12 Extremely Disappointing Facts About Popular Music

dpmay

musicismylife78 wrote:

i think there is a difference for most people, that i dont subscribe to between masterpiece music, ala the beatles, led zep, the stones, dylan, bruce. music that is considered great. and on the flip side music thats commercial, and on the radio and popular and hip. while i am the biggest beatles fan around, i enjoy commercial radio as well, and think a well written, well sung, hook laden, catchy song is as important a contribution to music and to culture as creating lasting powerful art. its a gift and an art to create a catchy song and im in awe of those who have accomplished it.

im a hipster, and love arcade fire, modest mouse, sufjan, and iron and wine, radiohead, but can also appreciate and love so called pop music. justin timbertake, kelly clarkson, gaga, beyonce, im a fan of them as well.

if a song is catchy and good i love it. simple as that. music is music is music. ultimately i think people dont like admitting things like guilty pleasures in music because there is some unwritten rule that you cant love or enjoy pop and or commercial music if you are a serious music consumer and lover. i think thats a falsity and absurd.

will the beatles last forever? i hope so. but lets not forget the music thats often considered important and groundbreaking often has a pop edge. Nirvana was a self admitted pop band. Elvis took blues music and made it pop.

good post. musical taste is not a statement of personality. like what'cha like - that is all.

Newch91

musicismylife78 wrote:

The biggest selling album of the 2000's was Eminems Marshall Mathers LP, sold 10 million by 2009. i think its safe to assume way more than 10 million people own that record.

The Beatles "1" was the biggest selling album of the 2000's, selling 31 million by 2009.

Newch91

musicismylife78 wrote:

i think there is a difference for most people, that i dont subscribe to between masterpiece music, ala the beatles, led zep, the stones, dylan, bruce. music that is considered great. and on the flip side music thats commercial, and on the radio and popular and hip. while i am the biggest beatles fan around, i enjoy commercial radio as well, and think a well written, well sung, hook laden, catchy song is as important a contribution to music and to culture as creating lasting powerful art. its a gift and an art to create a catchy song and im in awe of those who have accomplished it.

im a hipster, and love arcade fire, modest mouse, sufjan, and iron and wine, radiohead, but can also appreciate and love so called pop music. justin timbertake, kelly clarkson, gaga, beyonce, im a fan of them as well.

if a song is catchy and good i love it. simple as that. music is music is music. ultimately i think people dont like admitting things like guilty pleasures in music because there is some unwritten rule that you cant love or enjoy pop and or commercial music if you are a serious music consumer and lover. i think thats a falsity and absurd.

will the beatles last forever? i hope so. but lets not forget the music thats often considered important and groundbreaking often has a pop edge. Nirvana was a self admitted pop band. Elvis took blues music and made it pop.

Like this post. You sure you're the biggest Beatles fan around?

My guilty pleasure is Alicia Keys. She's amazing and very talented.

conman

:(

musicismylife78

Newch91 wrote:

musicismylife78 wrote:

The biggest selling album of the 2000's was Eminems Marshall Mathers LP, sold 10 million by 2009. i think its safe to assume way more than 10 million people own that record.

The Beatles "1" was the biggest selling album of the 2000's, selling 31 million by 2009.

good catch. i got mixed up. but eminem was the top selling artist of the decade, with 2 albums in the top 10 selling albums of the decade list. but you are right the beatles 1 was the champion in terms of top selling album.

Johnny Abruzzo

Newch91 wrote:

My guilty pleasure is Alicia Keys. She's amazing and very talented.

Me too. Are her songs written in a board room like Rhianna?

Newch91

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Newch91 wrote:

My guilty pleasure is Alicia Keys. She's amazing and very talented.

Me too. Are her songs written in a board room like Rhianna?

I believe she writes her own songs, words and music, something Rhianna doesn't do.

tybird

I wonder what would happen if one looked at the average sales of each album by the artists mentioned....how albums has Babs released....and what's the average sales of each compared to say Pearl Jams average per album...not counting the official boot legs, I guess... :twisted:

musicismylife78

tybird wrote:

I wonder what would happen if one looked at the average sales of each album by the artists mentioned....how albums has Babs released....and what's the average sales of each compared to say Pearl Jams average per album...not counting the official boot legs, I guess... :twisted:

good question.

i dont wish to diminish or minimize the success of PJ, but unless you are the beatles, elvis, led zep or pink floyd or something, album sales are shockingly low for huge bands.

since 1991, PJ has sold over 30 million albums. thats a ton of albums. But think about it. thats 31 million records in 20 years. spread out over what 7 or 8 albums, countless official live releases, hundreds of official bootlegs and so on. hell Ten alone accounts for a third of the 30 million records.

i think as i said, unless you are led zep 300 million or pink floyd 200 million albums or Elvis and the Beatles 1 billion albums sold each, the album sales numbers really arent that shocking or interesting.

i also think there is a difference between albums sold in terms of pop music like the christinas and gagas and britneys of the world, and albums that mean something to the artists fans beyond background music.

with the beatles, a few years back that Across the Universe film, brilliantly depicted the 1960's world, with a script made of nearly entirely of beatles lyrics. i think that speaks to the importance and impact of the beatles. will people feel that way in 20 or 30 years about britney, or gaga, or shakira? i have no idea, but my gut says no on that, but that doesnt mean they dont make catchy fun songs.

there is a reason the pop songs get stuck in our heads. plus, lets be honest, i love getting lost in emotional, powerful albums when im sad or depressed, but i also think there is nothing better when feeling sad than listening to the radio and hearing a top 40 hit. those songs were written to help me, and the collective us deal with the world. thats the value of pop music. its life affirming. it gets your mind off the world

Newch91

musicismylife78 wrote:

tybird wrote:

I wonder what would happen if one looked at the average sales of each album by the artists mentioned....how albums has Babs released....and what's the average sales of each compared to say Pearl Jams average per album...not counting the official boot legs, I guess... :twisted:

good question.

i dont wish to diminish or minimize the success of PJ, but unless you are the beatles, elvis, led zep or pink floyd or something, album sales are shockingly low for huge bands.

since 1991, PJ has sold over 30 million albums. thats a ton of albums. But think about it. thats 31 million records in 20 years. spread out over what 7 or 8 albums, countless official live releases, hundreds of official bootlegs and so on. hell Ten alone accounts for a third of the 30 million records.

i think as i said, unless you are led zep 300 million or pink floyd 200 million albums or Elvis and the Beatles 1 billion albums sold each, the album sales numbers really arent that shocking or interesting.

i also think there is a difference between albums sold in terms of pop music like the christinas and gagas and britneys of the world, and albums that mean something to the artists fans beyond background music.

with the beatles, a few years back that Across the Universe film, brilliantly depicted the 1960's world, with a script made of nearly entirely of beatles lyrics. i think that speaks to the importance and impact of the beatles. will people feel that way in 20 or 30 years about britney, or gaga, or shakira? i have no idea, but my gut says no on that, but that doesnt mean they dont make catchy fun songs.

there is a reason the pop songs get stuck in our heads. plus, lets be honest, i love getting lost in emotional, powerful albums when im sad or depressed, but i also think there is nothing better when feeling sad than listening to the radio and hearing a top 40 hit. those songs were written to help me, and the collective us deal with the world. thats the value of pop music. its life affirming. it gets your mind off the world

Don't forget Michael Jackson, who has sold over an estimated 750 million albums.

I thought Pearl Jam was at 60 million?

Johnny Abruzzo

Whatever, most pop music is just garbage. The songs are written by a bunch of honchos and I don't find them catchy or good. There are some exceptions, but most of them just suck. I haven't listened to Top 40 radio since I was about 15 probably. When I hear people I work with talk about music (and TV) I feel like I live in another world.

tybird

musicismylife78 wrote:

tybird wrote:

I wonder what would happen if one looked at the average sales of each album by the artists mentioned....how albums has Babs released....and what's the average sales of each compared to say Pearl Jams average per album...not counting the official boot legs, I guess... :twisted:

good question.

i dont wish to diminish or minimize the success of PJ, but unless you are the beatles, elvis, led zep or pink floyd or something, album sales are shockingly low for huge bands.

since 1991, PJ has sold over 30 million albums. thats a ton of albums. But think about it. thats 31 million records in 20 years. spread out over what 7 or 8 albums, countless official live releases, hundreds of official bootlegs and so on. hell Ten alone accounts for a third of the 30 million records.

i think as i said, unless you are led zep 300 million or pink floyd 200 million albums or Elvis and the Beatles 1 billion albums sold each, the album sales numbers really arent that shocking or interesting.

i also think there is a difference between albums sold in terms of pop music like the christinas and gagas and britneys of the world, and albums that mean something to the artists fans beyond background music.

with the beatles, a few years back that Across the Universe film, brilliantly depicted the 1960's world, with a script made of nearly entirely of beatles lyrics. i think that speaks to the importance and impact of the beatles. will people feel that way in 20 or 30 years about britney, or gaga, or shakira? i have no idea, but my gut says no on that, but that doesnt mean they dont make catchy fun songs.

there is a reason the pop songs get stuck in our heads. plus, lets be honest, i love getting lost in emotional, powerful albums when im sad or depressed, but i also think there is nothing better when feeling sad than listening to the radio and hearing a top 40 hit. those songs were written to help me, and the collective us deal with the world. thats the value of pop music. its life affirming. it gets your mind off the world

Excellant points...I used PJ as merely an example

musicismylife78

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Whatever, most pop music is just garbage. The songs are written by a bunch of honchos and I don't find them catchy or good. There are some exceptions, but most of them just suck. I haven't listened to Top 40 radio since I was about 15 probably. When I hear people I work with talk about music (and TV) I feel like I live in another world.

as i said before, most of the stuff, most of the music you actually hear, is going to be pop music, whether its striaght up pop, or pop with a coat of indie or whatnot. the fact you hear Pearl Jam on the radio or used to soundtrack tv shows and commercials, they dont do that for music that isnt going to appeal to a pop/commercial audience. same goes for any of the "cool" bands right now, whether thats the shins, or death cab, modest mouse, iron and wine, james blake, and on and on. they are radically different in sound, and look and style, but pretty much they all have appeal to the commercial audience.

i think its silly to worry about what other people will think of your music taste. there are no guilty pleasures. just straight pleasure. there is a need to be filled for the emotional and substantial and important music the arcade fires of the world. dylan, bruce, neil young. but just as important, is the music that makes you want to dance, and sing along, and makes you forget your troubles if only by getting a silly and stupid chorus stuck in your head. i see no difference in the importance of either of those. arcade fire, and bruce and dylan serve their purpose, but so does britney and gaga. music that makes you think, and feel, and cry and is your solace when it all goes wrong, thats important stuff. but so is music that makes you tap your feet and nod your head and makes you want to jump around the room

Johnny Abruzzo

musicismylife78 wrote:

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Whatever, most pop music is just garbage. The songs are written by a bunch of honchos and I don't find them catchy or good. There are some exceptions, but most of them just suck. I haven't listened to Top 40 radio since I was about 15 probably. When I hear people I work with talk about music (and TV) I feel like I live in another world.

as i said before, most of the stuff, most of the music you actually hear, is going to be pop music, whether its striaght up pop, or pop with a coat of indie or whatnot. the fact you hear Pearl Jam on the radio or used to soundtrack tv shows and commercials, they dont do that for music that isnt going to appeal to a pop/commercial audience. same goes for any of the "cool" bands right now, whether thats the shins, or death cab, modest mouse, iron and wine, james blake, and on and on. they are radically different in sound, and look and style, but pretty much they all have appeal to the commercial audience.

i think its silly to worry about what other people will think of your music taste. there are no guilty pleasures. just straight pleasure. there is a need to be filled for the emotional and substantial and important music the arcade fires of the world. dylan, bruce, neil young. but just as important, is the music that makes you want to dance, and sing along, and makes you forget your troubles if only by getting a silly and stupid chorus stuck in your head. i see no difference in the importance of either of those. arcade fire, and bruce and dylan serve their purpose, but so does britney and gaga. music that makes you think, and feel, and cry and is your solace when it all goes wrong, thats important stuff. but so is music that makes you tap your feet and nod your head and makes you want to jump around the room

It's my own opinion that almost all pop music blows and it has nothing to do with worrying about what others think of my musical taste. As I said above, I'm a Alicia Keys fan. I enjoy Michael Jackson songs, some Billy Joel songs, some Phil Collins songs, blah blah. Every Black Eyed Peas song I've ever heard is horrible. I know a lot of people like them (obviously) but I just think they fucking blow. I'm not trying to be cool (I really couldn't give a shit). That's just how I feel. Obviously they have some sort of talent, since they make a shitload of money (just like people on Jersey Shore make a lot of money, I suppose). Whole thing mystifies me.