Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
How would define "bad music"?
- Thread starter bassliner50
- Start date
No need to chomp on carrots any more, the popcorn’s here.
I think it depends on what is meant by "bad". There's plenty of personal biases in this thread about things people don't like or think is bad. That's fine, like what you like. Electronic music isn't my favorite but there's also plenty of stuff out there that heavily uses computers and live sampling to make very rich soundscapes and beats on the fly. Just because it's using a computer doesn't mean it's "easy" or turn it into glorified karaoke.
Mostly I try to just keep in mind what music in that genre is typically trying to achieve. Pop is not trying to be intellectually gratifying on a compositional level (typically) as a genre. Electronic music music generally isn't trying to dazzle and wow the audience with odd time signatures and quirky tongue in cheek stories like Zappa. Drone isn't trying to give you a toe tapping manageable 4 minutes of fun.
I wouldn't expect to "get" the same thing out of a Chopin album as I would an Andrews Sisters album. I wouldn't expect my copy of Rhapsody in Blue to achieve the same things as Bitches Brew. My Waylon and Willie WW2 record isn't there for the same itch as Splendor and Misery by Clipping.
Mostly I try to just keep in mind what music in that genre is typically trying to achieve. Pop is not trying to be intellectually gratifying on a compositional level (typically) as a genre. Electronic music music generally isn't trying to dazzle and wow the audience with odd time signatures and quirky tongue in cheek stories like Zappa. Drone isn't trying to give you a toe tapping manageable 4 minutes of fun.
I wouldn't expect to "get" the same thing out of a Chopin album as I would an Andrews Sisters album. I wouldn't expect my copy of Rhapsody in Blue to achieve the same things as Bitches Brew. My Waylon and Willie WW2 record isn't there for the same itch as Splendor and Misery by Clipping.
You are correct as far as them "using" overdubs. The word I used was "rely." All of those bands could perform without computers, sequencers, and "tracks," with the possible exception of Devo...I confess I only am familiar with a few of their works.
There's another one that's coming up more and more. Timbre. There're no rules ATM. Mainly because it's a bit inaccessible without synths. So right now it is boldly go territory. But still it provides a lot of movement in electronic music. There's a lot more immitation than innovation. But there are undeniable hooks made of tone alone. I can't imagine it's not going to be as heavily regulated as harmony one day, long after I'm dead.
A lot of complaints about using computers in music. It’s pretty hard to avoid these days since we won’t be going back to tape or cutting direct to disc any time soon.
As far as sequencing, there is a huge difference between sequencing a composition and just hitting the random button and hoping for the best.
Here’s a piece written by George Anthiel from 1924 that was scored for 16 player pianos. Modern performances use Yamaha Disklavier grand pianos which can record and play back using MIDI.
As far as sequencing, there is a huge difference between sequencing a composition and just hitting the random button and hoping for the best.
Here’s a piece written by George Anthiel from 1924 that was scored for 16 player pianos. Modern performances use Yamaha Disklavier grand pianos which can record and play back using MIDI.
People are thinking about this too simply. It’s a two-dimensional problem. There’s music I enjoy and music I don’t enjoy, but that’s not sufficient to make the determination. Fully acknowledging that these are both almost entirely subjective criteria, I think about not just whether I enjoy the music but also if I respect it. I might not respect it because of lazy composition, poor execution, bad messaging, whatever. And I might like it anyway, even if I don’t respect it. And I might respect it but not actually enjoy it. So we now have this space:
If I enjoy it and respect it, well, that’s good music. If I enjoy it but don’t respect it, that’s a guilty pleasure. If I respect it but don’t enjoy it, well, that’s music that I’m cool with but isn’t for me. Bad music is simply music that I neither enjoy nor respect. Again, I acknowledge that both “enjoy” and “respect” are pretty subjective, but that’s OK.
‘
If I enjoy it and respect it, well, that’s good music. If I enjoy it but don’t respect it, that’s a guilty pleasure. If I respect it but don’t enjoy it, well, that’s music that I’m cool with but isn’t for me. Bad music is simply music that I neither enjoy nor respect. Again, I acknowledge that both “enjoy” and “respect” are pretty subjective, but that’s OK.
‘
Just for the sake of clarity, "live" doesn't necessarily refer to "performed in front of an audience." It also means any performance captured in real time without any edits, splices, or overdubs. The vast majority of my album collection (LPs, CDs, and digital files) are all "live" recordings, either in a studio, hall, club, or other environment, with or without an audience. Of the over 1000 albums I have, probably 90-95% are "live" recordings, meaning recordings of all the musicians playing together in real time in the same space. Orchestral, chamber music, solo recordings (ok....just one person there...obviously), opera, small group jazz, big band, latin, afro-cuban, some reggae. I do have examples of other genres in my collection that I enjoy very much, and yes, many of those do use a lot of studio techniques, synths, overdubs, etc.
To imply that jam-band and tape-trading are the main sources of live recordings is...well...incorrect. 99% of my collection is commercial releases.
I started seeing the "music must have melody, harmony, and rhythm" thing come up more frequently after a fairly well known commentator whose dad was a composer was using it to say hip hop or rap wasn't music. Ironically that same person was just featured in a rap track. Anyways, it's a bit narrow of a take in my opinion as keeping the tracks of the two drummers from this wouldn't turn it into "not music". Purely percussive music exists
Then there's this, which is live sampling and mixing. Both triggers and music creation on the fly.
Try playing it... it grows on you. We played a tribute show and we were assigned that song. It took some work to make it sound like something... in a quirky way we had a ball playing it afterwards at some of our shows.
I wouldn't presume to define good or bad music, only music I like, and music I don't like.
My great appreciation for Derek Bailey supports this stance. I'd venture a large majority of music listeners would not consider what he does music at all, let alone whether it's good or bad.
My great appreciation for Derek Bailey supports this stance. I'd venture a large majority of music listeners would not consider what he does music at all, let alone whether it's good or bad.
As a Led Zepplelin/Yes/Floyd fan in the 70's, all the Disco stuff made my teeth hurt. I still maintain that was Bad Music, but opinions vary, obviously. The people twirling the night away on the dance floor dressed like John Travolta probably thought 70's Progressive Rock was hopelessly self-indulgent navel-gazing, with some justification (Remember Tales from Topographic Oceans? To this day, it makes me cringe a little). I remember when I was in High School, our bus driver had (2) two 8-track tapes he played in endless rotation. For FOUR YEARS: A soft-rock medley featuring "God Bless you, you make me feel brand new", and some other Pap, and The Carpenters Greatest Hits. To this day, hearing either one makes me feel a little sick, like the memory of food poisoning.
The Shaggs is truly wretched from the point of coherence, melody, timing, basic tuning, etc., but their father MADE them play this. It has a kind of demented sincerity I enjoy in (very) small doses, like having a brief psychotic episode. Karen Carpenter was an accomplished musician with a superb voice who chose to generate sickly-sweet ear-worms instead, that's MY definition of bad music. People who know better, but produce crap anyway.
And then there's the whole 80's Hair Metal genre, much of which was just awful, with some rare exceptions. Poison? Really? I feel faintly embarassed for most of the participants, but hey, it sold some records. No offense if you still have a pair of spandex pants and some hair gel in a closet someplace. I myself once donned a pair of Parachute Pants for a gig.....because Sting did it, so I have my own regrets.
The Shaggs is truly wretched from the point of coherence, melody, timing, basic tuning, etc., but their father MADE them play this. It has a kind of demented sincerity I enjoy in (very) small doses, like having a brief psychotic episode. Karen Carpenter was an accomplished musician with a superb voice who chose to generate sickly-sweet ear-worms instead, that's MY definition of bad music. People who know better, but produce crap anyway.
And then there's the whole 80's Hair Metal genre, much of which was just awful, with some rare exceptions. Poison? Really? I feel faintly embarassed for most of the participants, but hey, it sold some records. No offense if you still have a pair of spandex pants and some hair gel in a closet someplace. I myself once donned a pair of Parachute Pants for a gig.....because Sting did it, so I have my own regrets.
Last edited:
