Re: Does contemporary popular/mainstream music mostly suck?
Originally Posted by dybbuk
I My argument was always just against pop snobbery that places artists like say Led Zeppelin or Joy Division at or near the pinnacle of music and innovation, and trashes "mainstream pop" as derivative and simple.
Again - your focus on "simplistic" shows that you have a very limited view. Do you really think that something can't be both simple and innovative or that complexity is measure of quality? You express your opinions well but they're all snug in a tiny and very shaky box. In fact, the very idea that judging the merits of various eras of popular music is "snobbery" is inane. About the only poster I've read in this thread who seems to be awash in snobbery is you. For instance implying that you're musically well-educated and so your limited assessment somehow holds more water than that of others.
Once again - there is a lot of popular music (going by your
sweeping definition) that is more complex than a lot of what is now called classical music. But that parameter is irrelevant to whether or not it's more innovative and/or richer in timbre and feeling.
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects." - Albert Einstein
Last edited by pov : Aug 15th, 2012 at 08:11 PM.