Why is modern pop music so terrible?

[JimmyThunder]

Modern pop music has ALWAYS been terrible to people who aren't the target market (primarily, young teens).

 

[jmattbassplaya]

Good modern music is abundant in the "jam" genre if you are yearning for more rock, blues, and funk stuff.

 

[skwee]

Guy Who Wrote and Produced "Call Me Maybe" Releases Pop Song About How To Make Pop Songs

 

[NullPorch]

In order of increasing anger some music about despising the notion of conformity and mindlessly following the trend. Unfortunately only two were written within ten years of today.

 

[MDBass]

Stumbled on this youtube video and found it intriguing...

Fear not, there is unabashedly terrible pop music from every era; just learned a Spice Girls tune for a corporate gig tomorrow and was honestly shocked by how awful it was.

That particular song is over two decades old, and there are plenty of older examples as well

 

[songwriter21]

21 year old male isn't exactly the target market for Bieber, Cyrus or Perry. This is music primarily for 8-14 year olds, a group that is heavily reliant on social acceptance, and with little experience to draw upon. They know whatever music is popular and whatever gross, "old" music their parents listen to. Of course they are largely going to listen to the same music, if only to not be an outsider. Its the last reliably homogeneous group of music consumers. Some of the older ones in this age group will get adventurous and find the music that is on the periphery of popular, but collectively their tastes are pretty narrow. Just like it has been since the invention of radio.

I say that this slew of awful pop and rap, is geared from middle school, all the way up until around, what, 30?

Scary.

Thank God for satellite radio, and most importantly, my dad and subculture metal friends for getting me into classic rock and thrash metal when in I was in high school.

 

[monsterthompson]

Fear not, there is unabashedly terrible pop music from every era; just learned a Spice Girls tune for a corporate gig tomorrow and was honestly shocked by how terrible it was.

That particular song is over two decades old, and there are plenty of older examples as well

Part of the reason modern music is worse than old music is that "older music" exists through the filter of time which has allowed people to forget the bad songs which existed "back then" and get nostalgic about the "good music" favorably remembered. Old "bad" music gets forgotten and left behind as time rolls on. Modern music exists in all of its presently exposed good and bad, and has yet to be filtered by time, so we are consciously aware of its flaws.

 

[RattleSnack]

For me, it is lack of BAND MUSICIANSHIP that makes me dislike modern music. You can feel producer "steering" song through safest, most commercial waters, avoiding anything that resembles: art, creativity, inovation and humanity.
Song must be cool and trendy, so it can be sold with expencive video with dancing and sex and circus and fireworks and explosions.
Good thing is, you can easily spot this cr*p from a mile and avoid it like a plague.

 

[SactoBass]

I still laugh my tail off at this one...

Looking at it from an "opportunity" point of view, this genre has been a real boon for those who can't sing worth a #@%&. This genre has open the door for those with absolutely no musical talent whatsoever to enter recording studios and make recordings (and videos) instead of selling fries at McD's. Can you hear the auto-tune? Of course! Gross.

I personally *DESPISE* everything about this genre....the vocals.....the music.....even the visuals. For me, it works better than syrup of Ipecac. Just listening to 15 seconds of that video caused me to frantically search for a brown bag.

But my opinion doesn't really matter in this case. There is apparently a certain percentage of the human population that actually finds this material appealing. As they say, to each his/her own. What's nice is, we all get to make choices regarding what we listen to. Thank goodness for that!!!

I'm sure our previous generation said the same thing about the material we listened to when we were youngsters. My parents would have never enjoyed listening to the Close to the Edge album by Yes!

 

[buldog5151bass]

People have been saying "new music sucks" for centuries. Nothing new.

- The Beatles are a bunch of mop top idiots
- Elvis is just grinding his body on stage.
- every new change in jazz is hated by the prior generation
- Most classical artists disliked Bartok and other 12 tone music when that came out.
- I am sure they were saying it about Mozart.

 

[SactoBass]

Good thing is, you can easily spot this cr*p from a mile and avoid it like a plague.

Well stated!

 

[monsterthompson]

For me, it is lack of BAND MUSICIANSHIP that makes me dislike modern music. You can feel producer "steering" song through safest, most commercial waters, avoiding anything that resembles: art, creativity, inovation and humanity.
Song must be cool and trendy, so it can be sold with expencive video with dancing and sex and circus and fireworks and explosions.
Good thing is, you can easily spot this cr*p from a mile and avoid it like a plague.

How short our memories are. Let's not forget about the homogeneous sounds of yesteryear, when The Wrecking Crew and Muscle Shoals played on all the tracks for every pop act who was presented as "the band." We've all been lied to our whole lives. Let's not pretend the old lie is better than the new one; they are the same.

 

[tb4sbp]

Music at that level is a business and what sells? C'mon we all know

 

[RattleSnack]

How short our memories are. Let's not forget about the homogeneous sounds of yesteryear, when The Wrecking Crew and Muscle Shoals played on all the tracks for every pop act who was presented as "the band." We've all been lied to our whole lives. Let's not pretend the old lie is better than the new one; they are the same.

True, making music specificaly to hit charts and make money hasn't changed that much.
But those charts are now almost exclusively reserved for "music products".

 

[johnpbass]

I wonder if we'll ever hear "elevator versions" of Katy Perry, Justin Beiber, etc., like we have with the Beatles?

 

[monsterthompson]

People have been saying "new music sucks" for centuries. Nothing new.

- The Beatles are a bunch of mop top idiots
- Elvis is just grinding his body on stage.
- every new change in jazz is hated by the prior generation
- Most classical artists disliked Bartok and other 12 tone music when that came out.
- I am sure they were saying it about Mozart.

Every generation has experienced expanding distribution of music. Before there was written music, it could only be passed in in-person. Then, music could be written by hand and passed along on paper. Then printing allowed wider distribution. Then we experienced a way to record the actual sound of music being played. Then radio showed up, so you didn't need a record player. Then the transistor radio, making it portable. Fast forward to web-based distribution making major labels impotent.

Each expansion allowed more people (audiences) to hear more music, requiring more people producing music to satisfy the demand.

 

[monsterthompson]

True, making music specificaly to hit charts and make money hasn't changed that much.
But those charts are now almost exclusively reserved for "music products".

They aren't music products. They are sex and image and product placement and lifestyle illusions, wrapped in music and sold as music. Funny that only pretty people make successful chart-topping pop music.

 

[Big Hoss]

They aren't music products. They are sex and image and product placement and lifestyle illusions, wrapped in music and sold as music. Funny that only pretty people make successful chart-topping pop music.

Which is why my fat arse will never be on a chart topping album...

 

[Boy_Narf]

It's because people just don't care. I've asked a few folks on my team why they listen to such crap music and they don't really have an answer. Most of them just want something mindless that requires zero mental investment. Guess it helps put them in a catatonic state during their one hour traffic jam/suburban commute to and from work. One of my close friends doesn't care what is on the radio, as long as it has a dance beat which gets her head bobbing she is happy.

I've honestly only met one fellow (ten years at the same company) who plays in a band. Everyone else is soo fixated on kids/lawn mowing/tv shows/home renovations, that they no longer have time/care for music. One of my cousins who used to be a big music fan in the 90's says he just doesn't have time to follow and research bands these days. It's 100% top 40's for him. He claims it's all about numbing his mind.

I've also discovered that most folks only listen to the singer. I find this completely baffling. If there is any part of a band I ignore most it's the singer. Usually they are so heavily tuned, or the lyrics are complete crap that I've learned to block them out. I'm 100% about the instruments. Probably why most folks who listen to my instrumental music are instantly bored by it. Nothing for them to connect with. I have even tried to point out how many current radio hits use the same chord progression. That sort of things annoys me, but the general population doesn't seem to care, or understand for that matter.

 

[tpaul]

Each expansion allowed more people (audiences) to hear more music, requiring more people producing music to satisfy the demand.

Maybe, but the point of the OP's video is that fewer and fewer original artists are now given the opportunity to satisfy the growing demand. Instead, in order to reduce risk, record companies have stopped signing original new artists and instead manufacture new artists complete with new hits that sound just like the old hits by the previous hot new artists, because they were written by the same people and recorded using the same digital instruments and techniques.

You can see the same trends in other art forms. Take movies - I go to the cinema and look at the posters for upcoming movies, and at least half of them are franchise films. In other words, the movie studios are trying to reduce risk, just like the recording companies, by rehashing the same movies over and over. Instead of coming up with something new, we get another X-Men movie, another Avengers spin-off, and so forth. I'm a big Star Wars fan, but let's face it, The Force Awakens was yet another retelling of the original Star Wars from 1977. It's the same movie, and we've seen it three times now.

The tragedy is that there are countless talented, creative artists in all genres that aren't being given the chance to be heard or seen by the public because all the corporate dollars go to the least risky investment - the next boy band, the next blond waif singer, the next franchise film, the next book series about wizards or vampires pitched to teenagers who will reliably buy all the merchandise, see the inevitable film adaptation, and go to the theme park.