How to Create a Pop Star

dtguitarfan wrote: rogerthat wrote: If you have a very specific notion of pop in making your points, it is better to clarify that at the outset than to assume that this is some universal notion which everybody ought to agree with.  And even then, you are simply generalizing at your peril.   Didn't you have some serious objections to people saying prog metal bands are same sounding?  So how does this work? The difference lies in the fact that I can play a Rhianna song and say "this is a four chord song", and then I can play a Lady  Gaga song and say "this is ALSO a four chord song - same progression", and then I can play a Katy Perry song and say "hey, this is ALSO a four chord song with the same progression...and guess what, they're all in 4/4 time!"  There's a BIG difference in saying all pop music sounds the same and saying everything in other genres sound the same - you can actually back up the statement about pop with technical FACTS.

All four chord songs are not necessarily the same because they may involve different textures, both melodic as well as percussive.  If this were not the case, cover artists would be completely out of business and nobody would want to listen to a performance of a jazz standard. So, you are probably 'backing' up your statement with only one set of facts that you have selected, while ignoring others.  I Kissed A Girl does not sound like Rolling in the Deep, that's pretty obvious and doesn't need any investigation into the 'facts'. 

dtguitarfan wrote: And bringing in Beatles, and Stevie Wonder, etc., to try to argue that pop music has its merits - I asked my wife "do you consider the Beatles and Stevie Wonder pop music?"  She looked at me with a look that said it all.  Let me ask you something - when you turn on the radio to the local hits station in your town, do they play Stevie Wonder and the Beatles?  No.  What they play - THAT'S what I'm talking about.  I'm sorry, but Beatles and Stevie Wonder are NOT pop.  They may be POPULAR, but they're not Pop.  Neither is Dave Matthews Band.  Or Eric Clapton.  There is a distinction between popular and pop.

Yes, I suppose pop is what derisive elitists would like to label popular music as.   So there must be a distinction.  Right, if you have a problem with labelling Beatles as pop, how about Toto?  Made up of sessions guns and wrote some interesting songs like Africa which became huge hits.  

If you have a very specific notion of pop in making your points, it is better to clarify that at the outset than to assume that this is some universal notion which everybody ought to agree with.  And even then, you are simply generalizing at your peril.   Didn't you have some serious objections to people saying prog metal bands are same sounding?  So how does this work?

EDIT: And by the by, whether I like them at all or not is beside the point but if somebody played songs by Adele, Lady Gaga, Norah Jones, Michael Buble and Rihanna back to back, I would not be able to say it is all the same.  It would only be to the extent that they are all pop in some or the other way, which is like saying one Oscar Peterson performance sounds at least somewhat like the next.  So it is not necessarily true that all contemporary pop is the same; it depends on what artists inform your perceptions.


Edited by rogerthat - June 02 2012 at 06:18

rogerthat wrote: darkshade wrote: I believe the topic of this thread is "How To Create A (late-2000s/early2010s) Pop Star Like Norah Jones?  She's not half bad either.  Pretty good, I should say, though I am not terribly fond of her work.

Edited by Dayvenkirq - June 02 2012 at 02:01

dtguitarfan wrote: Calling a pop musician an artist is like calling someone who can make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich a chef.

If you think that of all pop musicians then your statement is transparently lazy and naive bollocks.

A work of art is the unique result of a unique temperament (Oscar Wilde)

I suspect that in your cramped and humid musical cosmology, Pop can be defined in the same way as say, Satanism e.g. it's everybody else's religion apart from your own?


Edited by ExittheLemming - June 02 2012 at 00:03

dtguitarfan wrote: Ugh. Just go watch "Before the Music Dies" - it makes my point much better than I ever could. It's about companies, headed by people who know nothing about music telling artists what to do and grabbing pretty people who have absolutely no musical talent and using tricks to make them seem better than they are. It's about focus groups listening to ten second clips and these results being used to determine if music should be invested in.

I would say that stuff like that has probably been going on for a long time now, it's just that the quality of the music has dropped considerably in the past 12 years; and especially in the last 5 years.

rogerthat wrote: darkshade wrote: rogerthat wrote: darkshade wrote: I believe the topic of this thread is "How To Create A (late-2000s/early2010s) Pop Star Like Norah Jones?  She's not half bad either.  Pretty good, I should say, though I am not terribly fond of her work.  No, she's been around for a while now. We're talking about pop artists like Lady Gaga, Justin Beaver, Kelly Clarkson, Carrie Underwood, Rebecca Black, etc... The ones who can't really sing and rely on auto-tune to the max. Don't know about the Beavers and the Rebeccas but Lady Gaga can sing, irrespective of whether she uses auto tune (which Wilson does as well, anyway).  And what about Adele?

I know Gaga can sing, she just got lumped in with the other sorry sacks because that's who we're talking about. I already expressed my views on Lady Gaga.

Plenty of people use auto-tune for what it's supposed to be used for. These pop artists use it for the sound it makes when you can't hit a note consistently (also known as the T-Pain Sound)

darkshade wrote: rogerthat wrote: darkshade wrote: I believe the topic of this thread is "How To Create A (late-2000s/early2010s) Pop Star Like Norah Jones?  She's not half bad either.  Pretty good, I should say, though I am not terribly fond of her work.  No, she's been around for a while now. We're talking about pop artists like Lady Gaga, Justin Beaver, Kelly Clarkson, Carrie Underwood, Rebecca Black, etc... The ones who can't really sing and rely on auto-tune to the max.

Don't know about the Beavers and the Rebeccas but Lady Gaga can sing, irrespective of whether she uses auto tune (which Wilson does as well, anyway).  And what about Adele?

darkshade wrote: I believe the topic of this thread is "How To Create A (late-2000s/early2010s) Pop Star

Like Norah Jones?  She's not half bad either.  Pretty good, I should say, though I am not terribly fond of her work. 

Atavachron wrote: And what of Tom Petty, Paul Simon, Stevie Nicks, George Harrison, Prince, Tori Amos, Seal?   Whether you like them or not, all high quality Pop artists.

My point exactly.   I would not like to posit that calling someone an artist is ridiculous only based on their genre.  Or even if they are mediocre (in my opinion).  Any form of self expression in any possible medium, like music, cinema, literature, painting, is art.  That is all.

darkshade wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: darkshade wrote: Stevie Wonder is NOT a pop star in the sense that is being referred to in this thread. He is an R&B and funk musician who has had great success despite his unfortunate case of being born blind.By the way, I listened to that album last night. Great stuff, I love "Golden Lady". THANK YOU.  Someone who knows what I'm talking about. We're talking about the Lady Googoo's, Rebecca Black's, and Justin Beaver's of the world, yes?I know Lady Gaga can play piano and write music, but it doesn't seem that she cares about any of that and is just about her image and doing one ridiculous thing after another.

Yes, basically. Kesha and Black Eyed Peas are also good examples (I can feel IQ points dropping when they come on in a public place).