Sorry I'm late, nasty tiffy with the interwebs.
-
skizzie72-1 — 12 years ago(August 06, 2013 08:11 PM)
really? she "represents everything wrong with music" ? cmon..justin beiber and whoever else with a criminal record that isn an artist takes that crown
IM RUNNIN THIS MONKEY FARM NOW FRANKENSTEIN! AND I WANNA KNOW WHAT THE F#@$ UR DOIN WITH MY TIME! -
art-snob — 12 years ago(December 15, 2013 07:17 AM)
I'm glad to see this topic caught on and created a debate. Anyway, yes, I really do believe that she represents everything wrong in music because she paved the way as the poster child of AI for other pop singers to find an easy route into the music industry through a public singing competition. Again, all of her songs have the same formulaic, over-produced sound which is why, to me, they lack originality and character. I'm not bashing pop music in general, just her songs which more or less sound the same, similarly to Swift, Perry, Bieber, Gomez, etc. I think even Britney Spears, who came on the scene a few years before AI, had at least a modicum of originality and creativity in her songs. It just seems to me that KC set in motion a synthetic formula for pop music that has taken on new dimensions. Also, let me be clear, I am not saying that Clarkson is talentless! She just hasn't used her talent for anything that sounds original and creative. To me, it seems to be the reason that most pop music today sounds exactly the same. It didn't used to be that way.
-
sfmar — 12 years ago(December 15, 2013 07:41 AM)
I'm not bashing pop music in general, just her songs which more or less sound the same, similarly to Swift, Perry, Bieber, Gomez, etc.
A fair enough observation and certainly a valid one - but then why harp on Clarkson alone about it? I don't see your observations on the boards of the other artists you mentioned.
I am not saying that Clarkson is talentless! She just hasn't used her talent for anything that sounds original and creative.
Sadly, most "music" today is rigidly controlled by the money-men at the top who don't give a damn about creativity or quality - their Holy Grail is nothing other than the profits they can generate. Clarkson herself battled against Clive Davis when creating the "My December" album because she wanted more control - in that event I believe she behaved like a true artist. Again, your observation is a valid one, but again, why single out Clarkson alone as a target for your complaints?
Let's be honest, based on this board's usual content you had to know your posting would generate far more trouble than valid discussion. -
art-snob — 12 years ago(December 21, 2013 10:16 AM)
I've singled out KC because it seems to me that she set a new standard for synthetic, over-produced pop music that many others have followed since, whether they hit fame through AI or not. I'm not sure how else to explain it, but every song I hear from KC sounds like a formula that has been created by the industry execs to generate the greatest mass market appeal possible. The problem also isn't just with KC and the execs and producers that control her, it is also the dumbed down pop music mass audience today that thinks this is what real music is. It's similar to the audiences that see the same formulaic, clichd comedies that come out year after year.
Anyway, it's refreshing to see a new young artist such as Lorde come on the scene and have success. Maybe she will start a pop music trend back in the right direction. -
sfmar — 12 years ago(December 22, 2013 12:43 AM)
Fair enough - I see your point and I respect your opinion although I do disagree with you, at least in part.
The entertainment industry (music, TV, film) has indeed been on a downward slide for quite some time now and originality has all but disappeared.
In terms of music, I think this trend began far earlier than you believe. While it was a unique and fresh medium at the time, MTV, in my opinion, started out well, but gradually the flashy videos and sexuality of the performers became more important than the music itself. Needless to say the quality of the material suffered as the buying public became more infatuated with what a hunk or a fox the performer was instead of how talented they were (or weren't).
In that regard I don't see American Idol (and Clarkson) creating this trend. To me it's just the opposite - the trend was already well established and American Idol was created in response to it.
Your other observations are right on the mark. Artists today have less and less control over how their material is presented and produced by the industry. But on the other hand even the Beatles were at times frustrated when studio engineers remixed their music. True, this trend is far more evident today, but it was always there.
Clarkson has a good voice and genuine talent. Could she use it better? Perhaps. But while she may be caught up in music's current lack of creativity she certainly didn't initiate or establish it. -
-
art-snob — 12 years ago(December 25, 2013 10:19 AM)
Sorry if I offended you EdZeppelin. I was simply sharing my opinion b68on how Kelly Clarkson encompasses the sad state that popular music is in today. I wanted to come back to this thread that spawned a discussion over many months to reiterate my points.
If you are a fan of KC (or perhaps work for her label) then by all means enjoy her stale, formulaic music and don't listen to the opinions of those that actually care about any of the qualities that makes music interesting and original. I can understand if it bothers you that others insult something you enjoy. I just can't understand how someone can enjoy a catalog of songs from the same artist that re-use the same formula over and over, but I guess that's the difference between us. It just makes me sad that you and so many others are willing to accept the sad state of music that popular music is in today, rehashing the same meaningless, banal gibberish-laced lyrics and the same simple chord progressions and melodies that I would expect most five year-olds would become bored with in a short matter of time.
Anyway, I'm not sure who is the troll here since all you did on your post is rant about my posts with no specific reason except to sound like a whiny, belligerent jerk. You didn't express any opinion about the topic whatsoever so what is your point of posting here? If you don't like the topic then butt out.. troll! -
lizcarlo87 — 12 years ago(February 27, 2014 06:46 PM)
Anyway, it's refreshing to see a new young artist such as Lorde come on the scene and have success. Maybe she will start a pop music trend back in the right direction.
To me Lorde is not all that different from mainstream. When I think of someone with different sounds it more like Imegan Heap, Lykke Li, Lia ices or Fiona Apple new cd.
Here are there songs if you don't know their music.
Imegan Heap:
Lykke Li :
Lia ices:
Fiona Apple new cd: -
Price_RZ — 12 years ago(February 28, 2014 08:30 PM)
Lorde isn't all that bad but she isn't unique so I am in agreement there.
I saw a review comparing her to Nirvana as she was leading a new way that is an "alternative" to the common airplay. The irony of that is, Nirvana wasn't unique as there were many other doing alternative or grunge (depending on how you want to think about it) at the time. It was more of who from Seattle broke on a national level first or that has always been my take.
What if Alice in Chain's Man in the Box had hit first?
Some people count sheep. Doesn't work with Bryan, just gets him excited ~ John-Redcorn