Interesting article here (http://audio-fixation.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-does-contemporary-music-suck-story.html). Basically it argues that the over use of dynamic compression on modern recordings are a result of consumers not using quality gear like they used to. The author also believes that mainstream pop music is mostly rubbish nowadays because people do not consider music listening a separate hobby anymore.
The relationship between recording quality and musical taste
- Thread starter shafesk
- Start date
Also note I am not affiliated with the blog in any way, if this breaks any forum rules then mods please delete the post.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
shafesk said:
Without bothering to read the article in question (where would the fun be in that?) the premise of your last sentence is based entirely on the idea that the author's musical taste is somehow "better" than today's pop consumers. It isn't, it's just different. When the author was a teenager I'd bet good money that his elders were telling him that his taste in music, the same music that he doubtless now holds up as the pinnacle of "good taste", was rubbish but it's the same music.
Therefore the whole article is nonsense and is just an excuse for the author to try brag about how great his taste in music is, pretty much like most of us do. Mainstream pop music isn't rubbish (in general, some of it is obviously, just like most of the pop music from the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s is utter bilge as well, particularly the 70s as Johnny Walker makes me realise every Sunday), he just doesn't like it. That's not the same thing.
The_Lhc said:
Totally agree.
Like you, I didn't read it. Nor would I with such a subjective and asinine title "Why does contemporary music suck?"
I may leave a polite message.
Electro
Well-known member
Sadly there is an awful lot of truth in the blog .
I will admit that sound quality is one factor that is very important to me when I buy music and fortunately most of the music I like is well recorded , but then I don't buy music from any new mainstream artists because to my ear 99% of it is over compressed manufactured c**p by people who are just out to make money and put little of themselves in the music so it just sounds soulless and bland .
A sweeping statement I know, but it really upsets me that music has become just another consumerist commodity when it should be something that touches you heart and soul .
I will admit that sound quality is one factor that is very important to me when I buy music and fortunately most of the music I like is well recorded , but then I don't buy music from any new mainstream artists because to my ear 99% of it is over compressed manufactured c**p by people who are just out to make money and put little of themselves in the music so it just sounds soulless and bland .
A sweeping statement I know, but it really upsets me that music has become just another consumerist commodity when it should be something that touches you heart and soul .
Paul.
Well-known member
The_Lhc
Well-known member
Paul Hobbs said:
You and me both. It's not dance music because the tempo's so slow you can't dance to it. Electronic music sure, but I don't see how it works in clubs.*
*Yes I know but it's my rule, I can break it when I feel like it.
John Duncan
Well-known member
Electro said:
Become? Music has been a commodity since, like, forever. How did Mozart make a living?
http://www.anneofgreengables.com/component/k2/item/128-mozarts-career-under-patronage
"it was clear that he felt he was being treated like a servant and that it was restricting his genius"
So just like One Direction then.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
Electro said:
Like I said I haven't read it but if the OP's last sentence:
"The author also believes that mainstream pop music is mostly rubbish nowadays because people do not consider music listening a separate hobby anymore." had read:
"The author also believes that the sound quality of mainstream pop music is mostly rubbish nowadays because people do not consider music listening a separate hobby anymore." then I probably wouldn't have disagreed.
This isn't exactly new(s ) though is it? The Loudness War has been going on for decades and been discussed online for almost as long, this is about the 3rd or 4th thread about it that I can remember recently (for certain definitions of "recently").
Ask a One Direction fan if their music touches their heart and soul and I expect they'd say yes but I'm not convinced all music has to do that, sometimes girls just wanna have fun right?
Paul.
Well-known member
John Duncan said:
The Freestylers seem to have jumped on the Dubstep bandwagon. 19 year old Paul would be quietly sobbing in the corner if he knew.
Without sounding like im trying to defend the author, you didnt read the article so i dont think you got the message. The author went on to recommend a few contemporary artists but says that sadly even those artists have been forced to choose dynamic compression. I think the title is a stunt actually. Dont u find it true that recording quality is getting worse because people dont take music as seriously as they did before? I think so to be brutally honest. I also think sound quality gets worse depending on genre, modern jazz doesnt sounds as bad as modern pop from a sound quality point of view. Just my 2 cents, u might disagree but then again like u said musical taste is subjective
Electro
Well-known member
John Duncan said:
Yes I suppose that is true all musician have to make a living and quite a lot have been exploited for their talent in the past and still are .
But over the last few years the music seems to be being created by finding people with the right appearance then finding and creating some noise that will have a short term appeal to a certain group of people and marketing it for maximum profit with little thought for sound quality or musical quality and that can't be good for anyone except the people making the money .
Or it could be I am getting old and turning into a grumpy old Ba*****d
The_Lhc
Well-known member
Electro
Well-known member
The_Lhc said:
Yes but love him or loathe him he did have real singing Talent and he put his heart and soul into it most of the time , and quite a few burgers towards the end .
jaxwired
Well-known member
The_Lhc said:
What you are really saying is that all art is of equal quality since art is subjective. Have to disagree. Yes, art appreciation is subjective, but you can assess quality using objective criteria. For instance, the longevity of the recording (are people still listinening to it years later?), or the amount of skill required to create the music (can anyone do something similar?), or the number of people that like the art (popularity). By your definition, I could record myself singing and playing the kazoo and that recording is no better or worse than a mahler symphony.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
Electro said:
That's a matter of opinion, he had a distinctive voice but it's one that many thousands of Elvis impersonators can do just as well. What he had was the right look, in the right place at the right time and a manager that was utterly ruthless in his determination to promote him.
Paul.
Well-known member
Obviously there is good and bad music, I think he was referring to all genres being of equal value rather than individual songs. I would agree with that
Electro said:The_Lhc said:
Yes but love him or loathe him he did have real singing Talent and he put his heart and soul into it most of the time , and quite a few burgers towards the end .
Indeed. And did his own arrangements. In reality-show parlance, he really made those songs his own
Plenty of amazing singers - Elvis; Sinatra; Ella Fitzgerald, to name but 3 - didn't write their own material, but brought unique talent and voices to the equation.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
I'm going to answer your last point first as it's relevant to the rest of the discussion:
With all due respect, we're talking about pop music (in this thread at least), whilst you have a point about art in general I'm not sure it's relevant to pop music exactly. Again, listening to Johnny Walker's Sounds of the Seventies, there was more than one track played on there that I wold say is not much more complicated than someone blowing on a kazoo. On a different note I imagine there's quite a lot of visual art that a lot of people would consider to be the visual equivalent of someone tooting on a kazoo but it still sells for millions.
But you can't use that one if you're comparing today's pop music to that of yesteryear because today's pop music has only just been released, so it won't have the chance to achieve longevity for some time to come.
As far a pop music is concerned almost anyone can play a guitar or bash a tune on a keyboard (it appears), if you mean do they have the skill to write the tune then I'd again ask how many of history's most successful pop "stars" actually wrote their own songs?
Well, that's what the charts are for. Besides, this thread started precisely because somebody decided that today's music is rubbish because they say so, no matter how many people might buy it and listen to it (and there's more singles being sold now than there has been for a number of years).
jaxwired said:
With all due respect, we're talking about pop music (in this thread at least), whilst you have a point about art in general I'm not sure it's relevant to pop music exactly. Again, listening to Johnny Walker's Sounds of the Seventies, there was more than one track played on there that I wold say is not much more complicated than someone blowing on a kazoo. On a different note I imagine there's quite a lot of visual art that a lot of people would consider to be the visual equivalent of someone tooting on a kazoo but it still sells for millions.
jaxwired said:
But you can't use that one if you're comparing today's pop music to that of yesteryear because today's pop music has only just been released, so it won't have the chance to achieve longevity for some time to come.
As far a pop music is concerned almost anyone can play a guitar or bash a tune on a keyboard (it appears), if you mean do they have the skill to write the tune then I'd again ask how many of history's most successful pop "stars" actually wrote their own songs?
Well, that's what the charts are for. Besides, this thread started precisely because somebody decided that today's music is rubbish because they say so, no matter how many people might buy it and listen to it (and there's more singles being sold now than there has been for a number of years).
Today's music is mostly rubbish. Not because I say so but purely becuase I'm getting older. The stuff I listened to as a youth was thought to be rubbish by my parents ("Apart from that nice Alison Moyet. Ooo, she's got a lovely voice. I like her") as their music was thought to be rubbish by my grandparents. It's just rubbish to me. I don't relate to it. I guess songs about paying the mortgage and mowing the lawn aren't that popular :?
Modern pop should move with the times and both appeal to and represent todays youth. There's no place for me to be hanging around. I guess it depends on your definition of "pop". Take a listen to the charts on any given Sunday and - as my dad would say - it's just noise. The stuff I like tends to be more guitar/rock based and that hasn't always troubled the charts. There are still modern bands I like, but you probably can't call it pop.
Modern pop should move with the times and both appeal to and represent todays youth. There's no place for me to be hanging around. I guess it depends on your definition of "pop". Take a listen to the charts on any given Sunday and - as my dad would say - it's just noise. The stuff I like tends to be more guitar/rock based and that hasn't always troubled the charts. There are still modern bands I like, but you probably can't call it pop.
Electro
Well-known member
Lee H said:
Yes but the rubbish and noise from 20 or 30 years ago was far better quality than the rubbish an noise today's kids have
Alec
Well-known member
I have agreed with the_lhc at least twice now; I'm on the phone to my Doctor as i type.
But totally, like, pro th eloudness wars, down with dynamics and up with philitinism (eh?) I say.
"Oh, I can't hear this bit...oh good the next song...QUICK! THE VOLUME! THE VOLUUUUUUMMMMMEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!".
I'm going to read the article now
But totally, like, pro th eloudness wars, down with dynamics and up with philitinism (eh?) I say.
"Oh, I can't hear this bit...oh good the next song...QUICK! THE VOLUME! THE VOLUUUUUUMMMMMEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!".
I'm going to read the article now
Alec
Well-known member
Or maybe I shant. I get a brief flash of what I assume is said article then it all goes a bit...well...dark and blank.
I know I'm far from the target audience as it's possible to be, but the pop industry/ reality show tie-in is the thing that irks me the most.
Gone are the days a young aspiring star would do the pubs & clubs, if they were lucky they'd get spotted by someone important enough to get them on bigger shows with established acts, then maybe a bit of radio or TV airplay..... You're on your way.
Now it's: think you can sing? Audition for some reality TV show, up your chances by having a gimmick. Get a deal, record 2 albums before you've ever sung a note on stage. Sell your CDs to people who say they want your CD, but 3 years after receiving it for Christmas, it's still in the cellophane on the shelf*.
*True story. My Mother-In-Law's Leona Lewis CD has never been out of the wrapper.
It's all a bit sad.....
Gone are the days a young aspiring star would do the pubs & clubs, if they were lucky they'd get spotted by someone important enough to get them on bigger shows with established acts, then maybe a bit of radio or TV airplay..... You're on your way.
Now it's: think you can sing? Audition for some reality TV show, up your chances by having a gimmick. Get a deal, record 2 albums before you've ever sung a note on stage. Sell your CDs to people who say they want your CD, but 3 years after receiving it for Christmas, it's still in the cellophane on the shelf*.
*True story. My Mother-In-Law's Leona Lewis CD has never been out of the wrapper.
It's all a bit sad.....
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram