The Holonet Boards   » Beyond Star Wars   » Pop: The Death of Music?


BobPalpatine

posted 08-29-2002 12:44 PM    
If you are like me you think pop is the root of all evil. And if you think that you would be right!

Too many people decide today on what is good music by how many copies it sells. I can tell you though that all that pop music is selling is sex. They are not selling the music.

Why do you think so many boy bands and singers like Britney Spears sell out concerts, and sell so many cds? Is it because of the music? I've listened to it, and I want to paint the wall with my brains after listening to them about twice. Sure the music is catchy. Pop music is written by a team of professionals to do just that. Catch the audience with catchy beats and a generalized sound.

The music industry pushes pop music out to the forefront today, because it is what sells. They push whatever is popular at the moment out onto the buyers, and like sheep the consumers buy into it.

The latest example, Avril Lavigne. While some of you might enjoy her pop-hit "Complicated", it is pure pop. I agree it is catchy, but is it top quality music? If you go to Avril's website, you see how she is a "sk8r punk" and how she makes her own punk music. Since when is pop punk? She is dressed up to be the next "punk" by putting her into overpriced clothes from Hot Topic. Her claiming that her music is punk is a disgrace to real punk bands like The Ramones and such forth.

When you buy pop music, all you are buying is some over-produced vocals, being put to beats you probably already heard before, just mixed up a little bit. And why do people buy this? Well mainly because most of them are to young to realize and understand the importance of lyrics and other musical aspects. You are buying into the person, not the music.

I know I am overgenerlizing. I'm sure there actually are some talented pop singers out there. Maybe they can sing, and they don't need Pro-tools to fix their vocals in the studio, but until I see one hit the fore front again. I will beleive music is still on a steep downward turn.

More people should embrace music they haven't heard before, and actually listen to a song, instead of just nodding your head along to a beat. When you buy a cd, buy music, not a over-produced product.


Entaris

posted 08-29-2002 01:36 PM    
yes, pop is indeed how to put it gently? a load of cr*p(pretends like no one can tell what the word was meant to be).

Maybe its the fact that i dont pay much attention to the words of a song at first, as pop is simply words, with beats, i mean, jeez, the drummer, and gutar players in a pop band dont get any credit, which is cr*p.
I like to hear a nice beat,and i mean a REAL beat. like "Moonbaby-God smack" now thats a song you can listen to and have fun... awsom drum and gutar...and to back the kick @$$ beat up, you got a cool song being sung as well.


Taehun

posted 08-29-2002 03:46 PM    
It disgusts me to think that so many people listen to pop. And what Bob said about Avril is exactly right...I experience this firsthand when I see people walking around my highschool campus trying to look 'punk', because being a so called punk is now the cool thing.

I have a story one of my friends told me that relates to this:

A girl and a boy are walking along the street together. The boy calls himself a punk. So the girl asks him to explain what being a punk is. The boy kicks over a trashcan and says, "That's punk." They keep walking, and come up to another trashcan, and now the girl kicks it over. She asks, "Am I a punk now?"

The boy says, "No, you're trendy."

Don't get me wrong, I think people should just listen to whatever music they like, and whatever they have fun listening to...but I really cannot understand why anyone would ever listen to pop...I listen to practically everything, with the exception of pop. It just sounds too...synthesized, if you know what I mean.


Graysith

posted 08-29-2002 08:28 PM    
Shrugs and shakes her head....

I too don't understand, but then I'm of the classical school of thought myself. And soundtracks. And a little trance, maybe. Heh.

And yes, on occasion I have been known to get into the Oldies, hehehe...

Casts eyes upward, beginning to hum the "Fur Elise....

To me, a good rhythm and depth of sound is what counts... and if lyrics, please let them not be nasty ones....


Anakin

posted 08-29-2002 08:44 PM    
It's just music. Which part bothers you the most? The repetitive lyrics? Or the fact that the people singing the music aren't playing instruments, but just dancing?

I dunno, I don't like it much, but I don't understand why there's so much hatred towards it. A lot of the beats and lyrics are catchy, and the artists are talented at using their voice box, so what's the problem?

I'd rather listen to Britney Spears than Paula Abdul...there is no music I hate more than Paula Abdul's. I don't know how people made it through the 80's without committing suicide.


BobPalpatine

posted 08-29-2002 10:32 PM    
Anakin, have you ever heard of Pro-tools? Its a program used by professionals in the music business, to change the sound of a singer. So say Britney can't hit that high C, they just have her sing an octave lower, and then they use pro-tools and change it to that high C. That's the whole problem with pop music today. Half of them really aren't that good at using their voices, they just have programs that make em sound like they are. This is one of the downturns of music today. People aren't getting by on talent like some others in the music business. They are getting by because they look good, and that is part of pop music...

I don't know, it just seems to make me mad because they aren't getting by on their true talent.

Oh yea, and most pop stars don't sing live. You know why? Because they can't hit the notes in their songs, they have pro-tools to do that for them in the studio.


Taehun

posted 08-30-2002 12:17 AM    
Don't forget that most of their 'instrumental' music is computer generated (ie: a drum machine) Trust me, you can tell the difference most of the time, and I don't even like rock bands that synthesize their music too much.

LumbiaSith

posted 08-30-2002 12:41 AM    
Its horrible, but not that horrible. I dont think it could infect everything, even though their lyrically are horrible, and the Old Pop with Micheal Jackson was much better. Im talking about the Black Micheal, not the Demonish Pale One.

These Boybands are the kill of music, and those fake Britney Spear body, no singing voice people....


Entaris

posted 08-30-2002 01:39 PM    
its all about the jackson five... actauly no...its all about anyone that has fun doing what they love, whether they have talent or not, i mean, them making money do to machines isnt right, they should get stuff based on talant, but as long as there doing what they love, its all good, its just a shame though, because everyone has talant, while some cant hit those certain notes, its about finding the ones you can hit, and figuring out how to fine tune it...

Padme of Hidden Lake

posted 08-30-2002 05:04 PM    
my big problem with today's pop is the image it presents to kids about what you "must" dress and act like to be "cool" it basically promotes degrading and even dangerous behaviors that the younger audience doesn't always have the "tools" to deal with and say - no this isn't a good thing, they just do it cause it's "cool" to and end up hurt because of it. Today's young pop "stars" don't realize how much of a model they are for young kids and they don't think about how they are going to affect them with thier music, clothing, and actions.

Jedi_Zachaa

posted 09-04-2002 02:21 PM    
I agree, I really don't like the way some pop stars abuse their role-model image for kids. There was this infomercial for a CD with kids singing hits, and one of them was "Oops, I Did It Again." Now is it just me, or is that not a terrible, terrible message to send to your kids? It's okay (and fun) to play with people's hearts? It makes me sick!! And the constant push to show more and more skin and make little kids look "sexy." It's no wonder little girls are getting abducted by sick, twisted pedophiles.

I haven't really listened to pop music, unless I'm with someone else like my cousins. For the most part I'm a music hermit, I stick to my Classic Rock, where at least the people in the bands choose each other as bandmates and most of the time they write their own music and play their own instruments.

Enjoying a Page guitar riff right now.


Anakin

posted 09-04-2002 03:50 PM    
Blake, I dunno about that program, got any proof?

I can't stand it when they don't sing live, it's just dumb, but then I don't listen to them often.

If you can prove it I'll be a pop hater like you.


BobPalpatine

posted 09-04-2002 09:45 PM    
Proof that pro-tools exists or that they don't sing on stage?

Watch any live performance of most big pop singers and watch there mouths, that's all the proof you need.


Anakin

posted 09-04-2002 10:53 PM    
Oh hell, I know they don't sing on stage, at least I know Britney Spears doesn't, I don't know about the rest.

Prove pro-tools does what you said it does for who you said it does it for.


Mara1Jade

posted 09-05-2002 09:39 AM    
As a music student/person, I can personally verify that there IS such a thing as pro-tools. I've had the opportunity to see some recording and mixing done firsthand for both singers and orchestras. Because computers are so cool these days, they can actually map out every note sung or played during a recording session. You can go to the "map" of the song/piece and, with literally the click of a button, change notes that are played wrong, move things up the octave, and add effects. Suppose you want a singer to hit an a above the staff: you tell him or her to sing the a in the staff, go back to that a on the "map" later, and simply move the note. Most of these programs are so advanced you can literally move sung/played notes up microtones if necessary (i.e. if something isn't quite an a, you can just move it up a notch with your mouse).

But yeah, those sorts of programs exist.