I love Jurassic 5, What's Golden is a great track.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
The Downfall of Modern Rap Music
- Thread starter Congratulations
- Start date
On the subject of top hits in 1950s and nowadays, I'd say the trend and the understanding of what makes something good just keeps changing, and we can't ignore that. When jazz first started out, the "elite" listeners found it noisy and incoherent, a violent form of music that had no quality. Is that the general sentiment about jazz now? Hardly so, as people are accustomed to the way jazz compositions are written and what they sound like. You won't find many people at all thinking jazz is violent, but you'll find plenty who think it's boring and not explosive enough.
Who knows, maybe in a couple of decades people will actually remember the mainstream rap artists we love to hate as trend-setters of some sort. History of art and entertainment shows that what is found repulsive at one point turns out to be appealing briefly later.
If you compare 50s top 10s and modern ones, there's just one similarity that's very obvious: the songs tend to be accessible, short (or are cut in order to be short for radio play), have more or less simple structure. People who have ever taken liking to any kinds of music characterised by lengthy, refined compositions going beyond the length of 10 minutes will know what I'm talking about immediately.
So, it has always been like that - radio stations going for the accessible, short outbursts of whatever is hip at any given instance. And who knows how horrible we'll think something in the top ten will be in 20 or so years.
Who knows, maybe in a couple of decades people will actually remember the mainstream rap artists we love to hate as trend-setters of some sort. History of art and entertainment shows that what is found repulsive at one point turns out to be appealing briefly later.
If you compare 50s top 10s and modern ones, there's just one similarity that's very obvious: the songs tend to be accessible, short (or are cut in order to be short for radio play), have more or less simple structure. People who have ever taken liking to any kinds of music characterised by lengthy, refined compositions going beyond the length of 10 minutes will know what I'm talking about immediately.
So, it has always been like that - radio stations going for the accessible, short outbursts of whatever is hip at any given instance. And who knows how horrible we'll think something in the top ten will be in 20 or so years.
i think it's safe to say that lil' wayne and shit like that is almost objectively shit, the passing of time will not change that.
But if there are fans of it (which there are), then apparently there are people who do not agree that it is terrible (even if you think it is).
As for the music industry, while the popularization of certain styles or trends might permeate the Billboard Top 40, anyone who is here will tell you that there is stuff beyond those lists. Just because something one doesn't like is popular and catches on a bit, doesn't mean that the whole industry is going down that way and that something "bad" is happening to music.
pookar
Banned deucer.
lmao you criticize rap for using synth (which is just recent, and only common in mainstream music and trip-hop shit) then you list a band who ABUSED synths in every song they ever did (and a second shitty pop rock band)
fun fact: i used to dislike hiphop because they didnt use instruments in their songs, but it doesn't really matter at all. lots of hip hop CAN be played on instruments (the roots has enough members and talent to cover any hip hop song instrumentally id bet) (hint: a keyboard is an instrument, dumpass)
As stated earlier how many times by who knows, rap/hiphop is the current form of pop music that is most common. In the 90s it was boy bands/r&b, early 2000s it was "rock bands" and r&b, 80s was synthpop, 70s was the rock known today as classic rock
And all of it was shit, save some exceptions. Its the same trend. 'Modern Rap' is just more poppy than the underground shit. Little "poprap" really existed in the 90's. Sure rap got played on the stations, but it wasn't poprap
VKCA
(Virtual Circus Kareoky Act)
I'm really confused. Your original point was that you dislike rap because you dislike synth. That's fucking retarded, because you're making sweeping generalizations about all rap, and I'm nearly certain none of the rap I listen too uses synths. I'm saying you are being ridiculously closed minded about rap.
Umm, I don't think I've seen any aesop rock or brother ali yet. I enjoy them. Yeah.
This "TairyHesticles" fellow seems to have a fairly good taste in rap.
Prompts for shit when I started to type in walking away
:(
The people who disagree are wrong.http://rateyourmusic.com/customchar...=both&origin_countries=&limit=none&countries= Soulja Boy dominates the rym bottom 10 more than anything but Crazy Frog for objective reasons (like a complete lack of harmony, rhythm, instrumentals that sound like Yoshi's Island in Super Mario RPG slowed down to a crawl, songs that are basically all talking, et cetera). That people ignore those objective reasons does not mean very much. By "everyone", I mean everyone who has any sort of decent musical understanding and does not decide to be stupidly "amused" by something abysmal.
Just a curious question: If we can define what's bad music, can we also define what's the best thing ever?
the high point of rap was before most of the people in this thread had stopped watching Barney the Purple Dinosaur
my previous post still stands, more than ever
I think good music and bad music are quite distinguishable. There is music that you and I dont like, but it is still good music, and we can still appreciate it for its intent (I dont like Frank Sinatra's music, but i can respect it and even appreciate it in the right circumstances). Bad music often has obvious things that make it bad, and the epitome of bad music is Soufjan Stevens. holy shit he is impossible to listen to. the only good news is that he usually records at such low volume that you cant hear it if it unfortunately is played.
There are several problems with this. Does the best need perfect pitch? Are songs built around simple harmonies good, or are complex layers better? Is a looser construction (Jimi Hendrix) better than a more coherent, rigid work? There are just a ton of different types of goods and so many clashing opinions on what should be valued that it is impossible to define a best completely clearly. All we can do is form a good perspective of what is good or not.
No matter whether you like or dislike metal, you should be able to figure out that bands with names like Cuntscraping Fecal Destruction are likely going to have bad music. I agree with you Myzozoa, I cannot stand Frank Sinatra, but I can tell he can sing well.
This is a fallacy; no music is inherently bad. If they are seen as bad, then they become unpopular. "Bad Music" is subjective as hell and I can easily disprove your entire theory by simply saying that I see nothing wrong with Soufjan Steven's and that I actually like it.Myzozoa said:
Unless Cuntscraping Fecal Destruction actually turns out to have good music, god forbid...
I'm just gonna do a quick system of equations to theorize that bad music does not actually exist.
The Frank Sinatra Theory proves that all bad music is not good music but some good music can be perceived as bad in a subjective standpoint even though it has quality. Good and Bad are subjective terms in this case. There is no "more good" and "more bad" but they are held by perspectives in which they are sometimes the same value to multiple people. They are defined by Good (∫)= Quality (œ) and Bad (∂)= Negative Quality (-œ). œ is defined by a definitive system of values that are solid and non-subjective. It is based on use of harmony, lyrical depth, note patterns, and even how catchy it is, however, it is by no means all of them at once. Negative Quality is the absence of all Quality so it is in a sense œ when Good Quality is +œ. However, The Kesha Theory proves that even music with -œ can be seen as ∫. Therefore, the following can be shown:
∫≥∂
(-œ)<œ
∂≤œ
∂≤(-œ)
∫≤œ
∫≥(-œ)
therefore:
∫≥∂
As you can see, this system of equations makes no sense at all, despite being perfectly legitimate and based on the actual information I gathered from this thread.
.. My head hurts.
Well yeah your system of equations makes no sense because you said that bad music is less than or equal to both good or bad music.
Catchiness is not a valid way to describe if music is good or not.
No one is saying Frank Sinatra is bad music. Some of us (for instance me) hate the particular sounds. Different humans like and dislike entirely different sounds. You can differentiate dislike based on "not liking a sound" with "disliking something for having no value". There are objective reasons music are bad, like completely clumsy execution (Rebecca Black). I am not a music major or expert, so I cannot describe them perfectly (I already tried about the best I could), but I am sure there are a lot more than I know. I am not particularly concerned with it since people are always going to claim there is no objectivity to it, despite the fact that for instance you can almost always find a clear segment of an artist's works that are good and a clear segment that are bad (assuming there were any good in the first place). While it is not always absolutely crystal clear, it often is...for instance Led Zeppelin spent the last good bits they had on the Physical Graffiti album and then had nothing left except the song Achilles Last Stand. The easiest way to sense things like this is to listen to a lot of music and gain a clear perspective. It is hard to "prove" because it is something that varies by experience, by attention, and even then people will often disagree on things like the value of the "early" albums of a band (e.g. Queen). Anyway whatever this is getting kind of off topic to the point that: bad music absolutely can be identified, no matter what silly equations you make to try to prove that dull music has value because some dull people like it.
Catchiness is not a valid way to describe if music is good or not.
No one is saying Frank Sinatra is bad music. Some of us (for instance me) hate the particular sounds. Different humans like and dislike entirely different sounds. You can differentiate dislike based on "not liking a sound" with "disliking something for having no value". There are objective reasons music are bad, like completely clumsy execution (Rebecca Black). I am not a music major or expert, so I cannot describe them perfectly (I already tried about the best I could), but I am sure there are a lot more than I know. I am not particularly concerned with it since people are always going to claim there is no objectivity to it, despite the fact that for instance you can almost always find a clear segment of an artist's works that are good and a clear segment that are bad (assuming there were any good in the first place). While it is not always absolutely crystal clear, it often is...for instance Led Zeppelin spent the last good bits they had on the Physical Graffiti album and then had nothing left except the song Achilles Last Stand. The easiest way to sense things like this is to listen to a lot of music and gain a clear perspective. It is hard to "prove" because it is something that varies by experience, by attention, and even then people will often disagree on things like the value of the "early" albums of a band (e.g. Queen). Anyway whatever this is getting kind of off topic to the point that: bad music absolutely can be identified, no matter what silly equations you make to try to prove that dull music has value because some dull people like it.
The Kesha Theory begs to differ
for the record. it's sufjan stevens. and chicago is an enjoyable song.
yeah, aesop rock is great, another white rapper. synth is so fucking widespread anyway, there exists both bad and good uses of it. it's pretty hard to despise it as it emulates other instruments anyway.
edit: agorophobic nosebleed is a decent grindcore band with a terrible name. tonnes of metal bands have fucking terrible names and make decent music.
I'm really confused. Your original point was that you dislike rap because you dislike synth. That's fucking retarded, because you're making sweeping generalizations about all rap, and I'm nearly certain none of the rap I listen too uses synths. I'm saying you are being ridiculously closed minded about rap.
Umm, I don't think I've seen any aesop rock or brother ali yet. I enjoy them. Yeah.
This "TairyHesticles" fellow seems to have a fairly good taste in rap.
Prompts for shit when I started to type in walking away
:(
yeah, aesop rock is great, another white rapper. synth is so fucking widespread anyway, there exists both bad and good uses of it. it's pretty hard to despise it as it emulates other instruments anyway.
edit: agorophobic nosebleed is a decent grindcore band with a terrible name. tonnes of metal bands have fucking terrible names and make decent music.
You can't define the best thing ever, but you can quite obviously point out good and bad music.Take for example Friday (Rebecca Black, you know the stuff), and I think everyone here can agree that that is bad music - it is autotuned, doesn't require much skill, and so on. On the other hand, there is music that is just good, whether you like it or not. Pink Floyd bores me to death, but everyone who know a bit of music can tell it's good. Whether you like it or not, it requires skill, is executed well, and the list goes on.
Glen posts make me smile. :)
also threads like this are: dumb. also i would remove eminem from that list, considering he is a pretty ballin rapper and his old shit was fucking great, his new songs kinda suck, but he's still a white guy playing a black man's game, so he starts with a handicap.
also i dont really know what you're talking about, but lil wayne is a fucking great rapper, who gives a fuck what they rap about? its all about flow.
also threads like this are: dumb. also i would remove eminem from that list, considering he is a pretty ballin rapper and his old shit was fucking great, his new songs kinda suck, but he's still a white guy playing a black man's game, so he starts with a handicap.
also i dont really know what you're talking about, but lil wayne is a fucking great rapper, who gives a fuck what they rap about? its all about flow.
heres my contribution http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOFVL8w6WNA
Actually no, i simply stated the opinion I didn't like rap, and alluded to the fact that a lot of rap uses synsthesizers, the majority of the music made with them I dont like. The statements about my general dislike of rap and synthesizers were seperate comments although i can understand if the brackets muddied that. If you misunderstood that then that's my fault for not being clearer.
@whoever flamed my post
P.S. Dont be a jackass and pick on a particular piece of a post. Those were the bands I picked off the top of my head. i could have easily listed bands like Foreigner or Meatloaf. Try saying that they are pop rock.
At any rate this is kind of derailing the thread so I wont respond to any responses to this post.
VKCA
(Virtual Circus Kareoky Act)
Quite possibly the most retarded argument in existence. Stop being a (BAN ME PLEASE).
Good.
Ok.
But if you like eminem, I highly suggest you listen to some of the stuff in this thread. If you like eminem there are certainly other rappers you might like. Unless you only appreciate eminem (like ck and myzozoa appreciate sinatra).
Musical tastes are constantly evolving. At one point I was a classic rock only guy, since my cradle music was entirely zeppelin/doors/clash, and then my sister showed me the grey album. From there I just started listening to more and more rap.
At one point I never thought I could like something like this. And now it's one of my favorite songs.
Maybe evolving is the wrong word. Expanding. Strange days is still one of my favorite albums of all time.
Speaking of madlib... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4iR668Ki3I&feature=relmfu
I would say that after you get past mainstream the use of synths in hip hop is pretty minimal actually. There are tons of great producers out there like Ant, Madlib, and Stoupe the Enemy of Mankind who don't use much to any synth.
@VKCA lol that's one of my favorite DOOM songs, awesome post.
@VKCA lol that's one of my favorite DOOM songs, awesome post.
I used to read CK's posts. Now I'm not going to anymore. You are so fucking stubborn it's stupid. I mean on a good day you sometimes have a couple good points but
also agreeing with VKCA about radio: 107 used to be pretty great to me, but honestly after hearing the same shit over and over again I just started listening to CBC (mostly radio 3). They have a huge variety of what they play, and almost all of it is great. I'll still listen to some classical rock every once in a while though.
raw raw fight the power
e: wait vkca did you just post venetian snares? you are my hero