I hate pop music

I think classical musicians are just jealous of "pop" music because they have no rhythm or soul, nor do they have a sense of progression. Of course, posturing in the mid-20th century wasn't helping either (LaMonte Young)

If you disagree, challenge me


A superficial jab, but still somewhat relevant nonetheless

Originally Posted by gms5287

I think classical musicians are just jealous of "pop" music because they have no rhythm or soul, nor do they have a sense of progression.

I think all music has soul, and pop is more expressed in words therefore it's more comprehensive. Please don't say classical music doesn't have soul, composers dedicated their life in their works.
I GUESS claasical people can be jealous since pop industry is more profitable.
I apologize if I accidentally might have offended you in some sort of way

Originally Posted by z916

I think all music has soul, and pop is more expressed in words therefore it's more comprehensive. Please don't say classical music doesn't have soul, composers dedicated their life in their works.
I GUESS claasical people can be jealous since pop industry is more profitable.
I apologize if I accidentally might have offended you in some sort of way

I meant soul in the modern sense, kid

Originally Posted by gms5287

I think

No, no, no. You're doing this wrong. Less thinking and more listening to Bartok, Villa-Lobos and Ginastera.

Originally Posted by Zetetic

Gianluca -

If you're still here, then I have a challenge for you. If you genuinely think there's no skill, invention or wit involved in writing 'good' pop music, then I challenge you to turn your classically-honed powers of composition to this facile art, and write a piece of successful pop music. Once you've published and had popular successes of your own, then I'll agree with your diatribe.

You have to realize that what makes a pop song successful does not so much depend on the quality of it or the skills required to produce it, but rather on chance factors having to do with marketing, image, lifestyle, stage performance, manipulation of the mass media, etc. I could easily write a well-crafted pop song that is more artistic, more musically interesting and less predictable than 99% of the pop ditties played on MTV, VH1 and all that crap. But, as Gardener has pointed out, why should I even bother? Nowadays the pop audience will buy anything. Any song – no matter how childishly infantile, stupid and shallow the song is – can become a major hit, as long as it is marketed in the right way. Just take a look at the pop charts and you’ll see what I mean.

Also, I believe you are off the mark when you state that the great classical composers wrote the “pop music” of their day and that they churned out what the public wanted to hear. True, some composers (e.g., Verdi, Liszt as a performing artist) acquired the kind of status and popularity which nowadays only pop artists seem to enjoy, but in general, the “pop music” of, say, the classical and romantic periods consisted of the folk music, peasant songs and ballroom dances of those days. Furthermore, although a few composers (e.g., Mozart) may indeed have been concerned with pleasing the audience, a lot of what we now regard as the greatest classical music was in fact quite hard to understand and appreciate for the general public of those days – it was written simply because the composer felt an inner need to write it and not because it was the music the audience wanted to hear.

Originally Posted by gms5287

I think classical musicians are just jealous of "pop" music because they have no rhythm or soul, nor do they have a sense of progression.

What the heck are you talking about, classical musicians have no rhythm or soul?! They may not have the same sense of rhythm as jazz or pop musicians, but saying that they have no rhythm or soul is either painfully naive or just plain dumb. If classical musicians have any reason to be jealous, it’s because they see the stupidest and most talentless pop artists get lots of attention and earn heaps of money, whereas their own rare and immense talent is (comparatively) hardly recognized.

Originally Posted by gianluca

What the heck are you talking about, classical musicians have no rhythm or soul?! They may not have the same sense of rhythm as jazz or pop musicians, but saying that they have no rhythm or soul is either painfully naive or just plain dumb.

I think that his comment was just as naive or just plain dumb, as your own comments regarding pop music. See any difference?

That post was meant to be insipid, it was obviously half-hearted and nowhere near being serious.


I could be make another one, try this one.

Classical musicians are all lame white men who choose to dedicate their lives to a dead art. How's the knife twist feel?

Originally Posted by gms5287

Classical musicians are all lame white men who choose to dedicate their lives to a dead art. How's the knife twist feel?

Lol.

*resists the temptation to further the argument defending pop music*

^ because as was aforementioned, this is an impossible topic to debate on. I mean, so many arguments exist for either side that it's impossible to prove one's superiority to the other. Music = music -- we still use the same theories and the same twelve notes to write music, just with a different approach due to all of the new theories we acquired in the 20th century.

Okay, I lied. I'm going to argue. o.o

Hey, you can't assume that ALL pop music gained popularity through a few Hollywood tricks and endorsements.

Pop music doesn't have to be complex; pop music is sort of like a type of incidental music. They're used for music videos, in movies, in stores, etc. The music is like background music for the poem that the vocalist recites musically, despite what others may perceive as screaming and yelling [even though it is o.o].

With all of the previous examples of complex pop pieces, don't you think that pop can be complex, too? Hey, simple classical pieces exist, too.

I think this is a worthless argument, as all music has merit, and to attempt to disparage that would require both an ego and an ignorance of extreme magnitude.

However, the debate regarding which supergenre has more merit is acceptable, as it may open some minds to other styles.