I hate pop music

What the heck are you talking about, classical musicians have no rhythm or soul?! They may not have the same sense of rhythm as jazz or pop musicians, but saying that they have no rhythm or soul is either painfully naive or just plain dumb.

That post was meant to be insipid, it was obviously half-hearted and nowhere near being serious.

I could be make another one, try this one.

Classical musicians are all lame white men who choose to dedicate their lives to a dead art. How's the knife twist feel?

Classical musicians are all lame white men who choose to dedicate their lives to a dead art. How's the knife twist feel?

Lol.

*resists the temptation to further the argument defending pop music*

^ because as was aforementioned, this is an impossible topic to debate on. I mean, so many arguments exist for either side that it's impossible to prove one's superiority to the other. Music = music -- we still use the same theories and the same twelve notes to write music, just with a different approach due to all of the new theories we acquired in the 20th century.

Okay, I lied. I'm going to argue. o.o

Hey, you can't assume that ALL pop music gained popularity through a few Hollywood tricks and endorsements.

Pop music doesn't have to be complex; pop music is sort of like a type of incidental music. They're used for music videos, in movies, in stores, etc. The music is like background music for the poem that the vocalist recites musically, despite what others may perceive as screaming and yelling [even though it is o.o].

With all of the previous examples of complex pop pieces, don't you think that pop can be complex, too? Hey, simple classical pieces exist, too.

I think this is a worthless argument, as all music has merit, and to attempt to disparage that would require both an ego and an ignorance of extreme magnitude.

However, the debate regarding which supergenre has more merit is acceptable, as it may open some minds to other styles.

I think this is a worthless argument, as all music has merit, and to attempt to disparage that would require both an ego and an ignorance of extreme magnitude.

To paraphrase Orwell's famous "Animal Farm" line: all music has merit, but some genres have more merit than others.

I could easily write a well-crafted pop song that is more artistic, more musically interesting and less predictable than 99% of the pop ditties played on MTV, VH1 and all that crap.

You reckon?

I reckon it's probably a lot harder than you think. :O

To paraphrase Orwell's famous "Animal Farm" line: all music has merit, but some genres have more merit than others.

The only problem with your paraphrase is that "equal" is an unconditional state. Being equal can only mean one thing, therefore the facetious nature of Orwell's original quote is obvious.

"Merit", on the other hand, is quite subjective, as you have amply demonstrated in this thread. Why do you get to decide what has merit, more so than anyone else? Is your level of training such that it elevates you above the rest of the rabble?

Could someone please elaborate which pop music we're talking about (Country, R&B, Hip Hop, Rap, Alternative, Goth, etc, etc etc???)

I've heard some pretty elaborate symphonic clips on Kanye West's tracks. I've also heard some classical motifs coming from Linkin Park. Some pop music modulates a lot and changes themes.

I've also heard some classical motifs coming from Linkin Park.

Hackneyed symphonic riffs do not classical music make.

While there are good music from every genre, I think the main difference here is the minimum skill required to be successful. It is easy for us to mention good, high quality pop artist. I have to admit that MOST of the people featured in MTV are very good indeed. However to be successful (I mean, to gain a world-wide recognition), the standard required in pop music world is much lower than in the classical world. Can anybody name a famous but non-talented classical musician?

Hackneyed symphonic riffs do not classical music make.

:P Awww... shucks.... I was about to put a bunch of random appergios in my guitar solo and call it classical! ;)

Can anybody name a famous but non-talented classical musician?

Hmmm.... a challenge. I guess the real question should be, does such a person exist?

While there are good music from every genre, I think the main difference here is the minimum skill required to be successful. It is easy for us to mention good, high quality pop artist. I have to admit that MOST of the people featured in MTV are very good indeed. However to be successful (I mean, to gain a world-wide recognition), the standard required in pop music world is much lower than in the classical world. Can anybody name a famous but non-talented classical musician?

Non-talented classical musicians? How about Yanni?

You see how ridiculous this is. Please stop putting yourselves up on a pedestal please.

Non-talented classical musicians? How about Yanni?

You see how ridiculous this is. Please stop putting yourselves up on a pedestal please.

hahaha

Well, by no stretch of the imagination can Yanni be considered a "classical" musician. The guy's a new-age hack.

The original point is still relatively valid. It DOES take less formal training to become a "success" (relatively speaking) in the pop world than in the classical world.

In the classical world, when people with little or no training become "successful" it is often because they were backed by someone else with a solid career already. For example, Andrea Bocelli backed and promoted by Pavarotti.

A caveat: the world of "opera" is not the same as that of composition.

And to be fair, you should probably not take into account anyone who had a successful career in popular music BEFORE making the jump to classical. Since obviously, they had a distinct advantage over someone starting from scratch. Likewise, "contest winners" are not really valid comparisons either (ie: Paul Potts).

...to be successful (I mean, to gain a world-wide recognition), the standard required in pop music world is much lower than in the classical world.

Not necessarily... Regarding Pop music, you're applying the standard to the wrong person. The 'artist' (I use the term loosely) is often little more than a puppet - selected for visual and personality appeal. *NSYNC, Backstreet Boys, Britney, Christina Aguilera (but that girl can sing!), Beyonce, et al. are all product of a highly sophisticated machinery that manufactures, refines and creates these Pop stars. Beyonce has no more control over the songwriting/production process than a F1 driver has over his engine. They get strapped in, and take the ride.

The true artists (and highly skilled ones at that) are the producers, and songwriters who masterfully craft the music for maximum exposure and ultimately, maximum financial income for all involved.

Not all Pop music is done this way, and there are certainly exceptions to the rule. BUT, the business is MASSIVE...as is the money being made.

But POP, by default is not about super heroes of performance. Not anymore. The time of Hedrix and the other guitar gods is through (thank gawd). There is no need for any pop performer to play the perfect instrument, perfectly. Not if they deal with the studio most of the time!

Write a pop song: Doesn't matter if it's playable or not. Studio techniques are there

Write a "classical" piece: It HAS to be playable, and if difficult even better, since it's a show off for the performer.

big, big difference.

BTW, Yanni???? :(

Write a pop song: Doesn't matter if it's playable or not. Studio techniques are there

Serious artists don't use "studio magic" to fudge parts.

Serious artists don't use "studio magic" to fudge parts.

Oooooooh really?

I can recall quite a few artists who were very serious and were quite popular, but all of their music was made with 99% "Studio Magic" as it's called

Oooooooh really?

I can recall quite a few artists who were very serious and were quite popular, but all of their music was made with 99% "Studio Magic" as it's called

really? names please.

*edit**

my chauvenism is showing...

"serious" to my eye equated with "not pop".

And YES, I KNOW there are some popular musicans who are quite serious about their work.

Let me just go on record as being a lover of certain types of pop music, including the Rolling Stones... especially early ("Aftermath" album). Is Blues Pop? Love Blues (Howlin' Wolf, Lightnin' Hopkins, Blind Willie Johnson, John Hammond Jr., etc etc etc). This music does not seem to adversely affect my classical listening.

There does happen to be one kind of music I do detest... Merengue as played today in the Dominican Republic. Same 2 chords hammered away ad naus. I think of it as music for drunk people (no, this is not a general comment on the wonderful Dominican people!). As a frequent visitor to the DR, the loud, inescapable Merengue has ruined many a fine beach day. So I can relate to your feelings... that is, I know what it is to viscerally "hate" a certain type of music. Yes, it is tempting to allow this negativity to lead to a judgement upon those who love Merengue... I guess they are just in touch with their primitive selves... much like lovers of certain repetitive ethnic rhythm music. But I'll take African drumming over Merengue any day!

There are many classical musicians who unapologetically love certain varieties of pop (I don't think anyone loves ALL pop, just as no one loves all classical. I can live without Padre Antonio Soler, and Bruckner, to name a couple.)

I hear genius in my preferred Pop and Blues artists to the same degree I do in classical artists. Not because of structure or any other technical aspect. Simply because their work provides a totally absorbing musical experience.

There seem to be a lot of arguments relating to "taste" here, and it just cannot be quantified. It is expected that young people would discuss this, as their taste is still being formed, and new discoveries can elicit passionate bias, positive and negative, along with the urge to convince others. But with experience, we learn that we cannot deny the subjectivity of Art.

One might simply declare, "I hate Pop music!" and leave it at that. I mention "the same 2 chords" in relation to Merengue. But it is conceivable that there may be another type of music that utilises "the same 2 chords" in a manner I would find utterly enchanting. I just happen to... well... hate Merengue with a purple passion! But you are permitted to love it... I wish I did!

Serious artists don't use "studio magic" to fudge parts.

You've got to be kidding! For 2 reasons!

1. Again we go about naming artists! Serious vs non serious. Again? Didn't we go through this in the last 14 pages? :(

2. You mean to tell me that 99% of pop records (CDs) are the band going in, playing together, going out and producing the album as is? Or maybe there is a bit of layering, a bit of effects, a bit of pro tools, a bit of... everything. Any pop album that I know, has gone through 1000s (!!!) of waves to reach that result, inclduing mastering. You mean to tell me that "serious artists" don't use plug-ins, or hard drive recoding, or computers, and play/sing along the band, in one take and take it all home and leave, right?

I would assume (Robin?) that jazz artists might be doing that and bravo! to them, but jazz, exaclty like classical music is made to be played live!

I would assume (Robin?) that jazz artists might be doing that and bravo! to them, but jazz, exaclty like classical music is made to be played live!

You'd be surprised. Most will use a 'live' setting, recording the whole ensemble - x number of tracks, and mixing from that. But, some great sounding studio records are the result of soloists splicing the best bits from multiple takes; punching in to fix wrong notes or tuning.

It's a bit lame, and I don't agree with it, but it does happen.

2. You mean to tell me that 99% of pop records (CDs) are the band going in, playing together, going out and producing the album as is? Or maybe there is a bit of layering, a bit of effects, a bit of pro tools, a bit of... everything. Any pop album that I know, has gone through 1000s (!!!) of waves to reach that result, inclduing mastering. You mean to tell me that "serious artists" don't use plug-ins, or hard drive recoding, or computers, and play/sing along the band, in one take and take it all home and leave, right?

That's not what I was referring to. Artists might not be able to nail each song in one take, and might combine a few takes to get the part "perfect," but if they're at all decent, they can actually play the parts they write well. Otherwise seeing them live would be a miserable experience.

You mention, "the older I get". I wonder how old you are? I used to think I hated pop music, but the older I get, the more I realise it's just that I don't like it. I was angry because nobody understood me, and I didnt have any friends who shared my tastes musicaly. Now I finaly realize that hating it isn't worth the effort, and that I don't need to wish that thier music didnt exist- Live and let live.

PS- classical musicians DO get help from studio magic as well you know...

PS- classical musicians DO get help from studio magic as well you know...

though, honestly, you have to admit, considerably LESS so than pop musicians.

Toss a string quartet on a stage and they SHOULD sound the same as they do on their latest CD (unless the accoustics of the hall are incredibly dreadful).

Classical musicians use "studio" help to make the accoustics of the recording better, or to correct little performance imperfections here and there, since we expect a CD of classical music to be technically perfect.

But if a classical musician needed the amount of tweaking and "behind-the-scenes magic" that too many pop musicians require, they would never get hired... EVER.

Some pop bands don't even SOUND like themselves unless their recording has been processed to death in a studio environment by teh best producers and techs in the business.

I can give you one shocking example: When the movie Fame cam out, the theme song was a HUGE hit. Irene Cara sang the song in the the film, recorded in studio, obviously.

When the song was nominated for an Oscar that year, she went on stage at the ceremony to sing it... and it was a monumental disaster! Without the back-up of all those studio techs and over-production, it sounded like pure crap.

we are the Auto-Tune generation...