Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Pop
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-05-2011, 06:23 AM   #141 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight View Post
I think there is a big difference between something written 40 years ago and something wrote 300 years ago, the whole world has changed in the way music is produced and consumed.

'Importance' is a very subjective term, popularity rises and falls with fashion. Mozart for example wasn't so popular in the second half of the 19th century. So I'd rather just base it on how much good music I think someone has done irrespective of fashion or anything else.
you have to remember most classical works have gone through a lot of permutations to make it more accessible, certainly Mozart didn't write his pieces for a "modern" orchestra, it would've probably been more raucous back then

and Stravinsky's Rite of Spring even incited a riot at its premiere, now that's rock n roll
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2011, 11:58 AM   #142 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 936
Default

The way the audience receives older works is definitely different now to how they would have 300 years ago and that is part of my point. And whether something is more conventional or more rebellious doesn't really matter to me, both can be great.
__________________
non-cliquey member of every music forum I participate on
starrynight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2011, 09:31 PM   #143 (permalink)
Groupie
 
majorguitarenvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: In the land of Ooo.
Posts: 12
Default 07/06/2011 10:31 pm

I personally think that most of Paul McCartney is all corn and cheese whiz.

Michael Jackson had some diversity in his lyrics, at least.
__________________
I believe in everything until it's disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it's in your mind. Who's to say dreams and nightmares aren't as real as the here and now? -John Lennon
majorguitarenvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2011, 07:45 AM   #144 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Necromancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by majorguitarenvy View Post
I personally think that most of Paul McCartney is all corn and cheese whiz.

Michael Jackson had some diversity in his lyrics, at least.
This gives reason to rectify that "Michael Jackson" is the king of pop. His music alone defines the best definition for (Pop Music) at its Best! Jackson "Is". The King Of Pop.

I thought that "Blood On The Dance floor", shows the sophistication his music had reached to a new level musically. Even the Video itself was very well Produced. Jacksons music at this time of "Blood On The Dance Floor" is the best of "Jackson" in my opinion.
Necromancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2011, 01:02 PM   #145 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 936
Default

It always seems a bit pretentious to me when people talk about the importance of lyrics, most people don't remember lyrics to songs much and they listen to songs for the music and not the lyrics anyway. And Michael Jackson was very retricted in the styles he used as well as the relatively short period over which he wrote most of his main music.
__________________
non-cliquey member of every music forum I participate on
starrynight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2011, 11:16 PM   #146 (permalink)
quarantined
 
Neapolitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,179
Default

^ Lyrics do matter and Paul McCartney was a better lyricist than Michael Jackson.

If there was no one to help either with creating a song, Paul's song would definitely be better than Jacko's. Michael could not create a song by himself anywhere near what they sound with Quincy Jones as a producer and a studio band. What instrument have you ever seen Jacko play on stage, even now and then Madge straps on a guitar on stage, so in that respect she has a leg up on Michael JAckson. Paul McCartney at least plays his own instruments, (bass, guitar, piano, drums) and because he was a musician writing & playing his own songs the creation process was his own more so than Jacko who relied on others. The point Michael Jackson isn't the musical genius people want to make him out to be.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by mord View Post
Actually, I like you a lot, Nea. That's why I treat you like ****. It's the MB way.

"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº?
“I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac.
“If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle.
"If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon
"I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards

Last edited by Neapolitan; 08-09-2011 at 11:27 PM.
Neapolitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2011, 11:36 PM   #147 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
^ Lyrics do matter and Paul McCartney was a better lyricist than Michael Jackson.

If there was no one to help either with creating a song, Paul's song would definitely be better than Jacko's. Michael could not create a song by himself anywhere near what they sound with Quincy Jones as a producer and a studio band. What instrument have you ever seen Jacko play on stage, even now and then Madge straps on a guitar on stage, so in that respect she has a leg up on Michael JAckson. Paul McCartney at least plays his own instruments, (bass, guitar, piano, drums) and because he was a musician writing & playing his own songs the creation process was his own more so than Jacko who relied on others. The point Michael Jackson isn't the musical genius people want to make him out to be.
the ex-Wacko Jacko was credited on "maracas" on an Off the Wall demo
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2011, 01:52 AM   #148 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 936
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
^ Lyrics do matter and Paul McCartney was a better lyricist than Michael Jackson.

If there was no one to help either with creating a song, Paul's song would definitely be better than Jacko's. Michael could not create a song by himself anywhere near what they sound with Quincy Jones as a producer and a studio band. What instrument have you ever seen Jacko play on stage, even now and then Madge straps on a guitar on stage, so in that respect she has a leg up on Michael JAckson. Paul McCartney at least plays his own instruments, (bass, guitar, piano, drums) and because he was a musician writing & playing his own songs the creation process was his own more so than Jacko who relied on others. The point Michael Jackson isn't the musical genius people want to make him out to be.
What I mean is that people can inflate the importance of lyrics, it's not the same as poetry (which I also like). The music is the main thing, as long as the lyrics don't interfere with the music by being really silly and bubblegum. Certainly for some to say Michael Jackson writes amazing lyrics is a gross exaggeration. Wanna be Startin Somethin for instance is pretty much nonsense lyrics.
__________________
non-cliquey member of every music forum I participate on
starrynight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2011, 12:31 AM   #149 (permalink)
\/ GOD
 
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nowhere...
Posts: 2,161
Default

I think Dr.Pepper is the king of pop.
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2011, 07:35 PM   #150 (permalink)
Groupie
 
majorguitarenvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: In the land of Ooo.
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight View Post
What I mean is that people can inflate the importance of lyrics, it's not the same as poetry (which I also like). The music is the main thing, as long as the lyrics don't interfere with the music by being really silly and bubblegum. Certainly for some to say Michael Jackson writes amazing lyrics is a gross exaggeration. Wanna be Startin Somethin for instance is pretty much nonsense lyrics.
Actually, I think the lyrics are what people remember most. Have you ever heard anybody sing the actual music? No, they sing and remember the lyrics to certain songs.
(And you're right, poetry is good, Walt Whitman is a favorite)

Wanna Be Startin' Somethin may not be a great song lyrically in your opinion, but songs like Black or White, Smooth Criminal, Man in the Mirror, Dirty Diana, and Billie Jean all have amazing lyrics.
Paul McCartney is responsible for the absolute corn and cheez-whiz that is Ebony and Ivory, most of the rest of Paul's solo work is very similar in its cheez-whiziness. Personally I think John was the better songwriter out of the two of them anyway.
__________________
I believe in everything until it's disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it's in your mind. Who's to say dreams and nightmares aren't as real as the here and now? -John Lennon
majorguitarenvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2021 Advameg, Inc.