Why do people praise non-mainstream music here so much?

Because everyhing on the radio consists of Autotune and synths done on some guys laptop with a funny sounding name that means absolutely nothing.

Seriously...New York City doesn't have 1 Rock/Metal station. Not one for a city serving 20+million listeners. There's 1 official jazz and classical station (tons of unofficial and college ones),about 6 'hits' stations (that repeat the same songs over again), and 3 R&B/Rap stations. Pretty sad...

Most importantly, mainstream music sounds generic. Its all based on these one-hit celebreties that produce the same music over again. Chords are all in major. Albums literally have the same recurring beats in every track. Have you actually listened to an entire album of a popular band? They have 1 song on the radio, and that's pretty much what they make.

Try listening to some jazz, old-school rock, Beatles, Led Zeppelin, classical music (Vivaldi is always a good start), metal (Metal's a lot more than just grunts and noise. There's a lot of subtelty, nuance, and minor. Opeth is a good start), prog rock, foreign, indie (its pretty hit-and-miss tho....mostly miss).......can you really still enjoy mainstream music? At least ask why so many amazing musicians are completely unheard of and ignored while Evanescence, Jay-Z, rhianna, that annoying woman who dresses like a scary clown, and fvukin limp bizkit hog all the attention?

I have nothing against good popular music. Look at Metallica, Beatles, Doors, Public Enemy, Nirvana, Pantera, Rage against the machine, Megadeth, Led Zeppelin, Genesis (before they got all pop/trance and bad), Rush, Queen.....these were HUGE bands. All amazing. Yet there's nothing even close nowadays to the level of quality these bands churnned out at their prime.

When people think mainstream, they automatically picture crappy artists such as Ke$ha or Justin Bieber. It's just a cycle in which I bet that 30 years later, people will worship Lady Gaga as they do with Led Zeppelin. Yes I said it, go flame me all you want, you know it's true.

I like music that's mainstream in Europe, just not here in NA.LightR

When people think mainstream, they automatically picture crappy artists such as Ke$ha or Justin Bieber. It's just a cycle in which I bet that 30 years later, people will worship Lady Gaga as they do with Led Zeppelin. Yes I said it, go flame me all you want, you know it's true.

leviathan91

When people think mainstream, they automatically picture crappy artists such as Ke$ha or Justin Bieber. It's just a cycle in which I bet that 30 years later, people will worship Lady Gaga as they do with Led Zeppelin. Yes I said it, go flame me all you want, you know it's true.

leviathan91

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

When people think mainstream, they automatically picture crappy artists such as Ke$ha or Justin Bieber. It's just a cycle in which I bet that 30 years later, people will worship Lady Gaga as they do with Led Zeppelin. Yes I said it, go flame me all you want, you know it's true.

Reed_Bowie

Actually, if anything, Madonna became more respected over time and built up an enormous legacy.

Back then, people were saying that she would dissapear, now she is in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and gets on best of all time lists.

In short, your example is not a good one.

[QUOTE="Reed_Bowie"][QUOTE="leviathan91"]

When people think mainstream, they automatically picture crappy artists such as Ke$ha or Justin Bieber. It's just a cycle in which I bet that 30 years later, people will worship Lady Gaga as they do with Led Zeppelin. Yes I said it, go flame me all you want, you know it's true.

GreySeal9

Actually, if anything, Madonna became more respected over time.

Back then, people were saying that she would dissapear, now she is the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and gets on best of all time lists.

In short, your example is not a good one.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Reed_Bowie"] I bet in 30 years people will realize that her style was laughable and her music was un-original, just like they did with Madonna. Reed_Bowie

Actually, if anything, Madonna became more respected over time.

Back then, people were saying that she would dissapear, now she is the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and gets on best of all time lists.

In short, your example is not a good one.

Where exactly do you get that statistic from?

I think it depends on who you ask. If you ask at a gaming forum like this, then yeah.

And then you have to consider that alot of people hate her personality and all her antics, which is understandable. But even some of her detractors have to begrudgingly admit the impact she had on her genre.

Also, she's the fourth best selling artist of all time behind The Beatles, Elvis and Michael Jackson. You have to pretty popular to achieve that.

[QUOTE="Reed_Bowie"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Actually, if anything, Madonna became more respected over time.

Back then, people were saying that she would dissapear, now she is the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and gets on best of all time lists.

In short, your example is not a good one.

GreySeal9

Where exactly do you get that statistic from?

I think it depends on who you ask. If you ask at a gaming forum like this, then yeah.

And then you have to consider that alot of people hate her personality and all her antics, which is understandable. But even some of her detractors have to begrudgingly admit the impact she had on her genre.

Also, she's the fourth best selling artists of all time behind The Beatles, Elvis and Michael Jackson. You have to pretty popular to achieve that.

idk. OT is full of hipsters all of a sudden.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Reed_Bowie"] but if you ask most people the general opinion of her, it will most likely be pretty unfavorable. Reed_Bowie

Where exactly do you get that statistic from?

I think it depends on who you ask. If you ask at a gaming forum like this, then yeah.

And then you have to consider that alot of people hate her personality and all her antics, which is understandable. But even some of her detractors have to begrudgingly admit the impact she had on her genre.

Also, she's the fourth best selling artists of all time behind The Beatles, Elvis and Michael Jackson. You have to pretty popular to achieve that.

I didn't say popularity has anything to do with musical talent. I was simply using the sales to counter your "most people don't like Madonna" argument. People may not like her personality, but tons of people still buy up her music, and she set a record for tour attendance.

The Backstreet Boys may have been a fad for the most part, but this is not true of Madonna. She passed the longevity test a long time ago.

Also, while I don't think the Backstreet Boys made very good music, they did have a basic amount of singing and performing talent. I'm not somebody that writes off somebody's talents just because they are not musicians.

I listen to mainstream music. There is a lot of crap there (i.e. Jason DeRulo, Ke$ha) I must admit. But I'd say there's just as much good mainstream music (RHCP, The Cure, 30 Seconds to Mars, Sara Bareilles, Rob Thomas) as there is outisde of the mainstream. the_plan_man

good and 30 to mars should never be included in the same sentence positevly. are the cure really still considered mainstream? though i guess i still here them often. and they do own face......

rob thomas = fail.

either way. the probs with mainstream. is that mainstream music is on the radio. and the radio loops the same 5 f*&^king songs over and over all damn day....less main music comes up on alternatice radio stations and internet radio, hence lence mainstream is discovred to also own face

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"]I listen to mainstream music. There is a lot of crap there (i.e. Jason DeRulo, Ke$ha) I must admit. But I'd say there's just as much good mainstream music (RHCP, The Cure, 30 Seconds to Mars, Sara Bareilles, Rob Thomas) as there is outisde of the mainstream. blackacidevil96

good and 30 to mars should never be included in the same sentence positevly. are the cure really still considered mainstream? though i guess i still here them often. and they do own face......

rob thomas = fail.

either way. the probs with mainstream. is that mainstream music is on the radio. and the radio loops the same 5 f*&^king songs over and over all damn day....less main music comes up on alternatice radio stations and internet radio, hence lence mainstream is discovred to also own face

Once you become mainstream (whether intended or not), you never go back IMO.

But I think their best song is Just Like Heaven and that, to my knowledge, is one of their more mainstream songs.

Because Nickelback is god.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Depends on the genre/artists....some bands don't seek popularity but it finds them.....they generally make music because they like doing so. Then there are those making music for money....that music is generally the music categorized as mainstream....and it isn't very interesting. IMO.GreySeal9

Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

One can make music money and enjoy doing it.

[QUOTE="blackacidevil96"]

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"]I listen to mainstream music. There is a lot of crap there (i.e. Jason DeRulo, Ke$ha) I must admit. But I'd say there's just as much good mainstream music (RHCP, The Cure, 30 Seconds to Mars, Sara Bareilles, Rob Thomas) as there is outisde of the mainstream. GreySeal9

good and 30 to mars should never be included in the same sentence positevly. are the cure really still considered mainstream? though i guess i still here them often. and they do own face......

rob thomas = fail.

either way. the probs with mainstream. is that mainstream music is on the radio. and the radio loops the same 5 f*&^king songs over and over all damn day....less main music comes up on alternatice radio stations and internet radio, hence lence mainstream is discovred to also own face

Once you become mainstream (whether intended or not), you never go back IMO.

But I think their best song is Just Like Heaven and that, to my knowledge, is one of their more mainstream songs.

because hipsters

It tends to be better.

While I have noticed that, I haven't really thought too much about it. My best guess.... a lot of youngsters are at a point in their life when they are trying to come up with their identity. So, latching on to something off the beaten trail provides them with a sense of uniqueness.

I could be way off, but thats my guess.

because hipsters

freek666

because bus driver would rap circles around any famous rapper, also he is disjointed and crazy, so we have some common ground.

Generally when one is interested in making music for money/popularity they pander to the least common denominator.LJ

Even if we took this assumption as true (which I don't), that does not in any way rule out that they enjoy making music for money. Elton John said that he makes music to sell, but he has also said that he enjoys making music so much that it helped him through severe drug addiction. Madonna has admitted that she likes her music to make money, but she also has said that she "loves" making music. Those quotes, in itself, disproves your assumption that a desire to make money off of music cannot co-exist with the enjoyment of making it.

And that's what your arguments are based on: assumptions born out of your personal views on music, not anything that is actually tangible.

Sure some people are happy with pop hooks.....but generally that music is simple and uninteresting if one is truly interested in music.LJ

You can't speak for everybody that's "interested in music" and to attempt to do so is pure fallacy.

I'm "truly interested in music" (are you going to try to tell me that I'm not? :lol: )and I enjoy a well crafted pop song with a strong melody, strong arrangment, etc. I don't understand why you think your subjective view of what is interesting has any argumentative power insofar as your original stance.

Also, there's nothing inherently wrong with simplicity. I remember you saying that you thought LoveSong by The Cure is the best song of the 80s. Yet that song is simple. I also remember you calling Imagine is a masterpiece. That song is very simple.

Disposable three minute radio hits are just that. Not to say a good band can't craft a song that will sell.....but when that is the goal.....the music is generally underdone.LJ

Again, your very subjective opinion that three minute radio hits are disposable or that the music is underdone (whatever the hell that means) says absolutely nothing about how much pop artists like to make music.

Also, there are pop artists that don't just make "three minute radio hits". I think you're operation on pop stereotypes rather than the reality.

A lot of the mainstream music has no true meaning to it, most of the songs that are written was written soully for the purpose to sell music. UprootedDreamer

What is your definition of "true meaning"?

[QUOTE="cyborg100000"]

Mainstream music is too repetetive; you hear it all the time in shops, on TV, from your friend's iPod, in clubs, etc.

-DirtySanchez-

That's the downside of it, imagine going to work having to hear the top 40 chart radio all day, I wouldn't mind but the charts seem to stay the same all year. How many times have you heard 'I gotta feelin'?

A lot of the mainstream music has no true meaning to it, most of the songs that are written was written soully for the purpose to sell music. UprootedDreamer

Because elitest music snobs are too cool to like mainstream music. I may not like a lot of the pop artists that are currently on the radio, but I don't have to hate on every single band that more than 5 people have heard of. It's so frigging obvious these people just can't stand to listen to stuff that other people listen to. Every single time a relatively unknown band becomes popular, they immediately hate on it (Linkin Park, Green Day, Rise Against, Against Me!, etc).

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="blackacidevil96"]

good and 30 to mars should never be included in the same sentence positevly. are the cure really still considered mainstream? though i guess i still here them often. and they do own face......

rob thomas = fail.

either way. the probs with mainstream. is that mainstream music is on the radio. and the radio loops the same 5 f*&^king songs over and over all damn day....less main music comes up on alternatice radio stations and internet radio, hence lence mainstream is discovred to also own face

LJS9502_basic

Once you become mainstream (whether intended or not), you never go back IMO.

But I think their best song is Just Like Heaven and that, to my knowledge, is one of their more mainstream songs.

There are varying degrees of "mainstream".

I'm not trying to say that they are as mainstream as other bands, but they are not in any way obscure. They have sold millions of albums, they have some well-known songs, and their song structures are hardly radical/complex even if they do have a distinctive sound. That, IMO, makes you somewhat mainstream.

OT doesn't like popular stuff. Simple as that.

While I have noticed that, I haven't really thought too much about it. My best guess.... a lot of youngsters are at a point in their life when they are trying to come up with their identity. So, latching on to something off the beaten trail provides them with a sense of uniqueness.

I could be way off, but thats my guess.

Planet_Pluto

I would disagree that young people try to differentiate themselves from others. My personal observation growing up was that they will try as hard as they can to fit into a group of some kind, even if it's a small group.

Underground artists generally have more freedom than mainstream ones, they can do pretty much anything with their music without an idiot telling them to write generic 4 cord acoustic love songs an order to appeal to more people. Nobody should get in the way of an artist's goals and visions. You obviously weren't listening to the right bands.

RushKing

Does not necessarily has to be underground. It depends on the record label.

One Little Indian - Sugarcubes - BJORK etc /

Sub POP - Nirvana - Sonic Youth - Soundgarden etc.

Anyway your banner - Nexus Polaris, I love that album, especially - Bringer of the Sixth Sun . btw I love all kinds of music and genres, from ( GOOD ) mainstream pop to black metal to Hip Hop to folk - music to opera to alternative country to electronic etc.

Even if we took this assumption as true (which I don't), that does not in any way rule out that they enjoy making music for money. Elton John said that he makes music to sell, but he has also said that he enjoys making music so much that it helped him through severe drug addiction. Madonna has admitted that she likes her music to make money, but she also has said that she "loves" making music. Those quotes, in itself, disproves your assumption that a desire to make money off of music cannot co-exist with the enjoyment of making it.

And that's what your arguments are based on: assumptions born out of your personal views on music, not anything that is actually tangible.

You can't speak for everybody that's "interested in music" and to attempt to do so is pure fallacy.

I'm "truly interested in music" (are you going to try to tell me that I'm not? :lol: )and I enjoy a well crafted pop song with a strong melody, strong arrangment, etc. I don't understand why you think your subjective view of what is interesting has any argumentative power insofar as your original stance.

Again, your very subjective opinion that three minute radio hits are disposable or that the music is underdone (whatever the hell that means) says absolutely nothing about how much pop artists like to make music.

Also, there are pop artists that don't just make "three minute radio hits". I think you're operation on pop stereotypes rather than the reality.

GreySeal9

I'm not discussing what you like though from your comments here and in other threads....you do like mass appeal pop. That's fine. But it's not the best music out there. In the other thread you held up Madonna as something fantastic. And while subjectively that is fine...it's your opinion after all. Objectively her music was never much of a stretch. Not inventive and nothing risky. It was cIassic pop formula. Nothing under the hood...it was all right there on the surface. Some people do want more than bubblegum.

You are confusing my comment of liking to make music with making the music one likes and not worrying about sales. Pop is always about the sales.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Once you become mainstream (whether intended or not), you never go back IMO.

But I think their best song is Just Like Heaven and that, to my knowledge, is one of their more mainstream songs.

GreySeal9

There are varying degrees of "mainstream".

I'm not trying to say that they are as mainstream as other bands, but they are not in any way obscure. They have sold millions of albums, they have some well-known songs, and their song structures are hardly radical/complex even if they do have a distinctive sound. That, IMO, makes you somewhat mainstream.

I listen to mainstream music. There is a lot of crap there (i.e. Jason DeRulo, Ke$ha) I must admit. But I'd say there's just as much good mainstream music (RHCP, The Cure, 30 Seconds to Mars, Sara Bareilles, Rob Thomas) as there is outisde of the mainstream. the_plan_man

Who cares who likes what? I am so tired of OT always labeling one side to another rather than actually arguing about music...If you were to tell me why those bands are better or more worthy then an actual argument is to be had. Instead (and this is not just you) you get pseudo-music elitist that think they have good taste but couldn't tell me whats going on in any of the music scenes then try to justify themselves by quoting what they read on Wikipedia.

Sorry for the harsh words but OT music threads are so dead its not even funny, I wish it would go back to the music rather than its fashion and trend...

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"]I listen to mainstream music. There is a lot of crap there (i.e. Jason DeRulo, Ke$ha) I must admit. But I'd say there's just as much good mainstream music (RHCP, The Cure, 30 Seconds to Mars, Sara Bareilles, Rob Thomas) as there is outisde of the mainstream. mexicangordo

Who cares who likes what? I am so tired of OT always labeling one side to another rather than actually arguing about music...If you were to tell me why those bands are better or more worthy then an actual argument is to be had. Instead (and this is not just you) you get pseudo-music elitist that think they have good taste but couldn't tell me whats going on in any of the music scenes then try to justify themselves by quoting what they read on Wikipedia.

Sorry for the harsh words but OT music threads are so dead its not even funny, I wish it would go back to the music rather than its fashion and trend...

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

Underground artists generally have more freedom than mainstream ones, they can do pretty much anything with their music without an idiot telling them to write generic 4 cord acoustic love songs an order to appeal to more people. Nobody should get in the way of an artist's goals and visions. You obviously weren't listening to the right bands.

digimonkey12

Does not necessarily has to be underground. It depends on the record label.

One Little Indian - Sugarcubes - BJORK etc /

Sub POP - Nirvana - Sonic Youth - Soundgarden etc.

Anyway your banner - Nexus Polaris, I love that album, especially - Bringer of the Sixth Sun . btw I love all kinds of music and genres, from ( GOOD ) mainstream pop to black metal to Hip Hop to folk - music to opera to alternative country to electronic etc.

It's not exactly a secret that through the modern age mainstream music has been created for the sole reason of making money both for the artist and for the company. This is the category most pop music falls into.LJS9502_basic

Prove that most pop music is made "solely" for the reason of making money.

I don't deny that it's partially made for money, but the notion that it is "solely" is going to need proof.

There can be multiple motivations.

When I talk about the difference between making music for money and making it for enjoyment...I'm talking about the creativety being the impetous to the creation....and not the money. I'm not saying music shouldn't sell. But there is a difference between the motivations that when one is wanting sales they do "dumb down" the music to reach mass appeal. It's far easier to become wealthy making simple catchy pop songs. If one is trying to be inventive or make music for themselves....it's hit or miss whether they will be successful.LJ

Creativity and wanting to make money are not mututally exclusive.

I'm not discussing what you like though from your comments here and in other threads....you do like mass appeal pop. That's fine.LJ

I like all kinds of music and that includes mass appeal pop.

But it's not the best music out there.LJ

That's your subjective opinion and nothing more than your opinion.

"Best" is a subjective term.

In the other thread you held up Madonna as something fantastic. And while subjectively that is fine...it's your opinion after all.LJ

And when you say an artist you like is fantastic, that's your opinion, so what's your point?

Objectively her music was never much of a stretch. Not inventive and nothing risky. It was cIassic pop formula. Nothing under the hood...it was all right there on the surface. Some people do want more than bubblegum.LJ

You are merely giving your opinion, so the word "objectively" does not apply. It makes no sense to use the word objectively and then go on to give your opinion. That's ridiculous.

Also, there is nothing that says that music needs to be inventive and risky.

I value solid songwriting over making something "risky". If it something is arguably inventive, but has a **** melody, forget about it (I do appreciate inventiveness when it is paired with good songwriting tho). You might have different values in music, but don't try to pass them off as objective. They are not.

You are confusing my comment of liking to make music with making the music one likes and not worrying about sales. Pop is always about the sales.

LJ

You've made an absolute statement here, so care to prove it?

[QUOTE="mexicangordo"]

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"]I listen to mainstream music. There is a lot of crap there (i.e. Jason DeRulo, Ke$ha) I must admit. But I'd say there's just as much good mainstream music (RHCP, The Cure, 30 Seconds to Mars, Sara Bareilles, Rob Thomas) as there is outisde of the mainstream. LJS9502_basic

Who cares who likes what? I am so tired of OT always labeling one side to another rather than actually arguing about music...If you were to tell me why those bands are better or more worthy then an actual argument is to be had. Instead (and this is not just you) you get pseudo-music elitist that think they have good taste but couldn't tell me whats going on in any of the music scenes then try to justify themselves by quoting what they read on Wikipedia.

Sorry for the harsh words but OT music threads are so dead its not even funny, I wish it would go back to the music rather than its fashion and trend...

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="mexicangordo"] You are acting no better than the "hipster" stereotype that you always attack. Stop acting elitist, Rise Against is not an amazing band and if you like them kudos to you. See opinoins vairy...

Who cares who likes what? I am so tired of OT always labeling one side to another rather than actually arguing about music...If you were to tell me why those bands are better or more worthy then an actual argument is to be had. Instead (and this is not just you) you get pseudo-music elitist that think they have good taste but couldn't tell me whats going on in any of the music scenes then try to justify themselves by quoting what they read on Wikipedia.

Sorry for the harsh words but OT music threads are so dead its not even funny, I wish it would go back to the music rather than its fashion and trend...

mexicangordo