larstangmark
Group: Members
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mar. 2005 |
|
Posted: Jan. 11 2010, 16:19 |
|
Quote (starfish @ Jan. 11 2010, 15:04) | Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Dec. 05 2004, 11:13) | Last, but not least, JUST BECAUSE A SONG/ALBUM SOLD MILLIONS AND TOPPED CHARTS EVERYWHERE DOESN'T MEAN IT'S GOOD. If that was the case, we'd have to count Creed and Limp Bizkit as excellent bands. |
Oh deary me.
Y'know, each to their own and stuff.
But just because you personally don't like, say, Limp Bizkit, it doesn't necessarily follow that they are therefore intrinsically bad.
And just because something is popular, it doesn't necessarily follow that 'it's because of the media' / 'the masses are stupid and ignorant' / 'peer pressure' etc.
Now, I'm no fan of Creed either, but I do think it's a tad patronising when people say that such-and-such band is definitively terrible or lacking in merit. Or indeed that I'm stupid / a media-controlled sheep for liking a certain artist who just happens to be popular. It's all subjective, people.
I like what I like. Sometimes my musical tastes coincide with popular fashion, sometimes they don't.
But popular doesn't necessarily mean rubbish... a certain album called 'Tubular Bells' spings to mind at this point! |
I disagree with Starfish here. In order to have mass appeal record companies sign (and design) artists whose qualities can best be described as lowest common detenominator. Mainstream rock music had an experimetal phase in the late 60s/early 70s which left a lot of room for individuality and artistic expression but that is a thing of the past. Most of todays mainstream rock is totally populist, and the main reason for that is that the record companies (and the bands!) have more knowledge about their customers now than they used to. I too realize that the qualities of music lies mostly in the listener and his/hers interpretation, but still there is music with more and less artistic quallity. Music with high artistic quality may be difficult to grasp and require time to "get". It may also test the patience of the listener and it may fall outside of the format that current media requires. And it doesn't need to have a target audience. There are so many things that are not possible in the musical mainstream and therefore it's not as rich in colour and taste as the "undergrowth" (which admittedly is alive and well on the internet and on independent labels). It's true that you can't compete in music, but let's just admit that King Crimson has something that Michael Bublé hasn't. It's more than just a matter of taste.
-------------- "There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste" Mark E Smith
|