Is music becoming more homogenized?

Machine · 10-13-2014, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carpe Mortem

Food for thought: I've gotten my cousin into a few non-mainstream bands that would never get radio time. She asks me to make cd's of these bands, but doesn't look into them or others like them herself, because she's technologically inept and not that into music. Me making a mix CD of random songs is fine for her because she doesn't think in terms of artists or albums she likes, she thinks in terms of songs.

For people who don't become obsessed with music like us here are, their listening doesn't extend much beyond what they hear on the radio and what other people show them. And yes, most of the radio music follows a specific formula that apparently suits such people just fine. So more similar music is made to appeal to that greater demographic, even though they don't necessarily love it, they're just cool with it. I think if bands not following the formula would get more airtime, they'd have just as many fans as those who do.

Yes but what is good about today's musical variety is that it is easier than ever to reach using outlets like YouTube, Spotify, Sound cloud, Band camp, and especially Pandora who has actually turned me on to a few artists over the years I've used it. For those willing to look a tiny bit music is less homogeneous than ever and there is so much fragmentation that the amount of unique and creative music is almost overwhelming. I think with radio almost dead as it is that will soon become the norm for bands not following the formula to get more attention.

Carpe Mortem · 10-13-2014, 07:05 PM

There's also people like her though... A lot of them... Who really only listen to music in their car or a particular radio station. Its a shame with all this great new technology, but hey, at least us weirdos benefit.

Necromancer · 10-13-2014, 07:39 PM

I would think bands are more independent and free to express themselves with creativity more so these days than prior decades before. I get the impression that a lot of the modern rock and metal orientated bands are trying to develop a recipe that leads their music to a more mainstream audience. I've noticed a number of different bands that are really pushing the envelope and currently experimenting with their music. ScarThe Martyr (Joey Jordison) is a band that is raw sounding and hasn't fully evolved their style, but at least its something other than listening to Five Finger Death Punch all the time.

Neapolitan · 10-13-2014, 07:39 PM

Is music becoming more homogenized?
Just ask Neutral Milk Hotel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necromancer

I would think the 80s contained a much larger variety a pop music to choose from than the mid 60s did.

Just saying.

I thought that the early 80s were more experimental and had a bigger variety. All the later 80s stuff kinda lean more to be pop. Hair Metal, R&B and Pop all had more and more of a big studio production sound as the 80s progress.

Trollheart · 10-14-2014, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladyislingering

basic ingredients of a modern pop song:

- party party party
- mention of "dance floor"
- distorted vocals
- loud electronic noises

You forgot that the word "Girl" (or occasionally "boy") must be mentioned at least twice in the song...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

I'm fine with gay people making music.

Just as long as they do it behind closed doors, eh?

Consenting adults may listen to anything they want to, I just don't want to see them doing it. I'm sure you think the same about my prog rock and AOR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carpe Mortem

Food for thought: I've gotten my cousin into a few non-mainstream bands that would never get radio time. She asks me to make cd's of these bands, but doesn't look into them or others like them herself, because she's technologically inept and not that into music. Me making a mix CD of random songs is fine for her because she doesn't think in terms of artists or albums she likes, she thinks in terms of songs.

For people who don't become obsessed with music like us here are, their listening doesn't extend much beyond what they hear on the radio and what other people show them. And yes, most of the radio music follows a specific formula that apparently suits such people just fine. So more similar music is made to appeal to that greater demographic, even though they don't necessarily love it, they're just cool with it. I think if bands not following the formula would get more airtime, they'd have just as many fans as those who do.

My sister is like that too. She'll love a song, ask about other songs by the band. You buy her the album and she'll just listen to the song she knows. The band get a new album out, she's not interested. A real hummingbird when it comes to music. You should have seen her with the music channels when she could see properly --- zap (two beats of a drum) zap (three notes on a guitar) zap (half a verse of a song) zap (ad break) zap (ad break) zap (dance music bass) zap zap zap. It often amazed me how she could make up her mind she didn't like a song in a second or two and move on. Used to make me dizzy! Talk about Name That Tune! (OFA)

Oriphiel · 10-14-2014, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

According to article:

"The Million Song Dataset uses algorithms to analyze pop songs recorded since 1955."

This says to me they're only talking about pop music—which of course includes pop rock, pop metal, pop hip hop, etc.—so only really a sliver of all music being produced. I also question their claim about the 60s having the most musical variety. The data they used only starts in 1955 so they're looking at a fairly small window of time.

Not really. The 1950s through to the 2000s are an incredibly broad amount of time, considering the musical significance. Millions of songs have been made in that amount of time, and thousands of names and trends have made their mark or faded away. I realize that it isn't exactly fair to leave out the older progenitive years of traditional, folk, and orchestral music, as well as the beginning years of recorded music, but it's not very fair to just brush the years they analyzed aside. The fact that the 1960s beat out the 50s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s is actually a very solid achievement, not because of the quantity of the competitors, but because of the quality.

Also, I apologize. I didn't realize the study focused on chart toppers and pop-style songs. So I suppose this is less a study of all music, and more of a study of popular music.

Thanks everyone for posting your thoughts!

Oriphiel · 10-14-2014, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necromancer

I would think bands are more independent and free to express themselves with creativity more so these days than prior decades before. I get the impression that a lot of the modern rock and metal orientated bands are trying to develop a recipe that leads their music to a more mainstream audience. I've noticed a number of different bands that are really pushing the envelope and currently experimenting with their music. ScarThe Martyr (Joey Jordison) is a band that is raw sounding and hasn't fully evolved their style, but at least its something other than listening to Five Finger Death Punch all the time.

I disagree. Listen to the underground bands of any generation, and you'll find as much innovation and love for music as any other point in time. Try listening to the "Pebbles" and "Girls in the Garage" compilations (A big collection of 1960s underground music forgotten by time), and you'll very quickly see that even back then people were tired of the same-old pop formula. People like to think they are more experimental and mindful than their ancestors were, but in the end, they were people just like us, singing about the same themes and trying to have as much fun as possible with the tools at their disposal.

Holerbot6000 · 10-14-2014, 05:56 AM

I think there was more variety in the 60's because you still had stuff like Jazz and Lounge and Exotica actually making the charts. People were just as likely to buy a Frank Sinatra single as they were a Beatles single. Roger Miller could dominate the pop charts with country novelty songs. A lot of musical styles, like garage rock, psychedlia, prog, etc. had their roots in the 60's. There were also huge folk and Latin movements, and this was all taking place in the popular arena - TV, Radio and the Pop Charts.

If you just look at what gets played on the radio these days, it's either Modern Country or Pop-Hop and that's pretty much it. It's all heavily manufactured so it's pretty bland and homogenous. There is a lot of really interesting stuff going on but it's all on the internet or independent, so you have to look for it. The average cow consumer doesn't get exposed to the variety of music that they did in the 1960's unless they make the effort to actively seek something out. And most people don't.

**Janszoon** · 10-14-2014, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oriphiel

Not really. The 1950s through to the 2000s are an incredibly broad amount of time, considering the musical significance. Millions of songs have been made in that amount of time, and thousands of names and trends have made their mark or faded away. I realize that it isn't exactly fair to leave out the older progenitive years of traditional, folk, and orchestral music, as well as the beginning years of recorded music, but it's not very fair to just brush the years they analyzed aside. The fact that the 1960s beat out the 50s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s is actually a very solid achievement, not because of the quantity of the competitors, but because of the quality.

Also, I apologize. I didn't realize the study focused on chart toppers and pop-style songs. So I suppose this is less a study of all music, and more of a study of popular music.

Thanks everyone for posting your thoughts!

It's really not. It's only 60 years. People have been making music for thousands of years so one 60 year span is just a blip. I understand their reason for doing it—it's easier to collect data on recent eras—but I don't think it tells us very much.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 10-14-2014, 06:25 AM

Does it say what chart it was taken from?
I would say the American chart is a lot more conservative than the UK chart for example

10-13-2014, 07:05 PM	#22 (permalink)
Carpe Mortem Crusher of tiny Nords Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Ugly Bag of Mostly Water Posts: 1,363	There's also people like her though... A lot of them... Who really only listen to music in their car or a particular radio station. Its a shame with all this great new technology, but hey, at least us weirdos benefit. __________________ [SIG][/SIG] Mirth is King Be Loving & Open With My Emotions

10-14-2014, 06:25 AM	#30 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	Does it say what chart it was taken from? I would say the American chart is a lot more conservative than the UK chart for example __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

10-13-2014, 07:39 PM	#23 (permalink)
Necromancer Divination Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,655	I would think bands are more independent and free to express themselves with creativity more so these days than prior decades before. I get the impression that a lot of the modern rock and metal orientated bands are trying to develop a recipe that leads their music to a more mainstream audience. I've noticed a number of different bands that are really pushing the envelope and currently experimenting with their music. ScarThe Martyr (Joey Jordison) is a band that is raw sounding and hasn't fully evolved their style, but at least its something other than listening to Five Finger Death Punch all the time.

10-14-2014, 05:56 AM	#28 (permalink)
Holerbot6000 Music Mutant Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: near a record store Posts: 327	I think there was more variety in the 60's because you still had stuff like Jazz and Lounge and Exotica actually making the charts. People were just as likely to buy a Frank Sinatra single as they were a Beatles single. Roger Miller could dominate the pop charts with country novelty songs. A lot of musical styles, like garage rock, psychedlia, prog, etc. had their roots in the 60's. There were also huge folk and Latin movements, and this was all taking place in the popular arena - TV, Radio and the Pop Charts. If you just look at what gets played on the radio these days, it's either Modern Country or Pop-Hop and that's pretty much it. It's all heavily manufactured so it's pretty bland and homogenous. There is a lot of really interesting stuff going on but it's all on the internet or independent, so you have to look for it. The average cow consumer doesn't get exposed to the variety of music that they did in the 1960's unless they make the effort to actively seek something out. And most people don't.