♫ Opinions on Old Music? ♫

[Gina]

♫ Heyya I was Just abit curious on people opinions on old music such as queen, and the beetles, wham!
and all of them? :D Just curios :D
In my opinion I think queens greaat and so are some old songs but others are just dead boring :D ♫

[KyoraStryker]

Classic rock ftw.

Not just classic rock, but a lot of the oldies. Elvis, The Eagles, The Beatles... The list can go on and on.

[Gina]

i like jumpy old songs :D not rally like slow ones :D

[Misawa]

The older the music pretty much the more talent is involved. These days the charts and full of no-talents who rely on the studio to make them sound decent.

[Plebings]

Not listened to much suprisingly.
Being part of the Internet generation, new music is always on the output and I've never really wanted to go back.
'old music' is in the eye of the beholder anyway, and all new music is pretty much influenced by older music, mostly because EVERYTHINGS almost been done before, older generations had much more choice in making something fresh, like getting the last chocolate cause all the rest are gone.

It's mostly ignorence on my part for not listening to 'old music'


The older the music pretty much the more talent is involved. These days the charts and full of no-talents who rely on the studio to make them sound decent.

I do think the charts are changing. Pop music has definately upped it's game in the past year, more artists are deciding that change is good and music is all the better for it.

[Special]

hate most of it, it's slow and boring

[lPinoy]

i don't mind old music, i sometimes have a rare listen but i don't hate it. rather old music than charts atm though.

[Neversoft]

I love old music from the likes of Pink Floyd, Joy Division, Journey, Queen, Genesis, Supertramp, Paul Simon, David Bowie, Madonna and so on and I also love many old classical pieces from Beethoven, Mozart, Bach and Rachmaninoff. I can't put my finger on it, but I feel that older music just has that special something that a lot of todays chart music is very much so lacking, but there are still many amazing music artists around. I could never say that old music is better than new music, as every year there seems to be a band or artist that releases something absolutely phenomenal. Older music is just more influential and revolutionary.

[Judas]

The older the music pretty much the more talent is involved. These days the charts and full of no-talents who rely on the studio to make them sound decent.

what a ridicuous thing to say

i hate it when adults have that general opinion. obviously "old music" is more inspirational today, because who was inspired by it? the people that grew up listening to it that are big in the industry today. so who will the big stars in ten years time be influenced by? the people they grow up listening to today...

also whoever is influenced by someone these days is always slammed for not being original enough. no ones ever happy :l

[Circadia]

Well because my parents are old there is old music playing all the time so i can't help but liking some of it ans singing along with my parents. My mum lives Elvis and Tom Jones so there playing in the car alot. My dad likes queen alot so do I, I think they are great!

[Misawa]

Well when your charts are ruled by people like Rihanna and her overproduced vocals, Lady Gaga and Kesha's autotune...

[Judas]

Well when your charts are ruled by people like Rihanna and her overproduced vocals, Lady Gaga and Kesha's autotune...

lovely bit of generalising going on there
im sure if auto tune was around 40 years ago it would have been used a lot then as well. ftr i dont even like rihanna, but she can sing so im not sure when her vocals have been over overproduced? lady gaga only has a few songs where its dominated by auto tune, and if you want to get technical about it find me one singer these days that doesnt use pitch correction on their records to make them sound perfect. like i said it would have been used on "old music" if it existed then. and yeah ke$ha does use auto tune a lot, but she can also sing contrary to popular belief :l

[Andii]

ive been eating and watching tv for about an hour. . .


and meh some are old classics . . but you cant beat the new style :) its a new age :)

[Gina]

ive been eating and watching tv for about an hour. . .


and meh some are old classics . . but you cant beat the new style :) its a new age :)
Nice dinner? LOL
Erm I think the music has changed over the years and old people like my great great grandma will obvly have a different taste to what i do, you wont see her dancing to flo rider - get low? will you LOL I think everyone has different opinions i just want to know what everyones is :D

[samsaBEAR]

The older the music pretty much the more talent is involved. These days the charts and full of no-talents who rely on the studio to make them sound decent.
*REMOVED*

I don't listen to old music at all. Nothing about it interests me

Edited by Shar, (Trialist Forum Moderator) Please do not be rude, thanks.

[RedStratocas]

The older the music pretty much the more talent is involved. These days the charts and full of no-talents who rely on the studio to make them sound decent.

i luled. i like how you imply that the charts used to have talent as opposed to now. the charts have always been filled by bandwagon riding talentless "artists," even back in the 60's and 70's. you're only looking back on previous decades and seeing the people we remember rather the ones we dont (because they were bad.) its easy to look at todays charts and say "oh these artists suck" but look at any chart from any random week in the 60's and 70's and you probably haven't even heard of the large majority of them. oh, and nothing will ever beat the horrendous decade that was the 80's.


Well when your charts are ruled by people like Rihanna and her overproduced vocals, Lady Gaga and Kesha's autotune...

the 70's were ruled by the guys who wrote "afternoon delight" and the 80's were ruled by, well i dont even have to tell you lol look at any pop artist and try not to puke on your keyboard. and dont say "oh but what bout led zeppelin?!?!?" -- they were critically panned in their day. we may think of them as classic now but a lot of the music press back then thought they were awful, while the "afternoon delight" guys won a grammy. go figure. the charts, and grammys for that matter, dont represent the music of the times.

keep in mind that in the past decade, there has been far more music released than in the previous 4 decades combined, not including things from the internet. dig a little deeper into your music. the difference between music today and music "back then" is that music today is exponentially more diversified, thus theres almost no common consensus. in the 70's there was a huge social division between fans of the who and fans of led zeppelin. today this division seems comical, seeing as how those bands sound largely the same.

anyway, i liked classic rock etc when i was growing up cause its what my dad listened to, but since id say high school ive listened to almost only new music, as there is more than enough to keep me occupied. although i do like some pre-90's stuff such as sonic youth, velvet underground, joy division, r.e.m., the pixies, etc.

[FlyingJesus]

It's boring as hell for the vast majority and I don't care if they were more technically able than current musicians (which I don't believe to be the case anyway) if it sounds crap I don't want to listen to it. Furthermore:

"When I'm ridin' round the world
and I'm doin' this and I'm signing that
and I'm tryin' to make some girl
who tells me baby better come back later next week
'cause you see I'm on losing streak.
I can't get no, oh no no no.
Hey hey hey, that's what I say"

Hardly takes more talent and vision to write than

"Visualising the realism of life and actuality -
**** who's the baddest a person's status depends on salary.
And my mentality is money orientated,
I'm destined to live the dream for all my peeps who never made it
'cause yeah, we were beginners in the hood as five percenters
But something must of got in us cause all of us turned to sinners,
Now some, resting in peace and some are sitting in San Quentin,
Others such as myself are trying to carry on tradition."

[Plebings]

The topic in question is rather vague though, like asking 'do you like music??'

[Becca]

All music takes talent.. I do love classic rock but new now-a-day music is getting really good.

[Gina]

If the music wasnt good, then why would it still be well known? :D LOLOL
I think all types of music all have a good thing about it, good be the lyrics, could be the tune or anything tbh :P

[RedStratocas]

It's boring as hell for the vast majority and I don't care if they were more technically able than current musicians (which I don't believe to be the case anyway) if it sounds crap I don't want to listen to it. Furthermore:

"When I'm ridin' round the world
and I'm doin' this and I'm signing that
and I'm tryin' to make some girl
who tells me baby better come back later next week
'cause you see I'm on losing streak.
I can't get no, oh no no no.
Hey hey hey, that's what I say"

Hardly takes more talent and vision to write than

"Visualising the realism of life and actuality -
**** who's the baddest a person's status depends on salary.
And my mentality is money orientated,
I'm destined to live the dream for all my peeps who never made it
'cause yeah, we were beginners in the hood as five percenters
But something must of got in us cause all of us turned to sinners,
Now some, resting in peace and some are sitting in San Quentin,
Others such as myself are trying to carry on tradition."

the first verse of "life's a *****" is arguably the greatest in all of hip hop, no lie.

what really bugs me about people who think older music is better is that they are completely blind of modern music history. every generation looks down upon the next generation and thinks its talentless garbage. hip hop enthusiasts are looked down upon by rock enthusiasts, rock enthusiasts were looked down upon by jazz enthusiasts, jazz enthusiasts were looked down upon by classical enthusiasts, etc. when you realize that the gap comes from generational differences rather than actual musical merit, thats when you can have an open mind about new artists.

[Judas]

what really bugs me about people who think older music is better is that they are completely blind of modern music history. every generation looks down upon the next generation and thinks its talentless garbage. hip hop enthusiasts are looked down upon by rock enthusiasts, rock enthusiasts were looked down upon by jazz enthusiasts, jazz enthusiasts were looked down upon by classical enthusiasts, etc. when you realize that the gap comes from generational differences rather than actual musical merit, thats when you can have an open mind about new artists.

i think you summed that up perfectly

it also works with genres, pisses me off when people say that one genre requires no talent to write music for. like, when people say you need no talent to write rap or pop music - a lot of the time true, but not always. you cant generalise music like that

[samsaBEAR]

i think you summed that up perfectly

it also works with genres, pisses me off when people say that one genre requires no talent to write music for. like, when people say you need no talent to write rap or pop music - a lot of the time true, but not always. you cant generalise music like that
I sort of agree with rap. Like I don't listen to it, but I have respect for the people who write and perform it and whatnot. Pop however, is different. I know I'm generalising, but I have little-to-no respect for 'artists' who have songs written for them, have all the music arranged for them, and then have their vocals autotuned because they can rarely sing with it. Just irks me that that's the music getting popular, when their are a **** ton more talented performers across all other genres that work a thousands times harder, but don't get the success they deserve

[KyoraStryker]

I sort of agree with rap. Like I don't listen to it, but I have respect for the people who write and perform it and whatnot. Pop however, is different. I know I'm generalising, but I have little-to-no respect for 'artists' who have songs written for them, have all the music arranged for them, and then have their vocals autotuned because they can rarely sing with it. Just irks me that that's the music getting popular, when their are a **** ton more talented performers across all other genres that work a thousands times harder, but don't get the success they deserve

Agreed.

Far be it for me to say that I listen to anything remotely close to rap, but that doesn't mean I don't respect the work that gets put into it.

I'm more than certain if you took the time to dissect a song, there's a powerful meaning behind it.

[Dannnny,]

Abolutly love old music i love it better than new music as you may be able to tell on my shows LOL

[Judas]

I sort of agree with rap. Like I don't listen to it, but I have respect for the people who write and perform it and whatnot. Pop however, is different. I know I'm generalising, but I have little-to-no respect for 'artists' who have songs written for them, have all the music arranged for them, and then have their vocals autotuned because they can rarely sing with it. Just irks me that that's the music getting popular, when their are a **** ton more talented performers across all other genres that work a thousands times harder, but don't get the success they deserve

thats exactly what im talking about, thats really generalising a whole genre. not everyone in pop music is manufactured and cant write songs or cant sing. obviously a lot of it is no doubt, and i agree and have no respect whatsoever for people like that but you cant say you hate all pop musicians, because not all of them are like that?

[Plebings]

While most pop artists still don't write their own songs, in the recent years we have been getting more performers who can sing live.

Which is possibly the only thing we can thank the X Factor for, we know the people who come out on top CAN sing live.

There's still the odd act that can't sing live though, blame late 90s for the presumption that pop stars can't sing.

I won't stop denying that Lady GaGa has upped pop's game.

[Plebings]

While most pop artists still don't write their own songs, in the recent years we have been getting more performers who can sing live.

Which is possibly the only thing we can thank the X Factor for, we know the people who come out on top CAN sing live.

There's still the odd act that can't sing live though, blame late 90s for the presumption that pop stars can't sing.

I won't stop denying that Lady GaGa has upped pop's game.

[samsaBEAR]

thats exactly what im talking about, thats really generalising a whole genre. not everyone in pop music is manufactured and cant write songs or cant sing. obviously a lot of it is no doubt, and i agree and have no respect whatsoever for people like that but you cant say you hate all pop musicians, because not all of them are like that?
I just don't like pop music

[peteyt]

Is it just me who gets annoyed when people say they hate "old music" - define old music please?

The problem is old music isn't a genre - I hardy listen to them now but really was into Franz Ferdinand when they first came out - and it seemed to change brit rock - but that was quite a few years back - so is that classed as old?

I love all types of music - and the best thing is to judge it not by its age, but simply by how it sounds. It does annoy me when stuff is all edited to make it sound way better than it actually is - but then if it sounds good in the end, I suppose its kind of worth it.

Someone mentioned X Factor and how we know they can sing live - Is that fully true? I hear they use autotune a lot on the show and other stuff, but I wouldn't know. My biggest problem with X Factor is how it simply creates bands and artists that end up getting other people to write their own stuff, create the sounds and so on.

I mentioned ages ago my love for Tom Waits - i've only got a few of his albums but I really loved that he's slowly tried to experiment with music - i read that he tried to use everyday items as instruments - I wish there where more people who tried to do more with music instead of just reading someone's lyrics and then letting someone else produce a track/beat etc.

[Judas]

I won't stop denying that Lady GaGa has upped pop's game.

unless you mean just musically, she definitely has. the clothing, videos, image, performance, she pushes the boundaries and whether you think the way she does that is good or not you cant deny she does. but if you do just mean musically then fair enough its down to opinion. but no pop singer has made the kind of instant impact that she has done in a long time, fact


I just don't like pop music

i know, but what im saying is its ignorant to say you dont like it because "all pop musicians are talentless people."

[ChickenFaces]

The Beatles are sexy. End of story.

[samsaBEAR]

Is it just me who gets annoyed when people say they hate "old music" - define old music please
Music that is old. Doesn't take a rocket scientist

[Camy]

I prefer older music. I've been quite into thrash metal the last few years, and love Metallica in particular, but before that I was listening to The Who, and stuff. Don't get me wrong I love almost all music, and listen to all sorts, occasionally listen to Mozart from time to time aswell, just to relax and get lost in it.

[KyoraStryker]

Is it just me who gets annoyed when people say they hate "old music" - define old music please?

I don't think you can get any more obvious than what has been provided.

Old music: Anything earlier than the music between the 80s to present day. Hell, even the 80s can be viewed as old to some people.

[Plebings]

pre-spice girls

:D

[peteyt]

I don't think you can get any more obvious than what has been provided.

Old music: Anything earlier than the music between the 80s to present day. Hell, even the 80s can be viewed as old to some people.

Thats the problem though - sometimes I may hear a track and like it its like a few months old or something and someone goes thats old now.

Everyone has a different idea of what is old.

[RedStratocas]

unless you mean just musically, she definitely has. the clothing, videos, image, performance, she pushes the boundaries and whether you think the way she does that is good or not you cant deny she does.

i hate to be the doucher to argue but i honestly don't think she's pushed any boundaries at all. image is always progressing through time, really her appearances and performances seem like just a logical extension of what has already been in the spectrum of pop, if that makes sense. i guess i cant really think of another artist that dresses like her per se, but i dont see her image as completely far-fetched from where it was before, and given the fact that every new female pop artist attempts to make themselves a groundbreaking if not concept-driven image, i dont really see what separates her from any other female pop star.

when i think of musicians who have been able to infiltrate and push the boundaries of pop, i think of people like kate bush or david bowie.


Thats the problem though - sometimes I may hear a track and like it its like a few months old or something and someone goes thats old now.

Everyone has a different idea of what is old.

its all context. pop songs age exponentially. you play a random track from a moderately successful artist that came out in say, 2003, and no one will really immediately comment on its age because in the context of music that isn't well-known, time is not what matters most. the song is being played because it is good, not because it is necessarily relevant. however if you were to play "i gotta feeling" by the black eyed peas today, people would groan about how old it is even though its only about a year. cause in the pop spectrum, whats considered "new" changes fast. but in the context of this thread, when i think of "old" songs, its either usually a) songs that came out before i was born or b) songs that came out while i was alive but didn't have the capacity to enjoy when it did.

[peteyt]

Good reply - it just annoys me when people say i like new music not old music - define new music - cos i hate most rap stuff but i like new stuff coming out from other generes.

People should love the sound regardless of the age.

[samsaBEAR]

i hate to be the doucher to argue but i honestly don't think she's pushed any boundaries at all. image is always progressing through time, really her appearances and performances seem like just a logical extension of what has already been in the spectrum of pop, if that makes sense. i guess i cant really think of another artist that dresses like her per se, but i dont see her image as completely far-fetched from where it was before, and given the fact that every new female pop artist attempts to make themselves a groundbreaking if not concept-driven image, i dont really see what separates her from any other female pop star.

when i think of musicians who have been able to infiltrate and push the boundaries of pop, i think of people like kate bush or david bowie.



its all context. pop songs age exponentially. you play a random track from a moderately successful artist that came out in say, 2003, and no one will really immediately comment on its age because in the context of music that isn't well-known, time is not what matters most. the song is being played because it is good, not because it is necessarily relevant. however if you were to play "i gotta feeling" by the black eyed peas today, people would groan about how old it is even though its only about a year. cause in the pop spectrum, whats considered "new" changes fast. but in the context of this thread, when i think of "old" songs, its either usually a) songs that came out before i was born or b) songs that came out while i was alive but didn't have the capacity to enjoy when it did.
Oh Sam I love it when you occasionally post, I always have so much fun reading your posts haha


Good reply - it just annoys me when people say i like new music not old music - define new music - cos i hate most rap stuff but i like new stuff coming out from other generes.

People should love the sound regardless of the age.
New music is music that is new, good lord you're not very quick are you

[KyoraStryker]

Thats the problem though - sometimes I may hear a track and like it its like a few months old or something and someone goes thats old now.

Everyone has a different idea of what is old.

That's because anyone who thinks that lives for today's hottest music. When something new comes out, everything else is "old."

I'm almost certain the thread was created to discuss oldies.

[peteyt]

That's because anyone who thinks that lives for today's hottest music. When something new comes out, everything else is "old."

I'm almost certain the thread was created to discuss oldies.

I'm all into new music - and think that radio shows dedicated to new stuff are pretty neat but to say a song is crap because its simply old is stupid.

[samsaBEAR]

I'm all into new music - and think that radio shows dedicated to new stuff are pretty neat but to say a song is crap because its simply old is stupid.
I'm pretty sure you're not into ALL new music

[peteyt]

I'm pretty sure you're not into ALL new music
Ha as in im into new music - i like shows dedicated to it - of course I won't like all new music like I don't like all old music.

My point is music should be liked on sound and not age.

[beth]

i don't listen to anything pre 1985.
bores me rigid.

[samsaBEAR]

i don't listen to anything pre 1985.
bores me rigid.
More like pre 2006 is boring. I doubt I have anything on my iPod made before then

[FlyingJesus]

define new music - cos i hate most rap stuff but i like new stuff coming out from other generes.

Rap isn't new lol


to say a song is crap because its simply old is stupid.

True, but no-one's said that. Plenty of us don't enjoy "old music" but that's because it doesn't sound good to us, not simply because it's old. I listen to a fair bit of 70s soul music yet can't stand stuff like Led Zep, The Who, Rolling Stones and whatnot


i don't listen to anything pre 1985.
bores me rigid.

Bon Jovi debut album 1984, I win gotta be 20 man

[RedStratocas]

Good reply - it just annoys me when people say i like new music not old music - define new music - cos i hate most rap stuff but i like new stuff coming out from other generes.

People should love the sound regardless of the age.

again, context. you're looking for a solid division on a timeline to make the distinction between new and old but it doesn't work that way. i see where you're coming from but it isnt like we can draw a line and say "okay anything before 1998 is old and anything after is new" because there's so many factors as to how you look at music in the context of time. and sometimes it doesnt have a distinction at all. if you were to ask me if "viva la vida" by coldplay was new or old, id probably say neither.

as for the "people should love sound regardless of age" idea; i agree in principle but it doesnt work that way in practice. although the sound is technically the same through time, how we hear it changes. for example, anyone who says they listen to any sort of guitar-based music from the past 25 years without question listens to at least several bands who were directly or indirectly influenced by the velvet underground. theyre certainly one of - if not the most - influential bands of all time. they virtually single-handedly kicked started the punk movement, which in turn has been incredibly influential in it of itself. i even wrote a 10-page research paper last year about how the album "the velvet underground & nico" is more important and influential than any album the beatles ever put out. now many of the people who listen to music heavily influenced by the velvet underground have never even heard of the velvet underground. moreover, if they were to listen to VU most of them wouldn't like it, even though without VU a lot of the bands they listen to wouldnt even exist. its because even though the velvet underground was groundbreaking in 1967, now they just seem like a building block for other artists to expand on their sound. listening to them now, they're not that outstanding because their sound has been so integrated into modern music that we cant hear what made them so relevant in 1967. unless you're aware of the history of music in the 60's and the context of the time, the velvet underground would probably just sound like boring primitive rock and roll.


Oh Sam I love it when you occasionally post, I always have so much fun reading your posts haha

i miss you too.

[Judas]

i hate to be the doucher to argue but i honestly don't think she's pushed any boundaries at all. image is always progressing through time, really her appearances and performances seem like just a logical extension of what has already been in the spectrum of pop, if that makes sense. i guess i cant really think of another artist that dresses like her per se, but i dont see her image as completely far-fetched from where it was before, and given the fact that every new female pop artist attempts to make themselves a groundbreaking if not concept-driven image, i dont really see what separates her from any other female pop star.

when i think of musicians who have been able to infiltrate and push the boundaries of pop, i think of people like kate bush or david bowie.


http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/jul2009/8/5/lady-gaga-kermit-image-1-332417061.jpg
http://www.gossipjackal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/lady-gaga-meat-dress-21.jpg
http://www.fash-eccentric.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/halloween-costume-lady-gaga-bubble.jpg

so you're telling me these kind of appearances aren't far fetched, and just a 'logical extension' of whats been done before?
musically however, i agree, nothing brand new. but on that i think her new album will surprise a lot of people.

image wise, let me take rihanna for example, another female pop singer who has been around for a few years more than gaga. this is her circa 2006:

http://www.coutureinthecity.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/rihanna-2006-billboard.jpg

then she kind of disappeared from 2007-09, in which time gaga emerged, and now these are some pictures of her after her first album since gaga came out

http://cdn.buzznet.com/media/jj1//2010/01/rihanna-grammys/rihanna-grammys-red-carpet-2010-05.jpg http://makeupforlife.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/rihanna-2010-clive-davis-pre-grammys-party.jpg

shes stepped up her image since the time gaga came out. completely changed everything, more elaborate image and performance, which is why i firmly believe that lady gaga is raising the bar for female pop singers today to be more expressive and creative with their performances and outfits, whereas before it would be the norm to just step out in a t shirt and jeans or some boring dress. what im trying to say is that yes now they are all trying to be groundbreaking 'concept driven' artists. but why? because of her. you may disagree but i think were in a new era of pop star now. not saying it was solely down to her but she definitely has had a major part in it. and it annoys me when people say that shes nothing new and not original etc, but any four piece band with dudes with guitars that bring nothing new at all to music but have a good album are fine. its just this common misconception that pop is low brow and everything has to be new and exciting. ftr, i think lady gaga is new and exciting anyway. hence the impact shes made.

and of course you would say people like david bowie and kate bush would be influential and ground breaking in pop music, but thats because theres been decades for people to break through in the industry that have been influenced by those artists. the people that grow up listening to lady gaga etc now are going to be the ones that are the musicians in the next 10 20 years, and then the pop stars of today will join the ranks of those legendary kind of artists... pretty sure it must have been the same in the "old days" as well. what im trying to say is that modern day singers will one day become OLD MUSIC, like youre talking about here.

[/essay]

[Suspective]

I don't mind old music, as long as it isn't really old school e.g. pre-1980. Anything before that - bores me!

[Richie]

I like old music, but it depends if I'm in the mood to listen to it.

[RedStratocas]

so you're telling me these kind of appearances aren't far fetched, and just a 'logical extension' of whats been done before?
musically however, i agree, nothing brand new. but on that i think her new album will surprise a lot of people.

image wise, let me take rihanna for example, another female pop singer who has been around for a few years more than gaga. this is her circa 2006:

shes stepped up her image since the time gaga came out. completely changed everything, more elaborate image and performance, which is why i firmly believe that lady gaga is raising the bar for female pop singers today to be more expressive and creative with their performances and outfits, whereas before it would be the norm to just step out in a t shirt and jeans or some boring dress. what im trying to say is that yes now they are all trying to be groundbreaking 'concept driven' artists. but why? because of her. you may disagree but i think were in a new era of pop star now. not saying it was solely down to her but she definitely has had a major part in it. and it annoys me when people say that shes nothing new and not original etc, but any four piece band with dudes with guitars that bring nothing new at all to music but have a good album are fine. its just this common misconception that pop is low brow and everything has to be new and exciting. ftr, i think lady gaga is new and exciting anyway. hence the impact shes made.

and of course you would say people like david bowie and kate bush would be influential and ground breaking in pop music, but thats because theres been decades for people to break through in the industry that have been influenced by those artists. the people that grow up listening to lady gaga etc now are going to be the ones that are the musicians in the next 10 20 years, and then the pop stars of today will join the ranks of those legendary kind of artists... pretty sure it must have been the same in the "old days" as well. what im trying to say is that modern day singers will one day become OLD MUSIC, like youre talking about here.

[/essay]

for the first question, yes. by logical extension, i mean people are so used to artists trying to be shocking or overly/absurdly original that seeing lady gaga in a meat costume (then defending herself before anyone even criticizes her, which by extension gives herself the power to proclaim herself controversial which is just silly, but thats another topic) just comes off as gimmicky as opposed to groundbreaking. a major factor in what makes it not groundbreaking is the simple fact that her image is not a reflection of her music at all. i cant really prove it but it just seems like lady gaga is trying to fool people into thinking there's actual intelligence behind her music by wearing so called "outlandish" costumes. anyway, if you want weird costumes, ever heard of grace jones? (these are from the 70's by the way.)

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00033/grace_jones_main_33535t.jpghttp://media.onsugar.com/files/ons2/539/5396139/44_2009/a0074957f7bb0284_gracejones_1985_tribal.jpg
http://www.revelinnewyork.com/sites/default/files/grace%20jones%2011_0.jpg

imo all those costumes beat out anything lady gaga has wore on the weirdness scale. there's more you can google it.

anyway i didnt say since lady gaga pop singers have been trying to be concept driven and groundbreaking, i said theyve been doing that since the beginning of the pop star. the idea of a pop star is always changing, yes it's changed since she came around but no more than it has changed on average over the past 20 years. honestly no one's ever explained to me how lady gaga is different, they kinda just say it cause everyone's saying it. and no one argues about some "four piece band with dudes with guitars" being unoriginal because no one argues they are original in the first place. the only reason this whole "lady gaga original vs. unoriginal" argument exists is because there are vastly differing opinions. no one is arguing that the all american rejects are unoriginal cause ive never heard anyone try to claim they're groundbreaking and going to change guitar-based music as we know it. if there were people making that claim you could bet a lot of people would argue about how unoriginal they are.

i see your point about david bowie and kate bush being old, but even in their peek days in the 70's and 80's they were widely recognized as completely revolutionary pop icons. no one had the vastly changing persona of david bowie before, or his (at the time) outlandish costumes. i guess its true that lady gaga's career is young and could prove to be more than it is now, but with any musician, revolution comes down to the music itself anyway, and even if her costumes were highly original and outlandish, it wouldnt make up for the fact that her music could have come out of anyone.

[Judas]

yes i have heard of grace jones im not stupid, shes a legend. i think you underestimate my musical knowledge.

but this isnt about being weird. i think grace wore that stuff for the sake of being 'weird' but most of what gaga wears actually has some kind of concept behind it.

and on the meat dress, she didnt defend herself before she was critcized like you said. PETA were right on her case the minute she stepped onto the stage in it, and she only explaned it when asked by ellen degeneres.


It's certainly no disrespect to anyone that's vegan or vegetarian. As you know, I'm the most judgment-free human being on the Earth. It has many interpretations, but for me this evening it's [saying], 'If we don't stand up for what we believe in, if we don't fight for our rights, pretty soon we're going to have as much rights as the meat on our bones.'

it was mostly inspired by her attempt to repeal the dont ask dont tell law concerning gays in the military, which also leads me to how she is different than other pop stars of today.

im not claiming she is something completely new or original, because like you said her kind of thing has been done before, but 20 odd years ago. she is different in terms of the modern day pop star. why? because firstly her costumes - you said they arent representative of her music, isnt that her bringing something new to pop music? whether you like her image or not it is different. also, her involvement in political issues, such as the DADT law. you dont see female pop singers in her 'category' if you like, becoming active in that kind of thing.


"I write and I also create this amazing theatrical show with the visuals, art films, dance routines and the backing tracks. I love artists who have more to say than just the songs they are singing. I love Grace Jones, David Bowie, Elvis, The Beatles, and my big hero Andy Warhol. I model my methods on the way he used to work."

she isnt trying to be something brand new, shes trying to bring the theatrics and the showbiz back because somewhere down the line it got lost. gaga i think is just a modern representation of that kind of artist. if her music was similair to those kind of people it probably wouldnt be succesful in the charts anymore. theres a better quote from her that says what im trying to say better but i cant find it right now but i hope you get what i mean.

and onto the most important thing of course, the music. you said she is "fooling people into thinking there's actual intelligence behind her music", which is rubbish because there is. i totally get where youre coming from and i agree, but i definitely think there is more to her than the just dance, pokerface and bad romance that everyone knows. if you actually listen to all her music and specifically songs like brown eyes and speechless and even go on youtube and look up videos of her performing before she became 'lady gaga' there is a talented musician in there that hasnt had the opportunity to properly show the world that side of her yet. i dont actually think that her material thus far has been 100% the direction shes wanted to go in. it might sound crazy but heres my theory. i think she made that kind of music, that is radio friendly, chart hits, so that she can create the massive fan base she now has just to get everyones attention. now i think with her next album, born this way, from what ive heard anyway it sounds like its going to be far deeper lyrically, and more techincal musically if you get what i mean. she hasnt yet got the respect as a musician that i think she deserves and i cant wait for it to come out and i really hope she proves people wrong.

and to be fair i cant count the amount of times ive heard her branded a pop icon. could be too early to tell but i think she is going to be around for a long time yet and in ten years you might be eating your words. but shes popping up on all these most powerful musicians/celebrty and most influential lists etc, voted by people that know what they are talking about. she is a modern day pop icon. whether she will be remembered as one or not, who knows? i think she will.

[Faboosh]

i seriously love old music, can't beat a bit of the beatles, bowie or the clash..

[samsaBEAR]

I have missed this sort of thread on the music forum, it's so nice to see actual opinions and contructed arguments rather than WHATS YR FAVOURITE BAND LOLOLOL

[Judas]

I have missed this sort of thread on the music forum, it's so nice to see actual opinions and contructed arguments rather than WHATS YR FAVOURITE BAND LOLOLOL

yess im enjoying it as well

[immense]

this is like asking 'what do you think about history' - you can't generalise all 'old' music.

[Gina]

OMG Queen <33333
Adore em :P

[mr.tom]

well, it depends on the old music

old music isn't exactly a genre. I like a bit of queen but I'm not so keen on Wham! for example...

agree with whoever said they had more talent, too much technology is used to engineer songs recently instead of talent

[Judas]

agree with whoever said they had more talent, too much technology is used to engineer songs recently instead of talent

ridiculous statement. if that kind of technology existed in that time it would have been used like it is today.

[Conservative,]

I don't like much old music. I like a bit of Wham!, and a few 80s rock bands like Guns N Roses, but not much else tbh.

[Plebings]

sadly the boundries created by kate bush, bowie, etc have slowly closed over the past decade due to the influx of popular artists relying on technology, producers and songwriters, gaga isn't as influential as the artists before, but she has become huge because of her talents and the main audience of pop music have lapped it up because they are sick of artists that rely more on appearence than sound.

She isn't original, but she's a rare talent.

[samsaBEAR]

well, it depends on the old music

old music isn't exactly a genre. I like a bit of queen but I'm not so keen on Wham! for example...

agree with whoever said they had more talent, too much technology is used to engineer songs recently instead of talent
While I agree that technology is overused, saying that older artists have more talent is ******* stupid

[beth]

agree with whoever said they had more talent, too much technology is used to engineer songs recently instead of talent

this is the biggest load of ******** i have ever read.

it's like saying writers back in the 16th century had more talent because they actually wrote their books, whereas nowadays authors
use computers to type their words.

it's not a case of having more or less talent, it's a case of utilising what is available to you. don't be such a douche.

[Judas]

this is the biggest load of ******** i have ever read.

it's like saying writers back in the 16th century had more talent because they actually wrote their books, whereas nowadays authors
use computers to type their words.

it's not a case of having more or less talent, it's a case of utilising what is available to you. don't be such a douche.

+rep for this ....

[beth]

+rep for this ....

i tries ma best ;)