61–70 of 71 posts
Popular music is the music listened to by most people by definition. Most people are not very smart (not to say they are stupid). Therefore, pop(ular) music will never be intelligent as it needs to attune to a lot of people that are not that smart. I got tired of the gimmicky pop years ago and switched completely to classical and folk music.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Average" just means that, while "mediocre" means average + negative connotation. You're the one who is using a word with more baggage than the straightforward, "by definition" meaning (probably to do with some statistical distribution). Average is not always bad , unless you think that being non-average is inherently good. And having average music taste is about as harmless/inconsequential as average-ness goes - you…
Contrast average with "Exceptional. Special. Distinguished. Excellent. etc." The nature of these words show a clear bias that being non-average IS inherently good, at least when you are talking about quality. Music is clearly a qualitative arena, and therefore, average means, "not exceptional," "not special," "not distinguished" and "not excellent" Ergo, my point is, the parent to this discussion is correct, "average…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contrast average with "Exceptional. Special. Distinguished. Excellent. etc." The nature of these words show a clear bias that being non-average IS inherently good, at least when you are talking about quality. Music is clearly a qualitative arena, and therefore, average means, "not exceptional," "not special," "not distinguished" and "not excellent" Ergo, my point is, the parent to this discussion is correct, "average…
In reference to why people call exceptional things weird, odd and strange, please refer to Albert Einstein's quote: "Great spirits have always encountered opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly."
Something being average denotes that it is commonplace. Not everything that is commonplace is subpar to something that is not average. Sometimes those things are just weird, odd, subpar or undesirable. And sometimes, they are indeed exceptional. And no, something being "odd" or "weird" isn't always or solely average people just "not getting it". Sometimes it's just subpar, weird and odd. I know, I know, it's a profound-sounding quote by Einstein so that means it must be relevant in every situation..
In the case of music, people with peculiar tastes will sometimes think of the mainstream music as being lame and uncultured. In reality, those mainstream listeners might get the exact same enjoyment out of listening to their mainstream music, as those with more peculiar tastes get out of listening to their music. But at least those with special taste get some kicks out of feeling superior, so they've got that going for them. You can call that the smug-hipster-bonus.
Tip: if you wait a minute or so you can reply to the actual comment. There is a short delay between a comment being posted and being able to reply to it, for some reason.
There has been terrible pop music since pop music began. Try and make it all the way to the end of this song from the golden 60s - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhYLz63csS0
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In reference to why people call exceptional things weird, odd and strange, please refer to Albert Einstein's quote: "Great spirits have always encountered opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly."
My point wasn't that "weird" are synonyms for "excellent". They are the other side of the coin of things that are not average -- the less desirable things. Something being average denotes that it is commonplace. Not everything that is commonplace is subpar to something that is not average . Sometimes those things are just weird, odd, subpar or undesirable. And sometimes, they are indeed exceptional . And no, somethin…
Whether or not this applies to mainstream music seems to be where we differ.
I believe the Einstein quote is still relevant to this discussion, even if it is possible to misuse the quote. Similar to wine, art and other things of quality, when you first start to learn something the basic, simpler things seem better. Most people start by drinking fruity wines, enjoy simplistic art and like pop music. Also, while you are still enjoying simple things it's hard to understand why someone would want something more refined.
However, once you have experienced the basic level you will eventually want to move beyond it and enjoy things of higher quality. Higher quality wine, music or art requires that you move beyond average.
I believe a more refined musical palette will always move you beyond pop music. Again, similar to fruity, sweet simplistic wine, that doesn't mean you didn't enjoy the basic experience, it's just that you now want something better.
Whether or not the things one would eventually move onto are truly better seems subjective to me, hence why I think "better music" is a qualitative thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contrast average with "Exceptional. Special. Distinguished. Excellent. etc." The nature of these words show a clear bias that being non-average IS inherently good, at least when you are talking about quality. Music is clearly a qualitative arena, and therefore, average means, "not exceptional," "not special," "not distinguished" and "not excellent" Ergo, my point is, the parent to this discussion is correct, "average…
> Contrast average with "Exceptional. Special. Distinguished. Excellent. etc." Contrast average with "Odd. Weird. Freak. etc." > Music is clearly a qualitative arena, Strongly disagree.
Or are you saying that a music's popularity, in terms of how many people listen to it, is how you determine it's value?
That is definitely an interesting way of looking at it. I can't say it's not a valid way of measuring it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Contrast average with "Exceptional. Special. Distinguished. Excellent. etc." Contrast average with "Odd. Weird. Freak. etc." > Music is clearly a qualitative arena, Strongly disagree.
I am sincerely curious as to how music could be not qualitative (IE, quantitative). Is better music just more notes? Or more words? What numeric value of music would be better? Making more money, perhaps? Or are you saying that a music's popularity, in terms of how many people listen to it, is how you determine it's value? That is definitely an interesting way of looking at it. I can't say it's not a valid way of mea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am sincerely curious as to how music could be not qualitative (IE, quantitative). Is better music just more notes? Or more words? What numeric value of music would be better? Making more money, perhaps? Or are you saying that a music's popularity, in terms of how many people listen to it, is how you determine it's value? That is definitely an interesting way of looking at it. I can't say it's not a valid way of mea…
I thought you meant that there is some way to measure quality of music.
I wouldn't think testing vocabulary would be a very good indicator of music's intelligence. In my mind, music has been getting less intelligent because the tools to make music these days have made the barrier to entry almost non-existent. No longer do you need to study and practice various musical/performance skills for years to be a musician and put out a record. All you need is a computer and some software. It's ha…
When we are talking about Pop charts hits, we are talking about songs quite often made by a small set of producers. The job title of these guys is strikingly adequate. They are manufacturing a product according to the specific requirements of the record labels+radio stations ecosystem. That's why the result is so often generic - it's a result of using some formulas which are proven to work for decades.
*On the other hand the "modern" tools created so many new amazing genres and styles that the net result might be not detrimental at all :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought you meant that there is some way to measure quality of music.
I think there really is music that is clearly better, but only subjectively. But you're right, a lot of hipsters think that there is objective quality in their particular brand of music. But I think they are just a different section of average.
Hmm... it looks like we agree much more on this point than I thought.