Modern Music: Why I hate it

[I Stomp on Kittens]

I like old songs and nu metal I cant stand rap

 

[OuroborosChoked]

Here is an artist I'm quite fond of. He is modern, and you're going to hate him. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAw0-lx1gcU]

I don't hate him. He's definitely an artist and I get what he's doing, but here's the catch.

It's not music.

It's noise.

And here's the thing about noise:

Anyone can make noise.

You may as well perform 4'33".

What are you trying to say about John Cage?

Music is what you call music, nothing more, nothing less. If that is music to some ears, then it is music. Granted, I wasn't overly enamored by that, and I like a lot of music no one else seems too, but I'm not going to tell someone that they're not making music, when that is clearly their intent.

What do you think of Musique Concrete [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9pOq8u6-bA]?

EDIT: If you like Mr. Bungle, give Capillary Action (Album So Embarassing) a listen. Very cool stuff. Hella, too (My favorite album being "Bitches ain't Shit, but Good People")

I'm not saying anything about John Cage, but I am saying something about 4'33 - it's not music. Specifically, it is the absence of music. In fact, that's basically what the instructions are for the musician: don't play music for 4'33. My point, in mentioning the piece, was that if you're going to call random noise music, you may as well just gather 4'33 of coughs and call that music.

Music, unfortunately for your opinion, is not just whatever you call it. Music has a definition. That is largely the point of definitions, by the way: to separate or "define" what one thing is in comparison to other things. Music has whole bodies of work dedicated to studying what music is, how it works, where it's going, and so forth. And in none of the definitions of music is it either defined as "just any sound" or "whatever you want it to be".

Yes, I have heard of musique concrete, and I think it can be said to be the foundation of experimental music and found sound collages. Is it music, as music is defined? Generally, no. There are examples that fit, kinda fit, and don't fit at all and no single piece speaks for all of the genre. Certainly, a lot more effort goes into musique concrete than in what Prurient was doing, especially since the people doing musique concrete in the early days were messing with tapes (splicing, editing, looping, etc.) and that takes fucking dedication.

 

[superbleeder12]

I'm wasting my breath here, but some of you guys are taking music way too seriously. Listen to what you like, and ignore what you don't. Mellow out maaaaaaaan.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and they all stink. And if you disagree with it, you'll get shit on.

 

[Mizaki]

I hate it when people say bullshit like this.

So do I. But I've been over this (and you've probably seen it) before.

 

[scoHish]

I have to agree with you for the most part (especially on that Jonahs Brothers nonsense that's considered pop) but if your looking for good modern music, the radio isn't going to give it to you. Dig around the bowels of the internet and you can find some surprisingly good stuff.

 

[Piotr621]

Okay here I go (I'll have to word this carefully)... There are actually two types of modern musicians and bands, starlets, and everyone else. Starlets is what you hear the majority of the time on sold out radio stations. You know who I'm talking about- Rhianna, Beyonce, and all those types of musicians who seem to be coming out of a factory. Now let me stress this clearly. THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT MUSICIANS! THEY ARE MERE PERFORMERS OR EVEN PUPPETS! THERE TO SUCK UP THE MONEY FROM WHAT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION! AND THE FACT THAT THEY ARE POPULAR MEANS THAT I AM LOSING FAITH IN THE HUMAN RACE! (ever wondered why the newest songs are always "hot"? Three words: "Democracy gone wrong"). And then there are all the other bands or musicians, genuinely trying to put a bit more good music in the world. I either listen to these guys or the good ole' 80s.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

*Sits in a corner and listens to his metal*


Its not dead yet.

 

[Jenny Creed]

Last year I overheard some 10-12 year old kids on a bus talking about how much better Metallica was when they had Cliff Burton. It was strange and beautiful.

Me, I've noticed that of about 300 songs that I really like and could listen to all day long, maybe 20 have been made in the last 20 years. I imagine that says more about my taste than the development of modern music, though.

(Current soundtrack: More than a feeling - Boston, 1976)

 

[Malkavian]

I've been thinking about this recently. Almost all of the songs you hear anymore... are just generic. And I don't just mean musically. Everyone knows that pop music is generic anyway, but I'm talking about the lyrics: there's nothing specific anymore. What happened to all the story songs like Tangled Up In Blue, The Night The Lights Went Out In Georgia, Harper Valley PTA... songs that refer to specific events and tell specific stories. The songs these days are just variations on "I love you" and "Why did we break up?" etc.

The lack of content and banality almost drives you insane.

I think you're not looking hard enough...
Coheed & Cambria, Ayreon, Devin Townsend on his newest... these tell actual stories.
If you mean just songs who are telling "stories", how about Bright Eyes, Dresden Dolls, Babyshambles, Tori Amos...

Thereøs lots, if you look hard enough.

Hmm... when was the last time I turned on the radio and I heard the Dresden Dolls...

I think it was... oh right, never.

I just listened to a bunch of Coheed & Cambria (via Youtube... I'm not buying any albums for experimentation's sake)... they're exactly what I'm talking about. The songs I listened to (Blood Red Summer, The Suffering, and some other ones) meant nothing and made no attempt to connect to the listener. Contrast C&C (music factory that they are) with the Eels.

C&C, at least in Blood Red Summer, takes a simple idea (betrayal) and just repeats "what did I do to deserve this?" for half the damn song. There's no interesting wordplay, it doesn't either implicitly or explicitly refer to a specific event in the writer's life, and there isn't even any language that paints a picture. He lays down what amounts to an outline of an event, then repeats a trite exclamation. It's generic.

Now, I may be falling back on personal taste here, but I can relate to what E writes about. For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQXAZrgPIH4 He uses specific imagery to tell specific stories and/or relate specific emotions and states of mind. From the first two lines "It's a beautiful mornin' / The sky is black as ink" you're thinking of a specific event in YOUR life... maybe a time when you were up before the sun or when you stayed up all night or whatever... in the first two lines the song has you in its grip.

THAT is the difference I'm talking about: forging a connection by building ideas, images, and metaphors vs. communicating simple ideas with repetition.

When was the last time that the only music in existence was Dresden Dolls? I offer some suggestions to music that might meet your criteria of music telling a story, and all I get is a sour attitude...

When I mentioned Co&Ca, it was in relation to bands telling a story, like, for an example, a book might do. when he sings "What did I do to deserve all of this" he is not singing about betrayal... It is a bit hard to explain, but he(the character in this particular song, Claudio, the Crowing) is referring to his friends, his family, and his having to leave them to become "The Crowing", an entity that is destined to heal the Keywork(the universe).
As to whether it "connects" to the listener... Well it does to me. Personal taste, perhaps...
Oh, and if you are willin to give it another try, try out anything that is from their third album, instead. It is very different, and more complex.

 

[sneak_copter]

Here is an artist I'm quite fond of. He is modern, and you're going to hate him. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAw0-lx1gcU]

Yes I do. That song was all sorts of torture.

 

[speedcoreXdandy]

Me, I've noticed that of about 300 songs that I really like and could listen to all day long, maybe 20 have been made in the last 20 years. I imagine that says more about my taste than the development of modern music, though.

Thankyou! At last someone able to admit this!

Here is an artist I'm quite fond of. He is modern, and you're going to hate him. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAw0-lx1gcU]

Prurient is some dope shit!

 

[D_987]

You know that music taste is subjective, right?

 

[jezz8me]

Modern Music is pretty good as long as you do not go for the mainstream stuff that gets played on the radio. Check out some of the post-rock around it is great Sigur Ros, Mogwai, Godspeed you black emporer, Amiina ect.

Here is an artist I'm quite fond of. He is modern, and you're going to hate him. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAw0-lx1gcU]

Oh yes another noise fan. It is truely an underappreciated art.

So what you're saying is only SOME people can make noise? And that some noise is better than other noise?

Well, at least we agree on one thing.

You ARE familiar with John Cage, yes? And the piece I referenced?

Good Noise, yes. It requires a special type of ear and knowledge of what makes a Noise track interesting. The subculture has standards and will reject things it considers bad, like most of Wolf Eyes' work, as I mentioned earlier. While still valuing the band's more polished albums. A lot of Noise bands care nothing about their intellectual foundation and only focus on obtaining an immediate emotional response from the listener. C.C.C.C for example explicitly rejected Noise's conceptual foundation and only cared about emotional impact.

And yes, I'm quite familiar with that piece and John Cage.

Just because it doesn't follow standards you understand doesn't invalidate it. Music that's based around dissonance and "unpleasantness" has been around since the late 1800's IE Luigi Russolo and possibly earlier. There's also tracks in the subculture that conform to traditional notions of beauty, take for example the Venice album by Christian Fennesz or Their Subtle Purpose by Circular Ruins.

I think you may misunderstand what I'm saying. I don't deny that there can be beauty in chaos or that there is a certain liberation in utter randomness and nonsense... or even that there can be a certain style to these elements.

What I am saying is that it's not music. Music has form, patterns, order, and many other elements that stem from these things (rhythm, melody, etc.). Noise, therefore, is the antithesis of music. It is chaotic. Once you step into the field of chaos, you can no more discriminate one work of "noise" from, say, a crowded downtown street with lots of construction on a hot afternoon. There is no difference.

In fact, one might even argue that the organic sounds of that downtown street are more akin to a symphony than that same work of noise made by a solo artist: the downtown street noise being a synthesis of wills being manifest simultaneously which is both representative and an example of life itself.

As much as i love noise and think it takes extreme talent to make well alot of noise "musicians" deny that it is music and more a different art of sound.

 

[Hyoscine]

Older music, like Led Zepplin, or even some '90s music comes on, I turn up the volume. What happened?

You got old.

I kid, but like half the internet's just told you; good music still happens. Just look harder.

 

[zen5887]

I dig a fair bit of pop and a fair bit of dance music.

I really think its because people want their music to be more fun and carefree. People like to dance.

I also disagree with 'pop acts have no talent.' There are some damn good singers on the radio and some daaamn good musicians who play for them. There is much less room for error when you play pop music so everything has to be pretty much perfect.

That is why I like pop music.. I also like catchy songs =D

 

[J-Man]

I'd say the only original "modern" genre out there is indie. You have your generic ones, like Belle and Sebastian, and then you have the wacky, innovative ones like Architecture in Helsinki and The Mountain Goats.

 

[Ace of Spades]

I'm wasting my breath here, but some of you guys are taking music way too seriously. Listen to what you like, and ignore what you don't. Mellow out maaaaaaaan.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and they all stink. And if you disagree with it, you'll get shit on.

That's a pretty good way to sum up how the internet works. You win a cookie.

 

[Joselyn]

They just don't put in the effort that one used to employ when writing songs,
most of those pop artists use songbooks and just....copy!

 

[OuroborosChoked]

As much as i love noise and think it takes extreme talent to make well alot of noise "musicians" deny that it is music and more a different art of sound.

Well, they're right. Not all art-sounds are musical, so why call it music? You wouldn't call a door slamming music, but arrange it in the right way, and you could say that it's a comment on Thatcherism or something. It still might not have melody, tone, rhythm, or any other musical elements, but it could still be considered art.