|
I think the difference, in general, is that pop "artists" do not care about there art as much as classical composers do. Most pop "artists" are really only in it for the money. I'm not saying they don't enjoy the music and that they suck but they don't seem to have a genuine interest in bringing there art form to the same level that classical music as risen.
Pop music is in its infancy but because so many pop artists don't really give a shit(as compared to classical composers who lived and breathed the stuff) the artistic aspect actually suffers.
Only knowing 3 chords or because" it sounds" good not a good enough excuse. Why limit yourself because you too lazy to learn or expand your horizons? If it sounds good with 3 chords just think how it would sound if you knew 4 chords? Sure you might still choose to use those 3 chords but then you made an artistic decision based on what worked best and not because you were to lazy to learn the 4th chord. Its one thing to be choosy and another to be limited.
Most contemporary genres now days don't seem to have any drive to improve there art. The average person has such a limited attention span and limit musical understanding that if you took one hit song and transposed it people would think its a new song.
I mean, come on. Lets be honest here. I don't think anyone says complex is better but there is something to appreciate in being true to the cause. Is pop music really about the music? Mostly not. Is rap really about the music? mostly not. Can you say the same thing about classical?
The reason why it doesn't grow is because the people who listen to it don't expect it to. Thats a disgusting excuse IMO. And now look what has happened. Music has become just another method of making money.
(And no, I don't think all pop is bad. I just see that it isn't going anywhere and has become way to commercialized by corporate america)
|