Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Music & Sound -> Music Today
Report, edit, etc...Posted by HolySin on 2006-10-09 at 22:45:29
I find today if I turn on the radio, I find that every single song sounds the same. Similar lyrics, similar tune, similar vocal, similar instruments, similar everything. Music today is now one of three things: rock, rap, and techno. I don't hate any of the genres themselves, but I begin to hate the music when a bunch of mediocre songs of that genre spew out of the speakers. The subjects of those mediocre songs are also limited to sadness, love, and hate. Let's take a look at the actual instruments being used:

Rock: Guitar, bass guitar, drums, vocal, piano (sometimes), synthesizer back-up.
Rap: Vocal, synthesizer.
Techno: Synthesizer, vocal (sometimes).

Seriously, what the hell? Are we really that restricted to those instruments? Diversity of music also includes diversity of the instruments. How about brass, wooden, strings. Too school-bandish or resembles too much of an orchestra? How about accordian, mandolin, maybe even bells. Now, should the bands only use these instruments? Of course not, my point is that they can be more diverse. Though it is preferred to be able to use the instrument itself, using a synthesizer wouldn't be bad either. Now should every instrument be used in a song? No, that will make all the songs sound the same as well.

"Rap and accordian doesn't go well together, now does it?!"

Wrong, any instrument can go with any genre or style if it is played right or has the right tune. Instruments don't always decide the genre, it's more so how they're played. A piano is a good example: it can be played for classical, rock, jazz, etc. I could go on for about an hour on the other problems with our instrument choice, but I assume you guys get the hint.

Next, bands today only seem to like to give us one better than average song and make ten other songs that are completely forgettable. What's with that? Do they lack this much creativity? It's actually come to the point where I don't like bands, I only like songs. For instance, The Scientist by Coldplay, good job, too bad the rest of your music sucks; or the Postal Service with Such Great Heights. Congratulations, I only remember that song only and the rest of your stuff sounds way too random to even be called music. Look at the older bands, like Pink Floyd, the Beatles, Queen, Aerosmith, Jimi Hendrix Experience, the Who, etc. We don't remember one song by them, we remember their albums. Hardly anybody hears the name, Pink Floyd, and only think of one song, say Another Brick in the Wall Part. 2. Most people think of three albums: Dark Side of the Moon, The Wall, and Wish You Were Here. I believe if bands can't compose at least three memorable songs on one album, they shouldn't even release it.

Also, there are the issues of the band members themselves: image and talent.

What is the deal with these people? Basically, band members go for looks instead of talent since they're so worried about their image. So many bands today go for the whole "dark" look to be scary, but fail and are called emos (e.g. My Chemical Romance). You want to know what's dark? Halfway through the song, Echoes, by Pink Floyd. That's probably eerier than any Rob Zombie crap you can give me since it gives the true feeling of being alone in emptiness. The only images of rap are pimps and people from the ghetto, and techno doesn't even have an appearance with or without a vocal. I don't care about what a band looks like as long as they make what I consider good or unique music.

The other issue I kind of touched on was the lack of talent. Let's start with the so called voice of the band. It appears though that more than half of the bands today use synthesizers as a crutch for their inhuman voice. Sing well or don't sing at all. Then we have our guitarists. They're probably good guitarists outside of the band, but why don't they step forward with something unique nowadays? Rather than helping the band, they just strum the same chords in every song then act like they're really into the music. They're not fooling anybody. The bassist seems to be the nobody of the band, just off to the side not doing anything significant.This is so ironic since the bassists twenty to forty years ago were incredible composers such as Paul McCartney, Roger Waters, or John Deacon. Last, we look at the drummers, or as I see it, the person with ADD who just like hitting things instead of keeping a beat. I can't say anything too horrible about drummers, since the most they do is keep a beat, but some still fail at it so they use a synthesizer during a concert at times.

Does this rant apply to every single band out there today? No, but it sure does apply to the majority or even the underground goth bands who think they'll make it big since they believe they're so talented and drink blood. Is there any hope? Maybe, just maybe. I know many people with tons of talent on an instrument, but something goes wrong when they play in a band. They're told to slow down or change their style, which brings them to the stereotype.

A band is unique through their songs, their instrument choice, and their members. The problem however is the cooperation of the band. Maybe most of the bands today have awesome musicians, but we can't see it since they need to play at a mediocre level so they can harmonize easier. I don't believe I'm being too harsh, I believe I'm being realistic.

Why is it that the bands are not memorable today? Why do I have to search for songs that were made years before I was born to enjoy music? Why can't I find a band that doesn't fit the stereotype? What's wrong with our music today?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2006-10-09 at 23:49:55
I agree about the part when it comes to lyrics and vocals. Lots of bands today can only write lyrics which even kindergardeners can write, it kind of disheartens me.
A perfect example of this would be back in 2004, a band called "Outkast" released a single called "The Way You Move." Omfg, it had the lamest lyrics ever, yet it still hit the top of the charts. It just kept going "I like the way you move... I like the way you move... I like the Way.. I like the way..." (repeat x4)

What pisses me off even more is how bands can't sing well live. I mean wtf, the most important part about the music you make is the voice, the singing. If not, you might as well call yourselves an orchestra or something.
Ok lots of people seem to look down on the show "American Idol," but do you realize that those people on the show can actually sing and have talent? That's why i like this show and watch it; because these people are actually talented and are worth listening to.


But also, what I really don't like about some of us "critics" is that we find fault in bands for the wrong things. For instance, it seems like many people hate Green Day. Why? From what it seems like to me, people criticize them for being talentless in their instrumental skills because all they play is lame powercords. Yet, people completely disregard Billy Joel's ability to perform live and his (or perhaps his band's) ability to write actual lyrics. Wtf? All people care about in bands is just the instruments. You might as well listen to orchestras since they're all about instrumental talent. Why dont these people actually look at what some of these bands are truly about? Anyone can learn to play a guitar, Anyone can learn to play drums. But not everyone can sing, not everyone can write good lyrics. The ability to do those last two things define what makes an artist skillful/talented or not. However, using those two abilities to make memorable songs/albums is something many artists cannot do, and that's where our criticism comes in.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by HolySin on 2006-10-10 at 00:10:57
Another problem (as far as the singer goes) is that the singer is usually a friend of the rest of the band who can't play an instrument, and since the bands don't want to feel mean and reject their friend, they invite him to play. It also saves time, but what they fail to see is that bands need a good vocal in order to be recognized in a positive light.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)Excalibur on 2006-10-10 at 00:55:07
Welcome to the music industry as it is. Please check your morals at the door, as they are not welcome. =/

On a side note, i think alot of bands need to work on lyrics aswell, but writing them myself, i know how hard it is to get a hit written. Out of 140-something i probobly only have 2 or 3 hit pieces.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2006-10-10 at 02:24:06
Well it may not surprise you that the two biggest hits this year are tracks that have taken 80's techno lines, remixed with real instruments and added shoddy lyrics by famous singers.

The problem is not that there isn't good music being made, which there actually is quite a lot of; but that the music in the spotlight of our society blows hardcore. The reason for this is simple, most music out there today is meant to be so people can dance (if you would call what teenagers do in a dance room dancing) and the best style for this is a rather simple beat. (I have tried dancing to classical music and it proves to be quite difficult for todays dance moves.) Then come the lyrics. If you were to want a song to be accepted by the media, you would want to select lyrics that would not really affect anyone in the pblic enough to the point where it would cause problems for the music company playing your music. This is where most of the good bands disappear, as the ones that actually have a message other then "You are hot, lets freak." or "I'm cool" are disregarded as possibly having some sort of opposition. Once a song is made so that it will be exactly what the majority is expecting, then it will be produced, because that is what sells. Very rarely is a different sounding song played openly over a variety of stations. There do exsist stations that pride in being different and play other songs. (which are the only stations I listen to regularly.)

Overall the reason that there are so many songs produced that sound almost exactly the same, is that the music industry is basically one big think tank, any one song is hardly produced by one person, as it has been in the past, there are quite a few more people who are hired to add small parts to songs, tweaking it in a fashion of their liking. The end result is not as meaningful as a single persons veiwpoint, and it shows.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-10-11 at 18:40:38
They use these instruments because modern americans love rap/hiphop/techno as it is. You should try Russian rock. It has all sorts of different instruments, I've heard violins, trumpets, and more. Of course, a lot of Russians now listen to rap/hiphop too. The sad decline of musical standards. If only Beethoven was around to teach the world a lesson.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-12 at 23:37:35
Too few people possess musical appreciation in order to drive the capitalist society into forcing the current makers of "music" to make something worthwhile.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Stealth-mM on 2006-10-29 at 18:09:01
QUOTE(HolySin @ Oct 9 2006, 10:45 PM)
I find today if I turn on the radio, I find that every single song sounds the same. Similar lyrics, similar tune, similar vocal, similar instruments, similar everything. Music today is now one of three things: rock, rap, and techno. I don't hate any of the genres themselves, but I begin to hate the music when a bunch of mediocre songs of that genre spew out of the speakers. The subjects of those mediocre songs are also limited to sadness, love, and hate. Let's take a look at the actual instruments being used:

Rock: Guitar, bass guitar, drums, vocal, piano (sometimes), synthesizer back-up.
Rap: Vocal, synthesizer.
Techno: Synthesizer, vocal (sometimes).

Seriously, what the hell? Are we really that restricted to those instruments? Diversity of music also includes diversity of the instruments. How about brass, wooden, strings. Too school-bandish or resembles too much of an orchestra? How about accordian, mandolin, maybe even bells. Now, should the bands only use these instruments? Of course not, my point is that they can be more diverse. Though it is preferred to be able to use the instrument itself, using a synthesizer wouldn't be bad either. Now should every instrument be used in a song? No, that will make all the songs sound the same as well.

"Rap and accordian doesn't go well together, now does it?!"

Wrong, any instrument can go with any genre or style if it is played right or has the right tune. Instruments don't always decide the genre, it's more so how they're played. A piano is a good example: it can be played for classical, rock, jazz, etc. I could go on for about an hour on the other problems with our instrument choice, but I assume you guys get the hint.

Next, bands today only seem to like to give us one better than average song and make ten other songs that are completely forgettable. What's with that? Do they lack this much creativity? It's actually come to the point where I don't like bands, I only like songs. For instance, The Scientist by Coldplay, good job, too bad the rest of your music sucks; or the Postal Service with Such Great Heights. Congratulations, I only remember that song only and the rest of your stuff sounds way too random to even be called music. Look at the older bands, like Pink Floyd, the Beatles, Queen, Aerosmith, Jimi Hendrix Experience, the Who, etc. We don't remember one song by them, we remember their albums. Hardly anybody hears the name, Pink Floyd, and only think of one song, say Another Brick in the Wall Part. 2. Most people think of three albums: Dark Side of the Moon, The Wall, and Wish You Were Here. I believe if bands can't compose at least three memorable songs on one album, they shouldn't even release it.

Also, there are the issues of the band members themselves: image and talent.

What is the deal with these people? Basically, band members go for looks instead of talent since they're so worried about their image. So many bands today go for the whole "dark" look to be scary, but fail and are called emos (e.g. My Chemical Romance). You want to know what's dark? Halfway through the song, Echoes, by Pink Floyd. That's probably eerier than any Rob Zombie crap you can give me since it gives the true feeling of being alone in emptiness. The only images of rap are pimps and people from the ghetto, and techno doesn't even have an appearance with or without a vocal. I don't care about what a band looks like as long as they make what I consider good or unique music.

The other issue I kind of touched on was the lack of talent. Let's start with the so called voice of the band. It appears though that more than half of the bands today use synthesizers as a crutch for their inhuman voice. Sing well or don't sing at all. Then we have our guitarists. They're probably good guitarists outside of the band, but why don't they step forward with something unique nowadays? Rather than helping the band, they just strum the same chords in every song then act like they're really into the music. They're not fooling anybody. The bassist seems to be the nobody of the band, just off to the side not doing anything significant.This is so ironic since the bassists twenty to forty years ago were incredible composers such as Paul McCartney, Roger Waters, or John Deacon. Last, we look at the drummers, or as I see it, the person with ADD who just like hitting things instead of keeping a beat. I can't say anything too horrible about drummers, since the most they do is keep a beat, but some still fail at it so they use a synthesizer during a concert at times.

Does this rant apply to every single band out there today? No, but it sure does apply to the majority or even the underground goth bands who think they'll make it big since they believe they're so talented and drink blood. Is there any hope? Maybe, just maybe. I know many people with tons of talent on an instrument, but something goes wrong when they play in a band. They're told to slow down or change their style, which brings them to the stereotype.

A band is unique through their songs, their instrument choice, and their members. The problem however is the cooperation of the band. Maybe most of the bands today have awesome musicians, but we can't see it since they need to play at a mediocre level so they can harmonize easier. I don't believe I'm being too harsh, I believe I'm being realistic.

Why is it that the bands are not memorable today? Why do I have to search for songs that were made years before I was born to enjoy music? Why can't I find a band that doesn't fit the stereotype? What's wrong with our music today?
[right][snapback]574029[/snapback][/right]




Nice Description
Music is the same, just expressed in different ways/and with different instruments
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Syphon on 2006-10-29 at 18:40:20
Other than Coldplay having only one memorable song, I concur.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kow on 2006-10-29 at 22:09:02
Generally, mainstream music is crap. Generally. Tis why I prefer those that don't sound mainstream. Take Nickel Creek for example. No drums. Acoustic guitar, mandolin and a viola (or violin, not sure). I love their music, especially because it's unique. ( http://www.nickelcreek.com/music.htm if you care about listening to them ). They even made a cover of Britney Spear's Toxic that is pretty decent.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Loser_Musician on 2006-11-02 at 10:15:24
Radio music is designed to please philistines. That's it. The people who are into critiqued entertaintment, are not the major targets. Mr "I want to be cool" is.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by JaFF on 2006-11-02 at 15:16:03
QUOTE(HolySin)
Let's take a look at the actual instruments being used:

Rock: Guitar, bass guitar, drums, vocal, piano (sometimes), synthesizer back-up.
Rap: Vocal, synthesizer.
Techno: Synthesizer, vocal (sometimes).

Seriously, what the hell?

The answer to this question is quite simple: people can't digest and understand complex music, they need something primitive (mostly). So, bands try to fit into this small hole in the wall, and instead of trying to make this hole atleast a bit bigger, they follow the so called "main stream". This happens because people are greedy, and work not for the love for music, but for money, fame and power (mostly).
QUOTE(HolySin)
Next, bands today only seem to like to give us one better than average song and make ten other songs that are completely forgettable. What's with that?

I'm also pissed by that. But I think it's a kind of strategy: you push one song up, by making the other ones pathetic. But I guess it's because of lack of creativity. The lack of creativity comes from huge amount of not talented people doing music for money, and not for the music. (I repeat myself)

QUOTE(HolySin)
Also, there are the issues of the band members themselves: image and talent.

You see, there is one simple truth: if you can't amaze the people with your music, amaze them with something vizual - your appearance/actions/effects. Again, I come back to my previous statement.

QUOTE(HolySin)
Why is it that the bands are not memorable today? Why do I have to search for songs that were made years before I was born to enjoy music? Why can't I find a band that doesn't fit the stereotype? What's wrong with our music today?

You left the ultimate question for the dessert, just like I love it. Basically the music we have today is like that because of two main factors:
  • Not talented people making music not for the music, but for money and fame.
  • The people that listen, the audience, has low standards, and preffers primitive music.
So there you have it, a good buisnessman will tell you: where there is a demand, there wil lbe an offer. So the buisnessmen who's buisness is music satisfy that need, and get what they want.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Killer_Kow(MM) on 2006-11-02 at 15:48:32
I like music. I truly do. But I agree with pretty well everything I've read here.

There are two things I'd like to add.

1) Listening to some of my friend's punk rock, I noticed that in a lot of the songs the vocalist seemed to have down syndrome. WTF? Why do they want to sound like they're retarded? I thought it was strange, but...

2) I once came across a new band that had some talent in their instrumentals and their vocals, but they had one problem: their lyrics were so profane their music would never be recognized by the majority of people. Why they would box themselves in like this is beyond me, but that's their own choice, I guess...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-11-02 at 17:02:14
Blame society, not the bands. [/sarcasm]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by JaFF on 2006-11-05 at 03:48:38
QUOTE(Centreri @ Nov 3 2006, 01:02 AM)
Blame society, not the bands. [/sarcasm]
[right][snapback]582278[/snapback][/right]

That's not a sarcasm. Bands are created by the society.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Inspektah-Deck on 2006-11-05 at 14:40:31
I dont worry about our music today, I dont turn on the radio ever. The thing is there is a
LOT of great music you just have to find it. There will always be mainstream garbage and there will always be great music. No need to worry!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2006-11-10 at 01:20:07
QUOTE
That's not a sarcasm. Bands are created by the society.
But they always seem to get the impression that they are original or breaking from the norm...

One thing I'm noticing about music.
No one song emphasizes all aspects that are found in music. Those aspects being Lyrics, Tone/Chordal arrangement, Verse/Chorus arrangement, Emotion, Beat/Rhythm, and Reason/message conveyance.

This change comes due to people growing bored of one emphasizing factor, and focusing on another.
Next Page (1)