Quote:
Originally Posted by EazyMac
I guess you're at least 40, maybe 50....
|
This joke better not indicate the concept of an "You just don't like pop music because you're behind the times" attitude. As somebody in his mid-twenties, I don't particularly take too kindly to the concept.
As for assuming that only popular acts are good... Well, you're either being a troll, or you're really naive. Popular acts get good by fitting into a specific mold created for them, and knowing not to deviate too much from it. The reason why they're disliked by a lot of people has nothing to do with anything apart from the fact they tend to rehash formula.
Not everyone on your list does, but there are a ton of music acts out there that are just as hard working, if not more, who sacrifice the popularity because they can explore artistic endeavors that may not be popular, but are a proper outlet for self expression, which is more important than popularity(anybody who wants to be an artist of ANY type should know this). Popularity just may, or may not be a side effect. If breaking the formula to be yourself costs you it, then at least you realize your priorities as an artists.
Besides, there's also an account that must be taken in that choice of style/instrument should be taken into consideration. You won't see a virtuoso trombonist reach the levels of popularity of the people you listed, even if he or she is a far superior songwriter.
Unless you're holding a guitar in your hand(and this is dying off), pulling off fancy vocal tricks, and dancing it doesn't mean two ****s to the top crust of modern pop music. You can do all those things, and still create good music. But, not all good music is created through such ventures.