[OGTL]

I'm not telling anybody what they should be listening to, whether if it's full of talent or talentless, if you like it, what does it matter?

Good Charlotte wasn't my favourite band, and I only like the first album, because it is original, and more light hearted. The next album had songs like "Lifestyle of the rich and famous" and I couldn't stand it, just not my cup of tea. I don't put the blame on MTV, i just prefer the band's first album.

Yes, the credits are attributed to fallout boy, but there are specialists working with the band that know the exact formula of a hit single, and how to make an addictive song that gets stuck in peoples heads.

No need to get hostile here, just sharing friendly opinions is all i view it as!

When there are responses like these I start to wonder what is wrong with head-fi too.

 

[Ingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjhatfield /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is one of those threads where somebody needs to step in and say "this is what is wrong with Head-Fi" But I won't be that guy. btw, don't trust anyone under 23...

23? Where did you come up with that number? Lol.

 

[jrussell6]

I tried the album cause i love that one song, but i don't like that song anymore due to hearing the album

 

[Borat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OGTL /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, the credits are attributed to fallout boy, but there are specialists working with the band that know the exact formula of a hit single, and how to make an addictive song that gets stuck in peoples heads.

Please tell me how you know this. I'm genuinely interested.

And I'm curious, what bands/artists are talented in your opinion? Just name some.

 

[jjhatfield]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingo /img/forum/go_quote.gif 23? Where did you come up with that number? Lol.

Because I'm 25, and I want to think I have at least two years of good solid musical taste under my belt.

lol.

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borat /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please tell me how you know this. I'm genuinely interested. And I'm curious, what bands/artists are talented in your opinion? Just name some.

He can't because he doesn't know. I'm not a fan of this band though I do admit to enjoying a few of their singles.

This band has come up from the trenches. Was berated during most of their early years and when they made it quite big with their last album, they were severely criticized by "those that think they know music." Etc.

EVERY major label musician/band has "people" working "with them" to ensure that they don't put out total crap. That goes for Paul McCartney, U2, the Stones, Sting, Madonna, all the way down the chain to FallOut Boy et. al. People can detest their music. People can criticize their seemingly textbook musical formula (whatever that means), yet they should have their facts straight outright. Someone like Britney Spears who has the Swedish connection writing songs for her...yes one could criticize, but then, really, why? She or her label pays these guys to write her music, she sings it well enough and moves the way she needs to move to drive home sales. It's called a business. For people like Fallout Boy, who have worked to get where they are...they deserve at least some credit. People obviously like their music enough for them to be hitting Gold and Platinum sales status. Nothing wrong with that at all.

I mean...if we want to get elitist we may as well just drop the bomb now and tell everyone that if they aren't listening to "classical music" more appropriately baroque, classical, romantic with very little 20th century, they don't know music at all because since then, no one has really composed anything noteworthy right? I mean...seriously, they all used help...you know the guys who revolutionized music over those 300 years

 

[jjhatfield]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif I mean...if we want to get elitist we may as well just drop the bomb now and tell everyone that if they aren't listening to "classical music" more appropriately baroque, classical, romantic with very little 20th century, they don't know music at all because since then, no one has really composed anything noteworthy right? I mean...seriously, they all used help...you know the guys who revolutionized music over those 300 years

Amen to that brother. Actually there was a brief revival of good music between 1978 (after but certainly not including the released of Sex Pistols "Never Mind The Bollocks") and 1990 (before and most definitely including Depeche Mode's "Violator"). Pretty much everything else non-classical is total garbage.

<-four tongueys = one winky, nudge nudge, having a hard time using the new winky, it scares me a bit.

 

[Ingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif He can't because he doesn't know. I'm not a fan of this band though I do admit to enjoying a few of their singles. This band has come up from the trenches. Was berated during most of their early years and when they made it quite big with their last album, they were severely criticized by "those that think they know music." Etc. EVERY major label musician/band has "people" working "with them" to ensure that they don't put out total crap. That goes for Paul McCartney, U2, the Stones, Sting, Madonna, all the way down the chain to FallOut Boy et. al. People can detest their music. People can criticize their seemingly textbook musical formula (whatever that means), yet they should have their facts straight outright. Someone like Britney Spears who has the Swedish connection writing songs for her...yes one could criticize, but then, really, why? She or her label pays these guys to write her music, she sings it well enough and moves the way she needs to move to drive home sales. It's called a business. For people like Fallout Boy, who have worked to get where they are...they deserve at least some credit. People obviously like their music enough for them to be hitting Gold and Platinum sales status. Nothing wrong with that at all. I mean...if we want to get elitist we may as well just drop the bomb now and tell everyone that if they aren't listening to "classical music" more appropriately baroque, classical, romantic with very little 20th century, they don't know music at all because since then, no one has really composed anything noteworthy right? I mean...seriously, they all used help...you know the guys who revolutionized music over those 300 years

I agree with almost everything you're saying. If the only thing you base your opinion of an artist on is their studio albums I agree 99%. I don't agree that most bands like Fallout Boy have worked very "hard" to get where they are. I say that in terms of what I think of as "hard work". They learned their instruments, wrote some songs, and started a band. Then, an A&R guy from a small record company comes along, sees a cash cow based around a fresh image, and then he takes it to the bank. Now they're millionaires and they're not even as talented, IMO, as many of the countless acts that will never be signed. You do have to take your hat off to the team that creates a Fallout Boy album, though. Collectively, they've worked "hard" to make themselves a WHOLE lot of money.

There are bands out there that I will never see live but I love their albums. The biggest example is The Red Hot Chili Peppers. Anthony Kiedis has horrible pitch and I don't think he could sing on key if he tried. 'Blood Sugar Sex Magik' is one of my favorite albums, regardless. There's nothing wrong with liking the product which they're selling (pop albums).

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingo /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't agree that most bands like Fallout Boy have worked very "hard" to get where they are. I say that in terms of what I think of as "hard work". They learned their instruments, wrote some songs, and started a band. Then, an A&R guy from a small record company comes along, sees a cash cow based around a fresh image, and then he takes it to the bank. Now they're millionaires and they're not even as talented, IMO, as many of the countless acts that will never be signed. You do have to take your hat off to the team that creates a Fallout Boy album, though. Collectively, they've worked "hard" to make themselves a WHOLE lot of money.

Yet bands that play and play and play...hitting small venues, playing highschools, local rotary clubs etc...just to get their name out, that is working hard, just because they happen to get the big breakdoesn't mean diminish their prior efforts. There are plenty of bands that work as hard or harder and never get anywhere. Some continue to do it because they love it, others pack it in. A good friend of mine was playing music like the Killers, the Stills etc were playing about 3-4 years before these guys were big. His band never got signed yet they opened for Interpol, The Killers, Franz Ferdinand etc. Sometimes things just don't click at the right time and some great acts fall through the cracks. Learning instruments, putting together some decent tracks to build up a fan following and playing enough so that a label's scout might be interested to hear them and perhaps give them a whirl is all solid accomplishments say vs. a band that is put together by a label, hand picking each member and then throwing them in a studio to sing songs they have hired others to write etc.

Quote:

There are bands out there that I will never see live but I love their albums. The biggest example is The Red Hot Chili Peppers. Anthony Kiedis has horrible pitch and I don't think he could sing on key if he tried. 'Blood Sugar Sex Magik' is one of my favorite albums, regardless. There's nothing wrong with liking the product which they're selling (pop albums).

Exactly. Pop = popular music, it is popular because many people like it. There is a catchiness to the melody and it is okay to like it. I definitely enjoy indie music and I get tired of listening to what seems like the same exact tune replayed with different lyrics but to those that love it, hey who am I to judge? Heck my favourite song in the universe is Walking on Sunshine by Katrina and the Waves...I can't judge anyone with that on my resume

 

[Ingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yet bands that play and play and play...hitting small venues, playing highschools, local rotary clubs etc...just to get their name out, that is working hard, just because they happen to get the big breakdoesn't mean diminish their prior efforts.

I agree with that. It is work, but for a professional bass fisherman, fishing is work. I'm just saying it's not particularly gruelling especially since they're probably doing it because they enjoy it.

Quote:

Sometimes things just don't click at the right time and some great acts fall through the cracks. Learning instruments, putting together some decent tracks to build up a fan following and playing enough so that a label's scout might be interested to hear them and perhaps give them a whirl is all solid accomplishments say vs. a band that is put together by a label, hand picking each member and then throwing them in a studio to sing songs they have hired others to write etc.

Quite often the music has no bearing on why a record company signs an artist, as you undoubtedly know. This is particularly true in genres like pop, rock, and country. I watched the country artist Kenny Chesney make a fool of himself at a local bar here in Arizona before he made it big. People litterally were raising their eyebrows and the place was almost silent. The reason he made it to the top of country music is because he is distinguishable. More than anything the A&R guys are looking at: a) is this person/group something that's different from the norm right now, or... b) is there still time to ride the coattails of another artist that's fresh. I believe Fallout Boy made it because of luck, distinguishability, and the current trends.

The extraordinary talent makes it through on it's merit alone most of the time.

Quote:

I can't judge anyone with that on my resume

I definately can't judge anybody's taste in music based on half of my collection!

"He who is without poor music taste may cast the first Brilliant Pebbles®..."

-Headfi 4:28

 

[sebascrub]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Exactly. Pop = popular music, it is popular because many people like it.

That used to be true in the 50s-70s (maybe, probably only till like 1971). Now pop has diverged from "popular" to become its own sound signature. At least, that's the way I read my popular music history

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingo /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree with that. It is work, but for a professional bass fisherman, fishing is work. I'm just saying it's not particularly gruelling especially since they're probably doing it because they enjoy it.

Well sure, but this is subjective then. I mean...neurosurgery, astrophysics etc...may be defined as "grueling" to most yet to folks in the field, it is fun for them..and perhaps not all that taxing on their brain (well save for really cutting edge physics).

It becomes relative. However, no doubt there are bands that have their careers handed to them (Milli Vanilli) and ride it well until they are no longer popular (or they goof as large as MV did).

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebascrub /img/forum/go_quote.gif That used to be true in the 50s-70s (maybe, probably only till like 1971). Now pop has diverged from "popular" to become its own sound signature. At least, that's the way I read my popular music history

Not at all true. Pop country, pop rock, pop for pop's sake...all of these "genres" are popular because people like them a whole lot. A perfect example..NickleBack. These guys are raked over the coals ALL THE TIME by critics and "music aficionados" yet they a multi-millionaires with hit after hit after hit. Yes they are backed by an RIAA company. Yes they get heavy air play on Clear Channel stations...but the fact is...go to a high school dance, go to a bar, go to a frat house and this stuff is being played. It's popular because people like it. Nuff said. Nickleback is "pop" music but in the "nu metal" genre or whatever it is these days. Blink 182 is "pop" but under the "pop-punk" genre. 50 Cent is "pop" but under the hip-hop genre. Certainly none of these folks could be lumped into a single "pop music" category without someone raising their brows thinking...huh? Besides being liked by a whole lotta folks...how are they similar?

In the 50's through the 70's there were genres and within said genres there were "popular" hits, some with more agreeable radio playability than others (based on the morals of tastes of the times etc). When I think of quintessential pop I think of the Beatles and manufactured band to the nth degree. In a way, your music history would coincide with a type of sound, that the Beatles themselves shed, opting for something different until that time when they split. But each genre has a "pop" section and like-wise a "core" as well as an "indie" which is usually related closely with the "core." Ironically...most often the "core" was yesterdays "pop."

If one does their research...pop transcends a "house sound" to include nearly anything that is radio friendly, enjoyed by the masses and brings in massive amounts of green.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_Music

Check out who is listed. There are so many acts that would be properly categorized under rock, punk, country, hip-hop, etc...but get the "pop" label.

 

[MdRex]

OMGosh yay! Speaking for "mainstream commercial contrived dishonest cashcow crap".

It's about time. I can name so many bands that I like somewhat that gets pan on the head-fi's so-call open minded music lovers. And when asked how do they know that the bands (or artist) pushes out dishonest materials, they will simply say, "I've got an acute sense of dishonesty" ... or something like that.

 

[fordgtlover]

Hey, thanks for the support. I too support individual tastes in music.

When I made my comments about throwing it away, It was tongue in cheek. I was a bit taken by how they were so quickly criticized.

I tend to find that pop music is like McDonalds food - tastes OK, but I usually regret buying it soon after.

Given that I have Alison Krauss, Ozzy Osbourne, Michael Bublé, Whitesnake, Tool Keith Urban all in heavy rotation on my iPod, I'm not all that fussed about other people's view of my taste.

This thread raises some interesting questions about poular music and people's perceptions of it. I'm sure bands like Fallout Boy, hey even Brittany, would like to be taken seriously. Meanwhile they sit in their mansions and contemplate how unfair the world is, and what they need to do to be taken as a serious artist - go figure.

Money doesn't buy happiness, but it makes misery more comfortable.



Quote:

Originally Posted by sebascrub /img/forum/go_quote.gif Dude, don't let anyone tell you what your tastes are. If you like it, who cares? It's more sheeple of you to not like it because people tell you to than to like it because you like it