Why Is Terrible Music Popular?

I understand that this post is more about "there is room for more than just a handful" then "stop letting terrible music be popular"...

But it still begs the question:

This is a 100% opinion based creative field... so what exactly constitutes terrible music?
 
I understand that this post is more about "there is room for more than just a handful" then "stop letting terrible music be popular"...

But it still begs the question:

This is a 100% opinion based creative field... so what exactly constitutes terrible music?

It's subjective.

For example, at times, i think conscious hip-hop is terrible music because it's too preachy and a lot
of them don't understand that you still need to have a hot beat and melodies to capture ears...

but Nas and Common are good by me.

I use to think Diddy was terrible until Soulja Boy, Lil B, and Riff Raff came out. (i still think Diddy is terrible,
but not as bad as those)

A backpacker will say Britney Spears is garbage, a pop fan will say conscious rap is boring.

People will say Nas is lyrically stronger than Jay, which i at times agree, but Jay, atleast to me,
makes better music than Nas even though Nas's subject matter is deeper.

It really is subjective.
 
If it's popular it's obviously not (terrible) to all ears. Just terrible to your ears because it's not your taste in music.
 
So If 5 Million people say 2 + 2 equals 5 it's true?

**** that. There will always be good and bad music, If most people enjoy the bad music it don't become good.
 
Pop music is more cookie cutter than it has ever been. This is a FACT.


Earlier this year, researchers at the Spanish National Research Council published a paper in which they claimed to have scientifically proven that rock and pop music all sounds the same. They analyzed more than 464,000 songs and concluded that, over the last 50 years, the melodies had become increasingly similar and the palette of sounds used more homogenous. This generated a degree of controversy – some suggested the research was flawed, that it had failed to consider rhythm and language – and a lot of headlines. Some of these were attached to gleeful articles by the kind of journalist who never misses an opportunity to favour the world with the information that everything was better when they were young.

The kind of journalist who never misses an opportunity to inform the world that everything was better when they were young is a crashing bore – and deluded, to boot – which makes it painful to say I find myself very broadly in agreement with the Spanish researchers. You don't have to analyze 464,000 songs or think music has been on an irreversibly steep decline since the 1960s to realize that, currently, a lot of pop does sound the same. You just have to listen to the top 40. Huge chunks of it cleave to roughly the same musical template, set about three years ago, when French DJ and producer David Guetta unexpectedly broke into the US market, scoring a huge hit, When Love Takes Over, with former Destiny's Child singer Kelly Rowland and producing The Black Eyed Peas' equally massive I Gotta Feeling. There will be a four-four house beat. There will be a euphoric, hands-in-the-air breakdown similar to those found on early 1990s rave tracks. There will be auto-tuned vocals. There will be a moment where the vocal goes "woah-oh-hoah" (or similar) in the stadium-rousing style of Coldplay.

Measuring the Evolution of Contemporary Western Popular Music, by Joan Serrà, Álvaro Corral, Marián Boguñá, Martín Haro and Josep Ll Arcos, appears in the journal Scientific Reports . The researchers used a dataset of 464,411 music recordings to analyse what has changed – and what has stayed the same – over the past half-century of song. "Many of [music's] patterns and metrics have been consistently stable for [this] period," they wrote. "However, we prove important changes or trends related to the restriction of pitch transitions, the homogenisation of the timbral palette, and the growing loudness levels."

When researchers write about "pitch transitions", they mean the way notes are used – the variety of intervals, and the difference between one melody and another. Melodies are becoming more and more similar, Serra explained to Reuters. "We obtained numerical indicators that the diversity of transitions between note combinations – roughly speaking chords plus melodies – has consistently diminished in the last 50 years."

Not only are the melodies of songs more similar than they used to be, the timbral palette employed – the sounds of the instruments – has also grown narrower. A trumpet's sound, its "timbre", is very different to the sound of an electric guitar or electric piano. But now, apparently, songs are relying on a much smaller range of timbres than in the past. When so many instruments are synthesised, perhaps, or rely on digital processing, the trumpet begins to lose its trumpet-ness.
 
Last edited:
So people with taste know to steer well clear of the pop charts... the music is artificial and so is the popularity of it.
 
So If 5 Million people say 2 + 2 equals 5 it's true?

**** that. There will always be good and bad music, If most people enjoy the bad music it don't become good.

You gotta differentiate fact from opinion. So a better analogy would be...If 5 million people say chocolate is amazing, the statement is true to all 5 million of them, so stores will carry and sell alot of chocolate even if you never like the taste of it.
 
So people with taste know to steer well clear of the pop charts... the music is artificial and so is the popularity of it.

Again, these statements are counterproductive. You're attempting to convince yourself you've gotta be smarter than consumers who financially support pop music as well as the artists who are able to create marketable music. These are the type of outlooks that lead to that 1 time you finally get to play your music in a public setting and no one cares it was ever played because you've gotten so caught in your own idea you're smarter than everyone that you're not making anything appealing to the ear.
 
Pop music is more cookie cutter than it has ever been. This is a FACT.


You have to consider the decline of genres. When's the last time you heard a new song from these genres on top 40 radio? Disco? Jazz? Classical? even Reggae, Hell, Rock and Roll? How much music in general is on the radio these days that can't be for the most part completely created on a computer? How much of that doesn't follow the same tempos, use the same sounds available to everyone? So for the sake of argument, I challenge anyone who thinks they have some type of upper hand by not making popular music(doesn't make sense as I say it out loud)to incorporate real instruments and take advantage of some long lost genres amazing sounds instead of thinking you're doing something different while just making song number 464,001...but not as good as the other 464,000.

I doubt many people on this site are capable of making anything close to this record...


It's just easier to say it's "terrible" because it sounds like "Unfaithful" by Rihanna, or this......


The point is, if you're not able to create something better(beyond your own opinion), it doesn't matter that they sound similarr. I'm talking mix, arrangement, lyrics, talent in the performance, use of the right instruments to bring out melodies and set tones, ect. If you can't make a better overall song, you're more of the problem than they could ever be. Especially in this day and time when your music career is completely left in your hands. It's not like back in the day when a new artist had an endless budget, you're expected to be able to match this quality ON YOUR OWN these days. Solution? I'll let you guys think of one.
 
Last edited:
Ask Pop music fans what they think of TechN9ne, or Slayer, or Phish, or any other artist or group that is considered "talented" but not Pop... You haven't heard someone lay into music until you do that. "Rap Crap!" "Screaming Angry Metal Crap!" "Druggy Hippie Crap!"

All relative. All subjective. I think it's fine to be a music snob, but keep it personal and just listen to what you like. Arguing about it with people is similar to arguing about religion or politics. You can't change what someone else feels inside, unless you are very close to them. Shouting about it aimlessly on a blog or on the street corner won't work. It hasn't worked, ever. If this was the 70's, we'd be here talking about how Led Zeppelin is undeserving of fame/fortune for stealing blues riffs, and how some other unknown guy was "the truth". Yet we know how it turned out for Zeppelin - $$$.
 
Back
Top