State of music today

[GommeInc]

I know nothing of music, but I can't help feel that people do not take it seriously. When Rebecca Black appeared everyone loved that song for it's crapness - crapness that sums up a lot of chart music that do not make sense lyrically. But I listen to anything, so I'm not the best person to talk to. The Rihanna thread in Current Affairs was good though, it was interesting to see what opinions were out there, even though it was one-sided hence its closure

Sex sells, and it sells well in the music industry. But it's up to debate if its the tune and the beat that sells the song, or the lyrics and video. Unfortunately it is here to stay.

[Jordy]

Mumford + Sons have some great songs but I find a lot of songs on their album quite unbareable. I just end up listening to the same few more often that not.

I don't think it's all about sex to be honest, music videos are perhaps but songs are just generally about love and always have been. You can go back to The Beatles and Elvis Presley and the topics of songs are pretty similar today. If you're not into the sex crazed R&B and Pop, there's lots of alternative music anyway. Whilst R&B and Pop dominates the charts there is a lot of other genres out there, it's just ridiculous to claim all music is going downhill etc. For instance look at Leeds/Reading and Download festivals, easily some of the largest in the UK yet you won't find many bands or artists attending in the charts, it's all still out there.

[peteyt]

I blame the Monkees first apparent manufactured band so they say ha.

But manufactured is the key word. Another is X Factor.

Why do a lot of artist fail who win on the X Factor? Well how many popular cover bands do you know? They call it the X Factor because they are "apparently" looking for something that's fresh, unique etc. Well that's a lie, they just want something they know they can sell in masses. They make them copy other artists, copy songs, and in the end they don't learn how to actually do their own stuff. I'd actually respect the X Factor if it allowed actual bands on the show and actually tried to help them with song writing.

Sex sells though. Look at commercials. Love also sells to the teens, who are probably going through something similar.

I'm currently listening to a favourite band of mine, the eagles. An old band, who worked together writing their own songs, playing their own instruments and years later they still are playing all over the world. They probably have more hits than 99 percent of today's artists yet they wrote most of them themselves.

Or take a look at someone like David Fords. With pen and paper, and a looping pedal, he can play all the instruments and do the singing, a one man band both in the studio and live. Extremely talented yet never really gets the break he deserves.

[simplymagic]

Like others have said sex sells. Clearly we enjoy singers singing about sex because the popular commerical artists sell quite well therefore the cycle repeats and we listen to sex all the time yay. Although like others, sex isn't the only theme repeated in music. While pop music is mainly about sex and relationships, it can be about anything because of it's genre.

Those that think the industry is autotuned, the answer to this problem is x factor or stop buying auto tuned music if you disagree with it that much (but others will still buy it anyway). I'm against auto tuning but if it produces a good song I like then I will still buy it. It's a cut throat industry to break in and I feel sorry for those good artists that can sing. However it's not just about their voice, in commerical anyway. They have to have a star image. I doubt a fat person with an amazing voice will last long tbh like her from pop idol who won.

[Spuds]

Find it strange 'Logan-' hasn't replied to the thread, he's got a level playing field here to come and explain to me why I'm wrong. Apparently he can't do that, guess I'll remain a 'hater'.

[Yupt]

OM NOM MUMFORD.

Anyway, I think that chart music is far too computerised. Yes I know all music recorded music is tweeked a little, but the whole songs aren't made on computers. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy it but Pop is literally just a computerised voice put over the top of a computerised beat these days.

[The Don]

A great example of this is Lady Gaga, where image seems to be more important than lyrics, beats and vocals.

[Neversoft]

It's interesting you mention that. In Japan they have a genre called visual kei (which basically translates to visual style) and the bands image, fashion and look is essentially what keeps them going and is considered as important as the music. I wouldn't say it has changed much over time though, music has never really been just about 'the music'.

[Spuds]

It appears Logan- is too inadequate to reply to this thread. He's now rejecting any contact from me via PM to earn a response as apparently I am not within my right to carry it on, strange as I was led to believe a debate is only ended when it's a moderator who decides to end a discussion due to rule breaking, not when a member closes a thread after quoting a user, not allowing the user to reply. Some may feel I'm acting a bit like a dog with a bone, which I probably wouldn't argue with however I just feel it's a shame Logan- is strangling an interesting debate for the whole forum due to his own selfishness.

[The Don]

It's interesting you mention that. In Japan they have a genre called visual kei (which basically translates to visual style) and the bands image, fashion and look is essentially what keeps them going and is considered as important as the music. I wouldn't say it has changed much over time though, music has never really been just about 'the music'.

Fair enough, but with Lady Gaga, it's all about the image.