Ok, just a thought..

This mostly pertains to rock, not so much rap.. Because I agree most non-stream rappers are better.

ANYWAY.

Why do people always say "blah blah THESE BANDS ARE BETTER AND THEY AREN'T OVERHYPED!!>!>!>>.>.>!one"

Seriously, there are a reason mainstream bands are mainstream. It's because they have good music, and the only reason that you think it is bad is because you hear a lot of it.

For example, if Slipknot wasn't so popular and another non-mainstream band who you claim is better was more popular and was played all the time, I guarantee that you would say "pmfg Slipknot is SO much better than yada yada band."

I think its a mixture of two things; personal gain and boredom of a certain band.

I say personal gain because for SOME reason people who listen to non-mainstream bands have a smug sense of superiority to those who listen to mainstream bands. They act like they are the "rebels" and "real" listeners because THEY listen to the not to popular stuff.

Boredom is pretty much self explanatory.. the more you're around something, the more bored of it you become. This happens when you're exposed to mainstream music. However, this doesn't mean that their music is any worse than another bands, you're just bored of it.

Your thoughts pleaseeeeeeee.

 

The reason is because mostly kids buy music, or parents for their kids.

Of course, there are also good, popular bands. But that accounts for most of the shit put out by hot topic.

 

Completely disagree, these bands "do not produce good music" but rather a collection of simplistic beats and patterns made to appease the masses. The reason I don't listen to anything mainstream because of the fact that it is a complete snooze fest, dumbed down art in order to gain a fan base, the artists aren't doing it to express their creative ways, their issues on the world etc but rather for a profit.

Can you personally pick out a band that actually produces well made music (ie actually invovles years of background knowledge music, theory etc?)

 

All I like to say is FUCK Lil Wayne and his shitty music making money. It makes no sense to me. (And soulja fag)

 

For the most part I would say you are correct. But for example with slipknot. I dislike them, although I use to like them, because I enjoyed a couple of there songs but with time it seemed like they were getting worse and worse and changed there music, to something I dislike plus for other reasons of them being ignorant pieces of shit. But I still enjoy those couple of songs I liked previously I just dislike where the band has gone since then.

 

It is quite simple, our general community today enjoy rebelling, or 'Sticking it to the man'.

Have you ever noticed bands that were amazing before they were well known usually did a lot better? Slipknot, Green Day, the list can go on and on.

I just think most people stop liking stuff when everyone is like "You rock!" but then a month later they start putting it on TV, and Radio and then people don't like it.

Overall it is a never ending chain of stupid Americans trying to be 'Rebel'.

Peace,
J.J


​

 

Ha, I don't really like many slipknot songs either. I was just using them as an example of a band that a lot of people like.

lolbannedfag

 

Experience making and knowledge about/playing music doesn't make a good musician. I've listened to many artists whose debuts are amazingly creative and innovative.

 

Examples?

And oh, shouldn't these "artists" and "musicians" have some sort of background knowledge of music to be deemed professionals if they are make a living off of it?

 

Off the top of my head, King Crimson's In The Court Of The Crimson King. That was there debut and none of the musicians who played in it were in a band before. Also, Pink Floyd members were never in a band before that group. And my statement could be proved another way....How many musicians who DO have alot pf practice making and playing music yet make completely shit music. Once again experience no= good music.

 

I'm not talking about musical experience as in never in band before etc, but rather knowledge of music, background knowledge of music of theory etc.

Needless to say Pink Floyd is a good example of mainstream music that actually exhibits musical genius etc but even then I wouldn't consider Pink Floyd to be entirely mainstream.

As with your little practice point I can name endless amounts of amazing musicians who get better everyday because of practising learning etc.

 

I don't think you understand me. I said if you know about music doesn't mean your music will be good. Of course if you have a deep knowledge of music theory and the such then your music will be more likely to have the qualities of good music. But it doesn't necessarily mean it will be good. My original point was that it isn't required to make good music. I never said it doesn't help. We're just dealing with semantics here. And no, I really wouldn't consider Pink Floyd mainstream either . And definently not back when they were still making music.

 

I've only seen this in rap, where everyone hates mainstream and people are all about the non popular stuff, but it actually makes sense because the old rap is better, but when you try putting the story to Metal, this story doesn't kick in.

In Metal it's different, death metal is hated by many people (just because you like death metal doesn't mean the whole world likes it and it's popular as hell) and then the Mainstream Metal is enjoyed, and old bands are also enjoyed like Metallica, Iron Maiden, Led zeppelin, etc.

Metal heads do this to be "rebels" and rap people do this because they get bored of mainstream rap. I got bored of mainstream rap when I used to listen to rap but I ended up listening to Metal instead of old rap.

 

Wut? Led Zeppelin isn't metal first. And why would metalheads be into the new stuff and the old stuff, and NOT the unpopular stuff(death metal) to be rebels? Wouldn't it be the opposite?

 

Rap between 1992 ish and 1998 is what I like.

 

I agree. people think there cool when they listen to the not popular music. I don't care as long as its good and its almost always is "mainstream music". And "mainstream music" is good music or they would play something else.

 

If you are suggesting that if everyone likes it, it must be good, than you're simply unintelligent.

I listened to the radio yesterday when I went to my friend's house and I didn't stop laughing. If that is what's "mainstream", I'd rather listen to the unpopular crap I already do listen to.

 

No I'm saying mainstream music is good music because it gets enough support from people so that it can be on media.

 

Yea, you're not smart. That is exactly what you are saying. If everyone listens to it, it's good music. That's exactly what you're saying. Wow I'm kind of stunned you're slow enough to not realize what you're saying. How are you a User Educator?

 

What I'm saying perhaps I didn't write it clearly enough is:

If music is in the media then most people prefer that music over the music that is not in the media, if not then the music not in the media would be in the media.