 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Moderators, Registered Joined: 13/02/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,094   Location: Probably not here Was thanked: 113 time(s) in 76 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Mt. Epic  Originally Posted by: stephaniewazhere Actually I do.
I believe a true singer, is someone who sings from the heart. Same applies with artist, writer ect. While many people feel the same way as me, in the end that is also an opinion.
Once again your rebellious teacher is feeding you rebellious opinions. There is no such thing as "good quality" music in the sense of the way you perceive it, since that's a broad definition to many. It's all opinion.
I'm kind of shocked your AP teacher didn't teach you music appreciation. Now if you're the one making it, then it might not meet your standards, and then it might be low quality to you. Because its not being heard the way you want it to be heard.
Album fillers are an exception.
How do you know the music being made nowadays is made quickly. Are you in fact in the studio with every artists that makes music. Do you know the actual process of making a song?
Whether is being made quickly or not, don't you understand that some people work faster than others. Some peoeple can learn the composition of a song by listening to it just once.
There are so many things I could go on about, but since it all varies in the end, it won't really prove my point. lol, don't blame my teacher on this. I am the one who did the research, so insult me instead (yes, I am proud to be his pupil because he is one of the finest in the business). But, all TRUE musicians will agree that the music created nowadays is complete and utter bullshit. For example, how many "rap" artists can you think of that rap about getting laid, doing drugs, and shooting people? How many "rock" bands can you think of that have a simple catchy guitar part to it, and the singer either sounds like Peyton Manning or a 17 year old blonde chick? And the ones that are "metal" who have all of those piercing and nonsense tattoos, who all have a couple of distorted chords and hoarse vocals to sound almost pleasingly evil? But, of course we are talking about your precious dance pop music (whatever you wish to call it). How many of those women (we'll get to the lads later) have a song about being heartbroken? How many of them have those "I don't give a fuck about you anymore songs"? How many of them have music that doesn't have some meaning to "love"? Do you really think all of those woman are truly always getting rejected? C'mon! They're hot, they have money, and they...well, that's pretty much it. You can't be a real artist and constantly have your personal lives up in the internet, being updated every couple seconds. Do you see any bands that are lucky enough to be talented and in the mainstream such as Foo Fighters have anything up other than their discography and tickets for sale when you look them up? When you look up Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, Shakira, etc., you get all of this garbage about how one of them said something to another, and they all get personal about this, and they wear this dress, or they say something smart on some show, or wear provocatively somewhere, or something like that, and that's because they are celebrities. But they aren't celebrities in the same sense that celebrities used to be. They are all walking advertisements. None of them are actually just being genuine, they are robots, not in the sense that most people consider robots to being man-made mechanical programmings. Rather, they are used for marketing. They can help shows get a good rating, help a product sell, make THEIR products sell (Albums, singles, EP's, etc.). Nothing they do is genuine, and you are a fool to fall for any of their stories and fairytales. Their music is exactly the same. Watch the film "Before the Music Dies". You will learn so much about the music industry. You will see truly how wicked those people are, and that they only care about the money. They can take the worst singer ever, add a couple synths, auto-tune the shit out of their voices, and they will make you think she has the greatest soprano voice ever on the face of this earth. Normally I wouldn't agree with such generalisations, but you're pretty much right. I don't think it's the artists that are "evil", but the producers, the label execs, the entire apparatus of the traditional music industry is a horribly exploitative industry which uses talent or looks for as long as it turns a profit, then discards them (but conveniently holds onto all of the rights to their recorded material in perpetuity). In the mainstream pop world (and I'm talking right from talented singer-dancer types like Beyonce down through popular bands with some level of "credibility" like Foo Fighters), it's a marketer's industry not an artist's industry. They know how to exploit certain demographics, and you can bet they have an artist for every occasion, and a promotional strategy to match. Mainstream pop is all about the hit single, the video, the TV appearances, the multimedia blitz. Only a few artists prove to have much longevity up there. For rock bands there's a slower burn, because the consumers don't like to think they're being pandered to (even though they totally are). So they'll keep bands around who reliably hit smaller more dedicated audiences. It's all horribly cynical though. Now of course now that the internet has deemed music valueless, we're in a world where the horrible process of manufacturing these new popstars happens on prime-time television. When somebody wins American Idol or X-Factor, the moment of them winning that contest is the biggest they will ever be, because it happened live on television. |
