Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
is it just me, or is most modern music crap?
Comments
-
-
-
-
PopePalpatine wrote: »I'm probably going to get a lot of shít for this, but I don't like indie singer-songwriters (e.g. Glen Hansard) because like pop music, they all sound alike - just a continuous low-pitch dirge.
Also, I'm surprised no-one's mentioned Muse yet.
I'll agree with you. They all sound the same and sing the same songs which are usually very moany. I used to like Josh Ritter but I've lately gotten quite sick of him as well...0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,982 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 91220
af_thefragile wrote: »Same when King Crimson opened for Rolling Stones and played 21st Century Schizoid Man. No one had ever heard anything remotely like it before and the crowd was absolutely stunned!
Also from '69
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
That may be true, but I don't see how music charts are really relevant in an argument like this. Why should the music tastes of 14 year-old girls be a reflection of our current musical climate? The reason the charts are the way they are now is because major record companies are hell bent on pedaling the lowest common denominator bullshit possible in order to make a few bucks. It has nothing to do with the quality of music being made at the moment.Yes, but the stuff on the charts was way better, even in the 1990s than today, let alone the music from the '70s and '80s.
You're hanging out with the wrong people manThe OP is far from alone. I recently went to an old school mates birthday bash (hes a DJ) and the party was dividied into two parts, the main part where the man himself partied with almost everyone under 40 in a function room, and a second part in the bar, for the old fogeys. Most of the people were the parents and grandparents, but not all. There was also myself and about 2 other young-ish people, with DJ setup including a broad variety of music much of it from the 20th century. Why?
Sounds like Sunn 0))) to me, must have been some partyBecause the main party music was absolutely dreadful! Droning, repetitive, loud, utterly pointless garble with no melody or lyrics. I left wanting to cry not because the music was weepy sad, but rather than it was sad that such music could be produced and sold in the firstplace, let alone that anyone might actually like listening to it!
Haven't even heard the Harlem Shake so I can't comment. I'm not exposed to this type of music.Then I heard the ****ing "Harlem Shake" and I actually had to look up the original (i.e. not a flash mob dance version) to realise that it was actually supposed to be a song. And I mean "supposed to be" a song, to call it music would be an insult to music.
"Colo terrorita ... Zoop Zoop zoop, zoop, zoop zoop zoop zoop, zoop ... thump thump thump ..."
People think music died at the turn of the decade because they don't know how to look for music themselves and/or their taste in music is very limited. The game has changed; the radio and club DJs are not the source for finding good music, it's the internet. People seem to be just slow at learning how to use the internet to find music. Once you know where to look you will see that music did not die at the turn of the decade, it is alive and kicking.Well F@#% me. Is it any wonder some of us think music died at the turn of some given decade? Some of us might hope that the crap today called music will eventually die, but crap like the Harlem Shake makes me think it will just continue to plumb new depths of inane pointlessness.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
"Colo terrorita ... Zoop Zoop zoop, zoop, zoop zoop zoop zoop, zoop ... thump thump thump ..."
Well F@#% me. Is it any wonder some of us think music died at the turn of some given decade? Some of us might hope that the crap today called music will eventually die, but crap like the Harlem Shake makes me think it will just continue to plumb new depths of inane pointlessness.
You could tell the same story and base it 10 - 15 years ago, and substitute the song for Whigfield's "Saturday Night" or "Macarena" or "Cotton Eye Joe" or "Barbie Girl" or any of the similar chart pap of the 90s. But that's what people were buying, and radios were playing, and people were dancing to, while in the meantime Nirvana and Oasis etc were doing their thing. Same goes for now, just with different bands. OK, there isn't a "scene" like with grunge / Britpop (emo perhaps?), but that's because music is so much more freely available and widely distributed through the web that nothing can really be the centre of things any more.
I remember that Take That were pretty much considered the way One Direction are now, but now most people fondly remember Take That and they are generally regarded now as having been a "good" band. I suppose the main difference is TT for the most part wrote their own songs. But that doesn't change the music - whether it was one guy or a team of people, a pop song is still a pop song.
And the naff stuff will always be around. Someone mentioned Bay City Rollers - they probably sold more records than Led Zeppelin did at some point. The 70s was filled with rubbish music - get any hoary old rock fan talking about disco in the 70s and you'll hear the same kind of opinion.
The 80s is the one decade for me that hasn't improved over time - I think all the 80s influences now are partly ironic and partly an idealised version of the decade - it wasn't all cool stuff like Depeche Mode and The Cure - it was Bon Jovi and Phil Collins and Mr Mister and Dire Straits and Mel & Kim and Bananarama so on. The kids playing in "80s influenced" bands today are only doing part of the story - OK, they are doing the good part, but they don't know what it was really like then! It was awful!!
But anyway, the point is you could substitute now for any time from the last 30 years and make the same argument, but that is because you are focusing on the stuff you wouldn't like anyway, rather than the good stuff that's out there.0 -
-
Most music in the 10s is crap. most music in the 00s was crap. most music in the 90s was crap. most music in the 80s was crap. most music in the 70s was crap. most music in the 60s was crap. most music in the 50s was crap.
Nature of the beast - absolutely nothing unique about modern music in that respect
I know, ever since Romanticism music has been pretty crap...
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
af_thefragile wrote: »Modern hip hop is absolute ****e! Can't compare it to 80's and 90s hip hop...
Of course you can't. They are decades apart. Pretty much everything, bar the economy, has changed since the '80s. To try and compare them would be a retarded move.
Modern hip hop isn't "absolute ****e". Modern music isn't crap either. If you genuinely think that then it's all your fault because you're looking in the wrong places.
The internet has given rise to a lot of terrible songs over the past few years but it has also given unheard of artists in America and other countries a chance to get their music heard.
Kendrick Lamar, Big K.R.I.T., Joey Bada$$ and others are the future of hip hop. Kendrick, in particular, is probably the one to take it on for the next 10 years or so.
There are plenty of other rappers out there who won't sell as much as the above artists or be featured in any music magazine. It doesn't mean that they are poor rappers. STS, Emcee Jermaine, Koncept, SIMS and Fashawn are as good as anyone out there at the moment.
If you want to draw a comparison, then look at Freddie Gibbs. He's the only credible gangster rapper in the industry as of now. Switch back 15 or 20 years and he'd be able to stand beside any of gangster rappers from that era and not look out of place.
He's another who you can put down with Lamar, KRIT and Joey Bada$$ as the future of hip hop. The chap is so talented it's ridiculous.
0 -
Not sure if sarcastic. It was a loose reference to:
af_thefragile wrote: »^Phil Collins is brilliant! I've been a big Genesis fan ever since the release of their 1980 album, Duke. Before that, I really didn't understand any of their work. Too artsy, too intellectual. It was on Duke where Phil Collins' presence became more apparent. I think Invisible Touch was the group's undisputed masterpiece. It's an epic meditation on intangibility. At the same time, it deepens and enriches the meaning of the preceding three albums. Listen to the brilliant ensemble playing of Banks, Collins and Rutherford. You can practically hear every nuance of every instrument. In terms of lyrical craftsmanship, the sheer songwriting, this album hits a new peak of professionalism. Take the lyrics to Land of Confusion. In this song, Phil Collins addresses the problems of abusive political authority. In Too Deep is the most moving pop song of the 1980s, about monogamy and commitment. The song is extremely uplifting. Their lyrics are as positive and affirmative as anything I've heard in rock. Phil Collins' solo career seems to be more commercial and therefore more satisfying, in a narrower way. Especially songs like In the Air Tonight and Against All Odds. But I also think Phil Collins works best within the confines of the group, than as a solo artist, and I stress the word artist.
But IMO the crap has gotten more plentiful. And crappier.Prettyblack wrote: »Don't get me wrong - I was a big Dire Straits fan in the 80s and still consider their first three records to be excellent and well worth checking out. Its just that the landscape then was dominated by a lot of music that today is not regarded so well - the manufactured stuff like Rick Astley and Jason Donovan etc.
So its the same story as our friend the OP stating that "modern" music is crap. Crap music is crap, and that hasn't changed since the first days of rock n' roll.0 -
-
-
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,982 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 91220
Don't forget the Blow Monkeys album She Was Only a Grocer's DaughterPete Wylie can top that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_WedgeRed Wedge organised a number of major tours. The first, in January and February 1986, featured Bragg, Weller's band The Style Council, The Communards, Junior Giscombe, Lorna Gee and Jerry Dammers, and picked up guest appearances from Madness, Heaven 17, Bananarama, Prefab Sprout, Elvis Costello, Gary Kemp, Tom Robinson, Sade, The Beat, Lloyd Cole, The Blow Monkeys and The Smiths along the way.0 -
Gotcha
Jesus I can't stand that egg-head Phil Collins. Has contributed absolutely nothing worthwhile to music apart from his early days with Genesis.
I like In the Air Tonight.
Its a great song to drive to...
Against all Odds is good too albeit a bit emo for the lack of a better word!0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYTu__hhMws
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_TFC2y-H44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcXi-VYy_Yw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbxcPy1qJTU
Advertisement