass, folk, R&B, psychedelic, Motown, the Philly sound, surf, southern rock, funk, the blues, gospel, Cuban, Mexican, progressive, Latin American, Irish, Indian, and so on.
hey come up with more shit in a day than I can.[/QUOTE] Way wrong. I depends on the station that you listen to. I DJ at a non-commercial community radio station (KDVS 90.3FM) and the non-commercial stations are playing good music, many genres. I keep hearing that modern music is crap. And those complaints sound different from my grandpa's generation saying that rock and roll is a sign of the apocalypse. The difference is the internet. The internet (computers in general) are real good at finding what you are looking for. But they are no good at exposing one to new things. (example. in a physical library you have to walk past the books about tubas to get to the books about guitars, a tuba book might catch your eye. In the internet, you can get to guitars without knowing that a tuba exists) The internet is no good for finding new music. The closest that it comes is that it will find unknown music similar to what you've listened to in the past. It won't broaden your horizons. Commercial radio has always been about delivering listener's ears to advertisers. About playing music that attracts a defined demographic. It will narrow your horizons to fit inside that demographic. (caveat, this applies to a single station. In a vibrant multi-station market, a station might reach away from the known to attract more ears away from competing stations [insert rant about corporate ownership of media], although the advertisers will want a defined demographic. Diverse music means diverse listeners, not what advertisers want.) I reach back to John Phillips Souza's comment about the phonograph. He thought that it would ruin American music. And he was right. Before Edison, music was something that one made (humming...). While there were traveling musicians, most of the music in ones life was self made. After the phonograph, music is something that one consumed. Edison turned music from a do-it-yourself thing to a commercial product. If you don't like modern music, then make your own music. Yeah, not going to happen. The results of the phonograph are not going to be reversed for this generation. Well then, how about you go hang at local clubs, house shows, small festivals etc and find the bands that are making good music. When someone says that modern music sucks, what I hear is that they aren't willing to go look for good music. Either they have been totally brainwashed by commercialism (that music is a commodity, that what is presented by middlemen (e.g. Spotify, Clear Channel) is the definition of "music") and/or they aren't willing to invest their time and effort into finding better than what they run across without effort.
I think technology, which is addressed in the op video is a large component to the fragmenting of the market. I meant that sentence primarily with the notion of the way music is consumed but thinking about it, it seems music itself usually branches off into different genre(s) when new technologies are developed and utilized, so I'd lean towards the latter. The Studio effects of Sgt. Peppers, the expansion of possibilities of the Electric Guitar with Hendrix/Clapton, the 808 synth largely influencing Hip Hop/ Electro, the 303 synth being predominant in Acid House/Techno, up through the DAWs of today which provide novel sounds and ways to produce music.
I don't see the correlation that would make it probable that if one is listening to a modern rock radio station they are a depressing loser. I hear modern rock played on the radio at least two to three times a week when I'm at work. But it's not the whole of it. The other stations are just as bad. Situations arise where everybody has to agree to some music, but no one person can select which music for all. Or if they do, they willfully select radio. No one has to deal with putting themselves out there that way. Or causing anyone in the group who hates their taste in music to suffer. So it gets turned on places. And it tells us what is popular. The music that the most people like.
that's a good point. i forgot how much i used to love listening to college radio. i've lived outside of the city for so long that i had kind of forgotten that there is such a thing as non-commercial radio. around here, NPR is the only thing that might qualify, and they don't really play much music either. well that was basically a joke, based on how awful modern radio rock music typically is.
I listen to a vast genre of music and specific sub genre within genre, so I feel I appreciate all music. I believe all music has its merit and right to be and exist, just because I don't like it doesn't mean it is bad or it sucks it's just I wasn't created and geared towards that, I have my own likes and sounds but others don't like them so really, music is all very individual and statistically with more people in the world today than 40 years ago, probably all genres have statistically gained in popularity, so science can go suck a fat one on this too. Science proves science is ignorant. /
"Modern music" is a pretty general fucking term. To act like all modern music is corporate pop or R&B is just ignorant. To be more precise would be to say that the music that receives widespread attention and radio play sucks. Or at least it does most of the time. I feel sorry for people who limit themselves only to what they're familiar with. To find good music these days you have to look to the more independent record labels, and even some them aren't THAT independent anymore.