Weird for a guy to like pop?

[King Cudder]

Pop is dope bro.

 

[filth]

What? It's shit because people are getting international fame for completely undeserved credit. The previous listed musicians were ones that at least had a little bit of credit maybe on a couple of songs. There are SO MANY other "Groups" and "Artists" these days that literally aren't credited at all, because they didn't do anything but play 4 chords and/or sing some pre-written lyrics. Oooh, so much more worthy than real bands and artists that grout day and night to push out real emotion-filled lyrics and music. Also, you don't get the same emotion because the performer of the song has a different perspective/feeling than the writer, always. Someone might write something that a singer has no prior experience or knowledge in, but they perform it anyway because as you said they "sold themselves to devil". They become the label's bitch and they do whatever they want, when they want, and they play what they want now much more than ever. You can argue it all day if you want, but the matter of the fact is you don't get the same emotion from performing another person's song. Sure you may be able to fabricate and project it, but it's not the same at the end of the day. Face it dude, most pop performers get some sheet music, a check, and that's all they need to fake an album.

And really?? "They" who put "Meaning" to a lot of these "Songs" are usually in it strictly for the business aspect, and that means solely numbers. If you really think these 4 chord pop songs with generic lyrics revolving around generic subjects are anything "Worthy" of listening to, then you need to do some long thinking. Not to say this hasn't been going on for awhile, if you like pop puppets you should try out Rick Astley, however it's so much more rampant these days and people hardly look/are able to look beyond the top 40 rotation on the radio. All they have to do is force feed it down your throat by repetitive play every other commercial break and it'll become a hit. Bring on the grammys! Meanwhile, the real musicians are just trying to get their stuff heard by a few ears. Idk how it is everywhere, but just in 10 years most of my local radio stations have quit promoting local bands and only pump out the charts.

Also, you couldn't say much about a band that writes their own songs other than it's not your taste... Just like if there are pop stars out there that actually write their own songs (And there really aren't many) I can only say it's not my taste. These, again, are "Pop puppets", they don't deserve to be famous, they don't deserve the universally known ownership of anything they perform (Most people just accept that they wrote/made it), and there is no way in hell you can convince me they don't have the time to learn something like... Creativity. Their lives consist of hanging around their mansions, on the road, and um... PLAYING MUSIC. I promise you these people aren't as busy as you think, their "people" do their work for them.

I have another theory: These people are getting 'money' to perform and take these pre-made songs to the top of the charts and neither they, nor their record producers/"Song writers" give two fucks about the true art and beauty of music. It's purely for the money. Therefore, you should want to get rid of this crap and promote stuff that deserves to be heard so that maybe if people pull together we can get it to the general public's ears and get rid of this safe, generic cancer in the music industry. Don't forget, in a tumbling economy industries have to play it safe with what they know will be successful, there is no time for risks and new artists, that would be gambling, a hit or miss. Who knows if people would like them? The reason these songs are so rampant and popular is because they aren't a risk, and they know what modern culture/generations will eat up like cake!

Tl;dr - Most modern pop songs are effortless pieces of garbage, I'm not trying to rip on anyone's taste, I'm just stating what should be the obvious... It all boils down to money, and pop songs are made to make that, not because some lonely guy got dumped and wrote a song, not because some teenager lost their father, it's a person at a desk writing a song that they know will be successful. Nothing more, nothing less. These people write dozens of songs a day.

haha this is hilarious... little baby thinks he actually has a valid opinion on music awwwwwww

protip: try to actually list musical reasons why things are bad instead of using useless vague blanket terms and buzzwords that mean nothing and only highlight your stupidity and arrogance

 

[durkatine]

You are not necessary gay but the music itself is pretty gayish... I like it too but I keep that to myself mostly haha

 

[Nickâ„¢]

IMO it isn't, i have a 250lbs(full muscle) friend who is top 100 in the nation playing football(running back in highschool), and he listens and knows all the lyrics as he sings to ke$ha and everything else on the radio, how i regret long trips with him in the car with only the radio.

 

[Possibilities]

It's all personal preference. Everyone likes something catchy, and pop music is basically 100% catchy tunes with a catchy vocalist, so it's not surprising.

I'm more into Indie-Rock (Elliott Smith, Quasi, Fleet Foxes, etc.) and some Hardcore/Post-hardcore music (The Word Alive, Of Mice & Men, Like Moths to Flames), and most anything in between those two "rock genres", really, which is a huge spectrum, and I still find myself listening to Pink, or fun., mainly on the radio, but still, if it's on, I'll listen to it and like it, ya know?

The way I see it, nobody should be judged by their music preference, cause everyone likes something different.

A lot of it comes from what you grow up listening to or surrounded by, also.

 

[Nickâ„¢]

It's all personal preference. Everyone likes something catchy, and pop music is basically 100% catchy tunes with a catchy vocalist, so it's not surprising.

I'm more into Indie-Rock (Elliott Smith, Quasi, Fleet Foxes, etc.) and some Hardcore/Post-hardcore music (The Word Alive, Of Mice & Men, Like Moths to Flames), and most anything in between those two "rock genres", really, which is a huge spectrum, and I still find myself listening to Pink, or fun., mainly on the radio, but still, if it's on, I'll listen to it and like it, ya know?

The way I see it, nobody should be judged by their music preference, cause everyone likes something different.

A lot of it comes from what you grow up listening to or surrounded by, also.

That is so true.

 

[Jet ~]

am I gay if I liked this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53R7mrawyLs

 

[TradeFortress]

Any music that you enjoy is good.

I personally like most music except hardcore rock, metal, etc. Try listening to some old songs like those ones and you'll get a wider variety of what music you want to listen to.

 

[christopher121]

Theres nothing wrong to listening what you like. To think of others when making a choice is not the way to go.

 

[SupremeBeing]

That was hilarious. But no, you just like modern pop instead of gay rock.

 

[FloydZeppelin]

Kind of like bands who became world renound for covers. No one seems to care about those though.

Really, I don't usually give two shits about bands like that. Some people call zeppelin rip offs, and I can see where they're coming from on some points. Other than that though, you're right.. I don't think bands should be famous off of solely covering other bands (apocolyptica - metallica), I can't think of any other bands.

I used to be -exactly- like you. But when push comes to shove it isn't skill or talent that is a requirement, it's marketing. If a group now a-days can't at least put the effort into using the widely available options to market their music then I have a really, really hard time feeling bad for them.

What does that have to do with the majority of pop stars/songs being effortless pieces of garbage made in an office?

The days of needing luck and a label to take you is over, it is much easier to make a name for yourself.

Good point but when people give much more attention to this crap, it directs it clear away from the real acts that are trying to make a name for themselves. This is pretty much the story of any underground band trying to break into a littered mainstream.

Let me put it bluntly. No one cares. Really, as long as a person enjoys the music who cares what effort the performer put into it. Music is a product, even the best artists realize this, this is why they're successful.

Okay, so what you're telling me is music is purely a product and not art of any sort and shouldn't be treated as one, sounds legit. Also I'd love to hear who your idea of "best artists" are because they should have everything stripped from them immediately for contaminating the music industry with their frivolous and money-driven purposes. By the way they're only successful because max martin and all the big boys make it that way. Fight me about it.

Because this was the case with Johnny Cash performing Hurt, a song he didn't write. Or like 90% of what Frank Sinatra performed.

The NIN song cover didn't have the same emotion at all, though??? Actually the only feeling I got from the Cash cover was a morbid feeling of aging and death which was accompanied by his death only a few months after that was released, if I recall correctly. Also Frank sinatra is an over hyped pop star, like the OG puppet if you will. Don't care to even defend him. He's actually a pretty bad example of emotion-filled cover artists/pop performers.

What does this even mean.

poppy = pop singer
Bob = the record producer/song writer

Say bob writes a song that hints at subjects on family abuse or substance abuse (not saying this would happen but for the sake of the reply just follow). He then requires poppy record it for her new album which she obliges because well.... it's what pop singers do why do you think none of them are listed as writers (and as I said, sometimes NO CREDIT AT ALL!). Anyway though, poppy has never seen or dealt with those issues so to even say that it would be projected the same way as someone who wrote it from the heart? That's tarded.

Yeah, no. It's the same as it has always been. Please stop looking at the past with rose tinted glasses.

Are you serious dude? I understand that pop has always been around and people who don't write their songs have always been around but to say that it ISN'T more rampant today? Okay........ Yeah I'm the one with rose tinted glasses on..

Wrong.

Um.....COMPLETELY RIGHT.

What is worthy of listening to is dictated by the end consumer. You can not change this fact.

True point, but the matter of the fact is if it's pushed hard enough into mainstream it will become popular and liked by the masses no if, ands, or buts. Also I've seen a lot of cases outside of the internet where younger kids are pretty much forced to grow up on that garbage because their mom forbids every other kind of music or is just ultimately in charge of what is listened to or watched at home, so it's not always just dictated. Sometimes it's just spoonfed to kids because it's "Safe".

I like some pop songs and I like lots of other stuff, care to make more generalizations about people?

At least they're accurate generalizations..... You're a 2k+ poster on an internet forum, I'd expect you to be the type to seek a wider variety of music. This doesn't go for the other masses of bimbos that think the internet only exists for facebook.

The radio is largely becoming an unnecessary medium, the internet seems to be doing a lot better. I mean look at Gangnam style; an international superhit thanks to the internet.

I agree that the internet is doing better in terms of current activity, but the radio wasn't always and still really isn't 'unnecessary'. A radio station could take a local band and make them pretty big with decent exposure, the internet doesn't really limit it, so to speak, but it definitely detracts the amount of listeners from it, for sure. Gangnam style is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Most people watched and made that popular because it was pretty much a meme in a music video. Everyone likes a fat dancing asian... Or maybe it was the beautiful back music and words that made it a hit.

Your mistake is assuming the radio is necessary.

My mistake was assuming people would care about the real art of music.

It doesn't matter who wrote it, it all comes down to being not your tastes.

Ok, people who have their bosses write all of their lyrics and music are NOT my taste!!! I wish I could have a painter paint me a picture and let me sign it at the bottom!

Again, no one cares who the hell wrote what. A catchy song is a catchy song to anyone who listens. It's not like their songs are stained by the blood of children.

You're right about no one caring, but they should. It's like the comment I just made about painting. Am I still one hell of n artist if I had someone
else paint a picture for me and I go out and market it?

That's great for them, but what does this have to do with the end product. Oh yeah, nothing.

My point was that big pop stars have the time to write and create their own material, but why would you when you have someone doing that for you?? Wow, what revolutionary artists....

Annnnd here's the kicker, almost no one cares. As a musician myself who greatly appreciates music, I wouldn't exactly care if my main audience didn't care about how much passion I put into my work. It only matters that it's fulfilling to me, why should I care about how people take my art?

Okay, so getting famous off of your record producers prewritten songs and none of your own is fulfilling to you? Well I can see why YOU don't care. Some of your replies are very irrelevant and completely derail from what you're quoting... Just so you know...

Or you know, bands could attempt to use the same communication networks they use to get their music known to the general public. It isn't the responsibility of the listeners to get you popular, it's the responsibility of the owner of the product to help tear down the existing infrastructure. Make your audience agree with a change in pace.

Okay well can you get me the number for the ceo of any of the big label, maybe even max martin, or how about kanye or usher one of them can help me out surely@@22! You do realize those "same communication networks" aren't what dictates a breakthrough right? It's actually totally the responsibility of the listeners, what are you smoking?

Of course major companies will play it safe, but you can't rely on them to promote YOUR WORK. YOU have to do it YOURSELF. You can't just sit on your fucking ass and hope to be popular, YOU have to do the legwork.

This is how it has always been for bands that couldn't rely on a company to pick them up. So quit bitching.

"Of course major companies will play it safe, and you have to rely on them to promote YOUR WORK. YOU can't do it YOURSELF. You have to just sit on your fucking ass and hope they make you popular, they have to do the legwork."

This pretty much sums up every success story of every pop singer

==================================

haha this is hilarious... little baby thinks he actually has a valid opinion on music awwwwwww

protip: try to actually list musical reasons why things are bad instead of using useless vague blanket terms and buzzwords that mean nothing and only highlight your stupidity and arrogance

Awwwwww how cute, a little faggot trying to get his post count up appears.

Protip: Actually reply to my comments if you have something to say, faggot, you might learn that there are plenty of "musical reasons" and valid points - But I can tell you right now - 95% of it will probably go straight over your head.

You're like the perfect candidate to market this pop shit to.

tl;dr: As I've stated numerous times I don't give a f what you listen to, the only thing that makes you gay is if you stick it in another dude's bunghole. But to say pop music and the alike are even comparable to REAL music.... Well, that's just a slap in the face to REAL music.