Paper Hearts Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 I've something else on my mind. The age of Warhol inspired super-pop seems to have ended. Gone are the days when pop music was a genre in itself. Pop seems to have gone back to being a shitty characature of actual music forms. Is the death of Warhol influence to blame for really, really bad radio today?
Gothmama25 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 There are a few good pop songs but most does suck
Paper Hearts Posted July 23, 2006 Author Posted July 23, 2006 define "pop" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well...I'm talking about "pop" on two levels. First I'm speaking of the Pop movement in art...and then I'm talking about the Pop movement's influence on popular music.
paradox Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 i always get so lost in genre labels. i try to avoid them in music because its too easy for any one band/group/performer to cross many genres. thus i find some point of referrance to be helpful. who would you classify as pop?
Paper Hearts Posted July 23, 2006 Author Posted July 23, 2006 i always get so lost in genre labels. i try to avoid them in music because its too easy for any one band/group/performer to cross many genres. thus i find some point of referrance to be helpful. who would you classify as pop? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> When I talk about Super-Pop, I'm talking about things like Bowie's Changes, Velvet Underground, obviously...when I say popular music, I mean music that you'd not hear live in a bar anywhere, before you hear it on the radio--in general, record company, studio driven music....which simply attempts to imitate what's going on in the movements of the day. I think we're seeing 'serious' musicians take a disinterest in pop. For a while, Pop music was an actual genre, there was a little bit of art involved in popular music, but I think those times are gone. Just wondering what other people think-
Gothmama25 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Some nowadays pop music examples are Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys, Jessica Simpson. Boy bands and girl singers are a trend with pop.
Paper Hearts Posted July 23, 2006 Author Posted July 23, 2006 Some nowadays pop music examples are Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys, Jessica Simpson. Boy bands and girl singers are a trend with pop. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Right. Same kind of slop people had on the Radio before Andy Warhol.
Gothmama25 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 I actually used like pop music when I was in high school. Scary isnt it?
Scary Guy Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Pop music of today sucks. Pop music of the 90's sucked. Pop music of the 80's sucked (except for that in the New Wave catagory). Pop music of the 30's - 70's (non disco) was alright. The largest misconception of music is that popular = good. I like the fact that "Emo" exists (except for a few bands). I really think of it as "punk alternative" and view it on the same level as what The Kinks did way back when. Again television pisses me off when it comes to music too. So much of today's music is based on appearence rather than sound and substance. The days of people like Mama Cass and Meatloaf are gone (Meatloaf still exists but got grandfathered in and is more into movies now). Back to why pop music sucks though. Today music is overproduced with hot people in the bands which usually have medeocre tallent. Those bands are out to make a quick buck. Andy and the bands of his time were in it for the art which is why it was good.
BrassFusion Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 I agree with Paper and Scary... I don't know if they do, but I believe that technology killed pop music. And the way I'm defining pop music is a segment of popular music in general that is produced just to become popular and make money. Some pop music isn't bad, and a lot of it historically wasn't either, but today there's a cut and dried formula to make a hit song and sell the shit out of it. A lot of groups aren't even talented writers or performers- they have ghost writers and machines to smooth out the uglies in their voices.
Scary Guy Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Technology isn't to blame, after all it is what helped it originally. Especially 80's new wave artists. Technology is just the tool used to make music. What sucks are the people who abuse the technology and are only in it for the money and not for the art of creating something beautiful. Biggest problem though is it's all been done before, and usually better than anyone who tries to redo it. No one is having any new ideas so everyone just copies off everyone else.
princesspsycho Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 New Wave of the 80s was awesome. But as for the rest of pop music it sucks big time.
Gothmama25 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 New Wave of the 80s was awesome. But as for the rest of pop music it sucks big time. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I second that notion
phee Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Also... are we talking about U.S. Pop? U.K Pop? Western Pop? Middle Eastern Pop? etc.... Pop Music can be different depending on which part of the world you are in.... Care to Clarify?
Paper Hearts Posted July 23, 2006 Author Posted July 23, 2006 Also... are we talking about U.S. Pop? U.K Pop? Western Pop? Middle Eastern Pop? etc.... Pop Music can be different depending on which part of the world you are in.... Care to Clarify? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm talking about our popular music. You monkey.
phee Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Oh.... well then.... I really like naked accordian pop from Guam...
Paper Hearts Posted July 23, 2006 Author Posted July 23, 2006 What else am I talking about when I list Andy Warhol and then later David Bowie and the Velvet Underground? Mr Moderator specifics master 69?
Blackmail Posted July 26, 2006 Posted July 26, 2006 I think the best period for pop music was before Warhol, mainly the early to mid 60's. Del Shannon, Roy Orbison, The Shirelles, Brian Wilson/Beach Boys, The Supremes, etc And note that while the Velvets were "influenced" by Warhol they also had issues with them, it was Warhol, not the VU that wanted Nico to sing for them. Until Lou Reed slept with her, no one in the band wanted Nico.
Paper Hearts Posted July 26, 2006 Author Posted July 26, 2006 I think the best period for pop music was before Warhol, mainly the early to mid 60's. Del Shannon, Roy Orbison, The Shirelles, Brian Wilson/Beach Boys, The Supremes, etc And note that while the Velvets were "influenced" by Warhol they also had issues with them, it was Warhol, not the VU that wanted Nico to sing for them. Until Lou Reed slept with her, no one in the band wanted Nico. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey, hey. Nice choices, but Warhol was an important artist from the early 1950s on. It's just he didn't make rock a project of his until the late 1960s. He was an influence on culture before that though.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.