Music? Is this generation making shit music, or are people not looking hard enough? - General

[QUOTE=Cl0cK;34195474]The reason we like music from the last decades more is because we can pick the good things out more easily than we could right now. So it's pretty much just a matter of not really looking hard enough to find good music today.[/QUOTE] Anyone now can release an album and be their own artist. It's so simple. The sheer amount that available is unbelievable, but there is still a shitload of obscure 60s/70s that needs to be rediscovered. [editline]13th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Guy Mannly;34195495]i'm really sick of people complaining that autotune automatically makes music bad. autotune doesn't make your voice sound better, it just readjusts the pitch, allowing singers to use ranges of notes they usually can't. singing in tune is an incredibly basic concept and vocal training focuses around making your voice sound nice, not just singing the right notes. aside from that, a lot of good artists like daft punk use autotune because it suits their music (daft punk's sound is more mechanical and it's appropriate for them to use it). i can agree that sometimes it's ill-fitting for the music it's being used in, but that isn't the fault of autotune itself.[/QUOTE] 808s and Heartbreak is a good album. If anything autotune makes the album a lot more interesting.

Here's a protip: If someone criticizes electronic music while refering to it as "techno", then they have no idea what they're talking about.

Our underground rappers are pretty good.

Oh god, this thread again. We only talk about the Beatles, Queen, Black Sabbath, etcetera because they made good music. Not, and I'll repeat, NOT because it was the ONLY music they made back then. The crap music of this generation will fade back into obscurity and the good remains. So if we could all kindly stop being such dramatic fucktards going 'OMG MUZAK WAS GOOD AND NOW ITS SHIT LULZ SRY FOR MAH GENERATION'.

Go to Coachella, Lollapalooza, Reading and Leeds, V Festival, Rock AM Ring, T in the Park, PinkPop or Glastonbury and say music is dead. Yeah mainstream music is shit, it has pretty much always been that way but I've seen some absolutely great acts in the past few years. [editline]13th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Katatonic717;34192017][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7ckAbEHhEg[/media] Fuck no, there are some gems among the shit.[/QUOTE] Live is even better, Matt does the Rage Maggies Farm riff right after and it kicks ass.

queens of the stone age

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;34200099]Oh god, this thread again. We only talk about the Beatles, Queen, Black Sabbath, etcetera because they made good music. Not, and I'll repeat, NOT because it was the ONLY music they made back then. The crap music of this generation will fade back into obscurity and the good remains. So if we could all kindly stop being such dramatic fucktards going 'OMG MUZAK WAS GOOD AND NOW ITS SHIT LULZ SRY FOR MAH GENERATION'.[/QUOTE] Well those were the ones getting the attention at that point. Most sane people nowadays prefer some indie artists that are not mainstream. Right now the music that is getting the attention it seems are rap and dubstep.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;34201249]Well those were the ones getting the attention at that point. Most sane people nowadays prefer some indie artists that are not mainstream. Right now the music that is getting the attention it seems are rap and dubstep.[/QUOTE] dubstep isn't really getting alot of attention on a global scale in comparison to the major contenders which are house, trance and downtempo

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34111766]Today's music is the best music. There are more genres and styles than ever. And there are more bands playing each genre than ever. If you think music today is crap then you don't know shit. You haven't even looked. If you don't like today's pop music, then okay, that's your opinion. But don't say it "takes no talent" or is more "generic" than pop music was before. It's not true. You don't know what you're talking about.[/QUOTE] Autotune can make anyone sound "good" Not even joking. Saying it takes no talent or is more generic is not true is correct though. Having NO talent is still better than the shit that spews out into our ears on the radio today and it isn't more generic, it's so generic that it has looped over three times and is just as generic as before.

the "mainstream" stuff is the stuff that tends to get most of the flak, but there are plenty of bands that I do like that are still goin' today. if you like chiptune or video game music, do me a favor and look up slagsmalsklubben, they're a great band for those into this genre.

Page 1 = Page 2 = Page 3 = Page 4 = Page 5 = Page 6. We're pretty much repeating ourselves now.

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;34200099]Oh god, this thread again. We only talk about the Beatles, Queen, Black Sabbath, etcetera because they made good music. Not, and I'll repeat, NOT because it was the ONLY music they made back then. The crap music of this generation will fade back into obscurity and the good remains. So if we could all kindly stop being such dramatic fucktards going 'OMG MUZAK WAS GOOD AND NOW ITS SHIT LULZ SRY FOR MAH GENERATION'.[/QUOTE] There are a ton of things that went undiscovered in the 60s and 70s. We can't all think it was rock that was big. [editline]14th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=wauterboi;34202203]Page 1 = Page 2 = Page 3 = Page 4 = Page 5 = Page 6. We're pretty much repeating ourselves now.[/QUOTE] No it isn't, read the discussion rather than the people who post once and leave. [editline]14th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=The one that is;34201311]Autotune can make anyone sound "good".[/QUOTE] No it can't. How can autotune immediately mean the music is good. It's overused and rarely used creatively.

[QUOTE=The one that is;34201311]Autotune can make anyone sound "good" Not even joking.[/QUOTE] What is the difference between good and "good" and why does it matter? What's wrong with using tools to make a production sound better? Why does autotune get special treatment, while equalizers/filters, compressors, reverb, delay, vocoders, chorus/phaser/modulators, are all perfectly fine? They are also tampering with the vocals in unnatural ways to make them sound better or special. Who fucking cares? Why does music have to be some kind of skewed talent contest? Here's a tip: forget all that shit - listen to the music. Listen to the tones, the chords, the harmonies, the beat, and enjoy!

Not looking hard enough. Thread over.

[QUOTE=deaded38;34193673]Good genres: SOME country. It's alright if you find the right songs. Country pop because it actually takes a good amount of skill and is generally about meaningful songs rather than some random shit like shoes and pandas. SOME classic rock. Personally, I like some rock songs but I never like most of a band's songs. Most of them all sound the same to me. Examples being Aerosmith, ACDC, etc. SOME Classic pop. Bad genres: Modern pop/autotune. The shit sucks, enough said. Metal. All it is to me is one guy playing a guitar, one guy with drums, and a lead singer that says three words. The same can go for most classic rock. Screamo. It requires no skill and sounds like shit. Computer generated sounds. They don't require any skill and mostly sound just weird/bad. Dubstep/techno. It takes no skill and it all sounds the same. As for the OP, I don't think it's our generation. I think it's the artists and/or the record companies. Some people just shouldn't produce "music". If they have no talent, they just shouldn't.[/QUOTE] This is one of the worst posts on any forum I have ever seen in my entire life, holy shit. You are exactly the kind of person we are talking about, the kind who acts like they know everything when really they're just whinging about shit they aren't familiar with. I don't even know what to say to this. How do you define talent and skill? Just because someone writing electronic music mightn't know how to play a guitar doesn't make them talentless, it means they have their skills applied in different areas.

Too many people need to relax. People will always let their personal prejudices get the better of them.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34205814]Why does autotune get special treatment, while equalizers/filters, compressors, reverb, delay, vocoders, chorus/phaser/modulators, are all perfectly fine? They are also tampering with the vocals in unnatural ways to make them sound better or special. Who fucking cares? Why does music have to be some kind of skewed talent contest? Here's a tip: forget all that shit - listen to the music. Listen to the tones, the chords, the harmonies, the beat, and enjoy![/QUOTE] The other effects you mentioned do a completely different thing. They change the sound of the performance, yes, but they don't change the performance itself. The thing is, it's not obvious in the way that vocoders and such are. Autotune when used in its intended way can "enhance" a vocal track and make it sound like the singer is a better singer than what he/she really is. Since this isn't usually obvious to the audience it can mislead them and have them believe the singer can sing on key when he/she really can't. It's misleading and many, including me, call it cheating. Note that I'm talking about Autotune for basic pitch correction, not to create the "Autotune" robotic effect that is so popular now.

It's not autotune itself that's bad and "easy", it's how it is used. Believe it or not, there have been some creative things done with it.

[QUOTE=Eric95;34206010]The other effects you mentioned do a completely different thing. They change the sound of the performance, yes, but they don't change the performance itself.[/QUOTE] But they do. Compressors keep the power to a constant. Filters alter the tone of the voice. Reverb/delay/chorus makes the voice "cooler" and the performer can "get away with more crap". And what about just editing the sample in general to tighten the timing? Singing isn't all about pitch. There are so many more variables. Do you think you can make yourself sound like Freddie Mercury or Celine Dion by using just your voice and autotune? Yeah, fat chance. But again, I don't even see why it should matter.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34205814] Why does autotune get special treatment, while equalizers/filters, compressors, reverb, delay, vocoders, chorus/phaser/modulators, are all perfectly fine? They are also tampering with the vocals in unnatural ways to make them sound better or special. Who fucking cares? Why does music have to be some kind of skewed talent contest? Here's a tip: forget all that shit - listen to the music. Listen to the tones, the chords, the harmonies, the beat, and enjoy![/QUOTE] I don't believe in parading somebody around as a successful musician/pop singer if they can't sing in tune, and if they can't write their own music. Autotune is used primarily to correct bad pitches, it's occasionally overdone to [i]sound[/i] like it was an intentional effect, but really it's just masking bad intonation. When the people who are earning a sizeable living from music lack even the most rudimentary of performing ability or critical ear for intonation, or songwriting skill, and the people who actually spend their entire lives from an early age training their performing ability fail to make a decent career out of it, or earn recognition, I say there's something terribly wrong with the industry. Record producers would rather overproduce and pitch correct a bad singer performing somebody else's formula pop music if he/she has a pretty face. I think that's a terrible state for the music industry to be in. Pop music these days is more about the celebrity face and the public image than any recognisable skill/talent/ability, and I think that's terrible, and I don't think it used to be like that. I don't think it's autotune that's the problem so much as it is what autotune represents. Autotune represents the industry that will willingly sell itself out to make a hot chick rich and famous as a musician, when she can't sing in tune, and doesn't write her own songs.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34206074] Singing isn't all about pitch. There are so many more variables. Do you think you can make yourself sound like Freddie Mercury or Celine Dion by using just your voice and autotune? Yeah, fat chance. But again, I don't even see why it should matter.[/QUOTE] It's about expression of course. But some don't think so. [editline]14th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Neon-Knight;34206081]Pop music these days is more about the celebrity face and the public image than any recognisable skill/talent/ability, and I think that's terrible, and I don't think it used to be like that.[/QUOTE] Not entirely true. Although image has been important, but the likes of Lady Gaga and such are very talented. Gorillaz, Coldplay, U2, Drake are examples of artists being mainstream but talented in expression.

[QUOTE=Neon-Knight;34206081]Autotune represents the industry that will willingly sell itself out to make a hot chick rich and famous as a musician, when she can't sing in tune, and doesn't write her own songs.[/QUOTE] Ok I understand what you're saying. But this isn't really something new, and it certainly isn't autotune's fault. Hot guys and chicks whose biggest trait is their sex appeal have been around since ever. And autotune is used by like everyone today. Pop, rock, metal, rap, house, you name it. I mean, there's no reason [I]not[/I] to use it. Leave autotune alone!

I don't understand, how is being MAINSTREAM a bad thing? So a group cannot become popular? They have to remain underground and unheard of?

People are liking what they are told to like instead of searching out their own music. Also a lot of music is promising and original but then gets fucked by the music industry bigwigs who just want to sell as much as possible and treat it like a traditional business rather than an art form.

Some make music to be popular, some make music for the listener to experience what they intend.

[QUOTE=Paravin;34206190]I don't understand, how is being MAINSTREAM a bad thing? So a group cannot become popular? They have to remain underground and unheard of?[/QUOTE] It's not, by itself. Plenty of incredibly mainstream musicians are amazing. However, there is a general trend which can be seen time and time again (there are countless examples) where a band or pop musician will become progressively worse as they become more mainstream, as the record label start making demands of their style and target audience. Being mainstream doesn't make something bad, but there's a whole lot of bad in mainstream music, because it's so formulaic and targetted specifically to a mass audience. It becomes marketed, and that often leads to a degeneration of artistic creativity.

[QUOTE=Neon-Knight;34206232]It's not, by itself. Plenty of incredibly mainstream musicians are amazing. However, there is a general trend which can be seen time and time again (there are countless exmples) where a band or pop musician will become progressively worse as they become more mainstream, as the record label start making demands of their style and target audience. Being mainstream doesn't make something bad, but there's a whole lot of bad in mainstream music, because it's so formulaic and targetted specifically to a mass audience. It becomes marketted, and that often leads to a degeneration of artistic creativity.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure I can agree until you give examples.

I do hate how mainstream pop music seems to be about who can make the most obnoxious beat. Something like "Sugar, Sugar" is pretty thin, intellectually, spiritually, and emotionally, but at least I find it pleasant to listen to. It is more of a personal thing though. I dunno if I can really argue about that. Then again my only experience with mainstream pop is what people play outta their cellphones at school. But looking at some music videos on TV this doesn't seem to be far off. Lady Gaga is someone who can actually make a good tune with an actual memorable melody or hook that doesn't make me wanna tear my ears out. I guess you can call Arcade Fire mainstream now. The Suburbs which came out in 2010 was something that was very fulfilling for me. Pop albums like Belong and Kaputt were albums last year which I found really enjoyable but they don't really seem to be very popular, not at least among the crowd at my school.

Indie has ironically become very mainstream. I personally think pop music can be very good, it's just the positive, innocent aspect of it that draws me. Can't keep ourselves stuck in the dark forever can we? :-)

[QUOTE=AK'z;34206324]Indie has ironically become very mainstream.[/QUOTE] everyone talks about hipsters who like Bon Iver or shit like that but I don't really see a lot of them around here. It's probably just the location. It's mostly faux- gangsta kids or faux-emo-or-scene-or-whatever-you-call-'em kids.