90s "pop" music |
Post Reply | Page <12345> |
Author | |||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The video itself is rather pedestrian.
It's categorised at rateyourmusic as "Chamber Pop, Twee Pop, Indie Pop, Chamber Folk" which sounds just my thing (twee pop is often not really twee). It's also very popular and highly rated at that site. I've come across the name before, and I'm sure I've heard music. If You're Feeling Sinister is the highest rated album there. Wait, what am I talking about? I was listening to music from Tiger Milk the other day. It probably came up in youtube as I was listening to related music. Yes, methinks when I was listening to The Cardigans on youtube it came up on the playlist. Great stuff, thanks. Edited by Logan - April 19 2020 at 14:07 |
|||
Tom Ozric
Prog Reviewer Joined: September 03 2005 Location: Olympus Mons Status: Offline Points: 15921 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
Belle and Sebastian anyone ??
|
|||
Cristi
Special Collaborator Crossover / Prog Metal Teams Joined: July 27 2006 Location: wonderland Status: Offline Points: 43855 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I remember Massive Attack's Teardrop video being omnipresent for a while, I liked the song (I have the album), but did not like the video at all.
|
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
^ I love that. Interestingly, I almost certainly would have posted that myself by tomorrow.
|
|||
Cristi
Special Collaborator Crossover / Prog Metal Teams Joined: July 27 2006 Location: wonderland Status: Offline Points: 43855 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
I've always liked this song, it was on all mainstream music channels, back in the day, so i guess it's pop music.
|
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Another favourite of a certain ilk from the time (Britpop, art rock, chamber pop). Thought I posted this already, but I don\t see it (mind you, I have been awake for more than 48 hours).
It's from Pulp's This is Hardcore from 1998. |
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
My kids have mentioned her. I checked her out, it's good and I get what you're saying. Would also fit art pop.
Oddly enough I listened to some of that album before, "A Storm in Heaven" and didn't do much for me, but now it is. Very good stuff. My mind must have been elsewhere at the time,or really distracted by other things. Listening to the whole album now. Thanks. |
|||
Icarium
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34055 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
the Verves first album "A Storm in Heaven" is abpretty rare treat in sound exploration, with exploration of soundscapes, a Velvet Underground/Krautrock/Floydian feel. Made before post rock were a thing, it incorpirate early post-rock sounds. Oppestitr to Talk Talk and Radiohead they become less experimental on later albums.
Edited by Icarium - April 19 2020 at 03:15 |
|||
|
|||
Icarium
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34055 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
Billy Eilish is labeld Avant pop on Wikipedia, and listening to her debute, i can sort of see it. No clear meter and a floating and unusual in the use of rythmic instruments
|
|||
|
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
So, following past discussion, I will attempt to define pop music in various ways (hadn't put enough effort into that before) since I don't hold to any one definition and to me it is a very nebulous thing. It can mean different things. Note: I am no musicologist and am hardly an authority on the matter, but that never stops me from having opinions and trying. I have done research into this, not as deeply as I would have liked, and shared related thoughts and inferences, plus some "unfunny humour" as I am wont to do (now there's an oxmoron, but then I am something of an oxy moron, oxy meaning sharp, and a moron being dull-witted, which presents its own oxymoronic qualities)
First off, I wrote that this is about pop genres and poppy music, so I should define poppy. Poppy: a flower, that thing worn on Remembrance Day that may poke you with that needle if you're not careful, or having pop-like qualities (GED - Greg's Egregious Dictionary) Poppy, poppish, popesque, or popsiquescent if one prefers, or even popalicious. Clearly to understand the notion of poppy, one must understand conceptions of pop music. There is overlap here: 1. Any music that is popular at a given time and has popular appeal (antonym: unpopular music). Mainstream music.* * Note that some art pop artists, progressive pop artists, experimental pop artists,or avant pop artists (all can be conflated) sought to deconstruct pop music, to marry the popular with the esoteric, to elevate pop from its lowly roots to a serious art-form, or to create a dialectic between the low art and high art, a sort of conversation and synthesis of two worlds. Some of it is a celebration of the low, some of it is a commentary on the low arts and popular culture. Some is very conceptual. Some artists tried to buck the trends, played with genre bending, form and structure, and even set itself up against the mainstream and the industrial nature of pop manufacture, one might say Pop in Oppsition (PIO/ Avant Pop). Some pop music is more complex than others. There is music deemed pop that not only is not commercially successful but has limited commercial appeal. I will discuss some of these pop sub categories after this list, and talk more about that so-called pop music that might be seen as antithetical to pop. 2. Any music that is simple, has a strong beat, is catchy and is easy for the plebs to digest (antonyms: academic music, esoteric music). 3. Music that is designed to be quickly consumed, shallow, the fast food of music, and is ideal for certain radio formats (antonym: radio unfriendly deep gourmet but indigestible music).* *Note: some pop is much more timeless, I'd say, than others, and can be deeply emotionally resonant and is more likely to be returned to again and again, and has achieved a classic status (others a cult status). 4. All music that has had popular appeal, including rock, punk, folk music, crooner music, jazzy music, New Wave, BootyWave etc. (antonym: non-popular unappealing music such as Hairy Booty Puddle). 5. Music distinct from rock and jazz that has a softer quality, is catchy and usually follows the verse, chorus, bridge structure (antonym: loud 'n heavy duty jazzcore brutal metal). 6. A modern music phenomenon with verse, chorus structure designed for the charts that is simple and included things such as soul and types of R&B (antonym: stone age rock on skull bonking, although that could provide the beat, hmm...). 7. Any music which is easily accessible to the listener (antonym: music that has been safely locked away). 8: To quote from ExittheLemming "short(er) musical forms* accessible by the widest possible audience with verse/chorus and middle eight structures, repeated 'hooks' at climactic points, consistent cyclic rhythms, craftsmanship rather than artistry, simple lyrical themes..." (antonym: EntertheLemming). 9. Justin Bieber's Baby, Baby, Baby Ooh" and that kind of crap. (antonym: Justin Bieber and that kind of good). 10. A diverse set of styles that fall under a pop banner, this includes art pop, sophisto pop, avant pop, chamber pop, baroque pop, lounge pop, jazz pop, pop-rock, pop-punk, bubbblesgum pop, psychedelic pop, pop electronica, experimental pop, sunshine pop, Arabic pop, K-pop, J-pop, Britpop, Raga pop, progressive pop, singer-songwriter and many, many more (antonym: a non-diverse,non-set of non-styles that fall under a non-pop banner). 11. All of the above and more (antonym: none of the above and less). What these subcategories are thought to have in common is that they all draw on types of popular music and, generally, have accessible qualities . Some will hybridise with other genres, but still have a pop feel or keep popular music components, but the structure may be changed and experimented with. Take Avant Pop and Experimental Pop for instance: Avant Pop is considered to be music that is forward-thinking, innovative, and experimental. It is said to balance an avant garde approach or avant garde approaches with stylistic elements from popular music. It may hybridise avant garde and academic music styles with popular music styles. Commonly it can still be catchy while being different. Bands like Kraftwerk, Can, and Tangerine Dream have all been linked to avant pop, as have bands/artists such as Henry Cow, Slapp Happy, After Dinner, Electric Storm, and Laurie Anderson. So have Scott Walker, David Sylvian, Kate Bush, Nico, and Bjork. The Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" is considered an example of avant pop for how it incorporated musique concrete techniques, Indian elements, and avant garde techniques into a pop composition. Art Pop is loosely defined,and can include a huge amount of music deemed artistic. It overlaps with avant pop and various other classifications. It has been defined as any pop style that deliberately aspires to the formal values of classical music and poetry. It is commonly linked to post-modernism and is said to be a breakdown of the boundaries between both high and low culture, and it plays with signs and signifiers, and so do memes (I still like LOL Cats).* Note: Art is sometimes considered in contrast to industry, so art pop may not be as commercial, but much that is considered art pop was very commercially successful. Like pop itself, art pop has various connotations and parameterisations (those parameters being amorphous). I try not to box myself (that might give me a black eye) into what are essentially fuzzy boxes (boxes with no clear edges or boundaries, some that I might call hyperboxes, like tesseracts, get it?). Sometimes art is just a term used by snobs to elevate music they like,I might say. Wait,I just did say that. Art can be in the eye of the beholder and beheraer, but in some contexts art is held to be in contrast to industry (I wrote a paper called the Art of the Industry for Sociology about film, and spent much time talking about so-called Art House film. Mostly it was about ideology). Art Pop can be subversive, deconstructing pop conventions, and melding with other forms of music (notably that which is considered to be high-brow art music, or esoterica). Progressive Pop is music that tries to break with the pop genre's standard formula. It can be likened to progressive rock that tried to break free of the constraints of the rock canon. Progressive pop may have extended instrumentation, break from traditional verse/chorus expectations bring in non-pop influences but still have an underlying pop aesthetic,or pop qualities. Unlike much pop, harmony, simple though pop harmonies ten to be, commonly is not its backing structure. It is generally more complex than other forms of pop, long songs are common, and some might call much of it progressive rock lite -- a crossover between the world of progressive rock and certain pop formats. Experimental Pop can be difficult to categorise within traditional musical boundaries. It commonly pushes elements of existing popular forms into other forms, or new forms, to create something new and different (a hybridisation of forms), It often will utilise experimental music techniques such as those of musique concrete or incorporate unusual sounds into the music such as the sound of a fat man eating pork chops, or a baby sliding around the floor in a bacon diaper. It can experiment with form, sound, and technique.* * I would place music such as Pink Floyd's "Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave and Grooving with a Pict" under this label. Some pop can and will play with form a lot and draw on various genre inspirations while still having popular music qualities. Not all pop must be popular, some just draws on popular music styles, and can be musically related to pop genres. It can be sound, a structure, an approach, all three of those,and a measure of popularity. It can incorporate various styles,,and sometimes, I would say, you just have to experience it and related music. It can cover a huge amount of music. It is sometimes defined by what it is not, for instance, "It's not Academic Music", but it can aspire to academic music and draw on academic music. It is what it is, it is what it is not, and some might say that both statements can be true. It can be a very amorphous label that can mean different things to different people and mean different things at different times. Some might say, it's silly to deal with all these labels, and we should just be talking about "music". Some will not associate some music with pop that others label pop, to which I would then ask, "How then would you classify and describe the music?" "What sorts of music would you relate it to?" "What do you think influenced it?" With pop music having so many connotations, imagine how much music could be considered poppy/ poppish, popesque, popsiquescent? For the purposes of this topic, I would say if you would describe the music as poppy, or of a pop genre, then it fits. I wanted to focus on certain styles of music that get associated with pop, but defining that is very open to interpretation. This why I put pop in quotes in the title and spoke of the amorphous qualities of both pop as genre classifications and in regards to poppy music. Pop is a mainstream music classification, refers to popular music, and has genre implications. There are those that draw on generic pop and play with the conventions and will not have mainstream success, some will. Experimental pop can still be catchy and accessible. Much of my favourite pop is playful. Of course there are many other possible definitions I didn't add and there's much more to say. That said, I hope that clears things up a bit, or it may muddy things even more. Pop is like a box of chocolates, some is sickly sweet, some is bitter, and a lot might leave a bad taste in the mouth -- rather like soda pop. I would hate liver-flavored carbonated drinks. Pop is commonly catchy, but then so is the Corona Virus. I hear certain poppy music qualities that make me think pop when others might think, "That ain't what I call pop." I hold multiple conceptions of pop music, but pop to me is something of a feeling to the music, often that is associated with the singing, but some music I easily lump in under the pop umbrella that is completely instrumental. There are structural considerations and various associations to be made. I don't deeply intellectualise it (as may be all too apparent with this little essay). I associate it with other music that I think of as pop. It is a very associative process, and that's how I tend to think about music under the Prog Umbrella generally -- ProgUm and PopUm I coined such things as. Those catchy verses for me are often a sign, but there's more than that. It need not be simple, some pop music can be very emotionally resonant, it can be deep, much is hardly disposable and does stand the test of time and receives reputable critical acclaim, both at the time and decades later. Sometimes it's just plain fun for me, but some of it really does move me, and not just move my booty. Note: I have edited this to add more thoughts. Feel free to critique and add to it. I know it could be much better. I spent hours on it, and I hope it's somewhat worthy of comment and consideration. It would be improved with citations and quotes. I'll add it to the first post, since if those goes on many pages it may be more neglected. Many coming into topics also refer to the opening post to get a clearer picture of what a topic is about and this I would have liked to have prepared for my opening post to set the stage more and open up more conversation. Edited by Logan - April 19 2020 at 13:33 |
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
^ Fair enough, and I don't disagree. I addressed that in some posts by talking about the verse, chorus, bridge structure, and a catchiness, I've also said that I'm no authority on this. Others also tried to address it. I think most people already know the form and qualities of stereotypical generic radio-friendly pop songs. I think I tend to be reasonably loquacious when it comes to such things. If Cristi asks in discussion, I'll go into more details, but it helps if I know where he is coming from, and his ideas too to springboard into my own ideas. If he's not interested in such discussion, that's fine too. I have already spent a long time on this, and had my particular idea that I was trying to express. Really, I had hoped for this to be about sharing music and commenting on each others choices, but, my fault, it took a turn down another rabbit hole that was not what I was trying to go for with this topic. I shouldn't lecture and I do apologise if I seemed patronising. I do enjoy friendly and good-humored discussion.
One thing I proffered early on was "The more variety of pop styles one hears and the more familiar with such labels, and pop subcategories, the more I expect that conception would grow." And I offered the rateyourmusic chart as one means to see how some others view pop. I've read up on pop music before, as I expect many of us have (at least looked up dictionary definitions), but actually listening to a variety of those styles can be very illuminating, and one can get a more intuitive feel for the diversity. We haven't achieved a consensus on what is Prog over years (to me it means more than one thing). All it boiled down to was me saying, I believe that Pop has different connotations, and I don't think Cristi is wrong just because others have a different conception (I hold various conceptions). To me as I said earlier, it is often a sound, which can be hard to describe, and I make that appraisal based on my associations. In another way, I consider all popular forms of music to be pop, and in another way... It doesn't matter as long as we can have some sense of where people are coming from, and in the process of discussion as you bounce ideas off of each other, that can be cemented all the more. That takes some effort, it often requires really "listening to" and engaging each other -- trying to understood where that person is trying to come from and sharing where you are coming from, as well as care in using inference. It takes an active interest in what they other is expressing, and some work sometimes to understand intent. Sometimes people lose the context and miss the intent, but often it requires clarification/more detail and examination,as well as re-thinking. It's a process If one is really interested, one will research and explore such things. And of course all who enter this thread can bring in their own ideas and approach. It's a group discussion, and hopefully we can all learn something from each other, or just share the music and let the music do the talking (for those who bother to listen). EDIT: Okay, I gave my "better defining" it a try, as I have been vague about pop, and have not gone into much specific when it comes to pop subgenres, and my sense of poppiness was not well conveyed. I'm not too happy with the results, but hopefully some others will find it useful or at least entertaining. I doubt it will make things I wrote earlier seem clearer or aid discussion much.
Icarium also mentioned Verve, particularly for the trippy, psychedelic early albums before Bitter Sweet Symphony came out. Of course I knew B.S.S (not to be confused with Brain Salad Surgery), but I'm not that familiar with Verve. It's one I have been checking out, I love Neo-Psychedelia, but it hasn't yet resonated with me. Maybe cause it feels kind of angsty in a particular young adult/ teenage way and the vocals feel a little forced to me. Not that this topic is supposed about just what I like. Gonna try some more Verve later. I bet a great many here would groan at the loungey music I'm often posting here, Others I like: (a strong favourite of mine, yet another of a certain loungey Indietronica ilk) Edited by Logan - April 19 2020 at 03:50 |
|||
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
I would be better able to follow your line of reasoning if you
offered examples of what you consider some of the characteristics inside the music that could be indicative of Pop e.g.
short(er) musical forms* accessible by the widest possible audience
with verse/chorus and middle eight structures, repeated 'hooks' at
climactic points, consistent cyclic rhythms, craftsmanship rather than
artistry, simple lyrical themes etc Beyond some of those aforementioned criteria, we're reduced to elements that exist outside the music e.g. it's ingested passively by consumers in malls, bars, abattoirs etc and the visual/video elements of Pop promotion
cannot be overstated by dint of the complete dearth of its drop dead
ugly practitioners. *As a historical aside, compliance with the
requirements of broadcast advertisers back in the day engendered the 2
to 3 minute track playing times. I think we both agree that innovation, originality and progression is possible within any genre (see the Beatles, Stones, Beach Boys, Who, Kinks, Barrett et al) and that truly great art does not rest upon inventing an entirely new one. The perception of Pop on a platform like PA strikes
me as a dichotomy arising from a corporately engineered 'branding'
stratagem that started maybe in the 1950's i.e. aesthetic prejudice
pandered to by class distinction marketing versus a global mono culture
initially foisted upon the rest of the world by the US and UK. Yes, I
agree that Pop is a nebulous and amorphous term but so is every term when perception is conflated with fact. Edited by ExittheLemming - April 30 2020 at 04:01 |
|||
Tom Ozric
Prog Reviewer Joined: September 03 2005 Location: Olympus Mons Status: Offline Points: 15921 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
|
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
^ Ugh, such long-winded flatulence again.
I forgot to mention two of my earliest exposure to The Cardigans (I really do love such stuff). I like lots of Indie Pop, and have long loved much loungey music: Lot of what I consider pop as a genre, or poppy, had to do with a certian catchiness (epsecially true of things like Bubblegum pop), but other cant be very different, and some haunting. This Anna Calvi Byrne, not from the 90s, from the last decade, I also consider to be pop (I love it): With Air, this was a bona fide pop hit: Edited by Logan - April 18 2020 at 18:49 |
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I guess I didn't address that in my follow-up post to Cristi, or related issues in my initial response to him well enough to follow. My point has been that these terms can have different usages. My point would be that Garth Brooks could have been considered an avant-country artist (I don't know his music well but that doesn't matter) if he was considered forward-thinking, innovative (my following experimental music sentence was also meant to be taken as referring back to that sentence) under that definition, which parallels what I've been trying to say about Pop music, that it can be defined in different ways. Pop can be a nebulous term, it can cover a huge amount of ground or relatively little depending upon the person/parameters, and just because I may use it one way (it doesn't only mean one thing to me), and use examples that he doesn't consider to be Pop, does not mean that his usage is necessarily wrong. The usage and parameters can vary. I definitely was not implying that pop music does NOT denote popular, I was trying to say across posts that it can have different usages. That extrapolation is antithetical to the points I've been trying to make, and would be the wrong inference taking into account what I have written across various posts in this topic.
I recognise that all of the music in PA could be considered pop (I brought that up on the last page as I recall). It's not how I;m using it for the purposes of this topic, but I did tell others to define and parameterise it as they see fit. So what I've been trying to tell Christi from when he first brought up "Some of the choices here I do not see as "pop". Therefore I officially declare I do not know what pop music is" (I know he was kind of joking) is that Pop can mean different things and have different parameters. In my initial post, this is what I was addressing with, "So what is some pop or poppy music that you like from the 90s? Of course that can cover a huge amount of music. Use your own discretion to define what are amorphous parameters when it comes to pop genres and poppy music." Avant Pop is a label that is used by some whether one likes it or not, I listed many in an earlier post. "There are many subgenres of pop, which includes art pop, jazz pop, pop-rock, avant pop, baroque pop, pop-pop, chamber pop, soda pop, chanson, Arabic pop, adult contemporary, pimple pop, bubblegum pop, folk pop, pop punk, jangle [pop], dadaist pop, neoclassical pop, gangster pop, singer-songwriter pop, lounge pop, synthpop, dream pop, vanilla pop, lollipop", some more serious than others, just seeing if close attention was being paid to my response, or actually I was just being absurd with a few of those. By the way, Avant-Pop is not a oxymoron as I see it or use the term, because the two are not opposites, unlike, say, regressive progressive rock or unpopular popular music. And I am confident that it does not necessarily present a contradiction. I expect I may have muddied the waters more. Sorry for the repetition. I have been doing too much of the talking in that exchange (I lack concision), which doesn't make for the best of discussions. I should have asked some questions back, like "How do you define and categories Pop?" But I tend to follow at least half of the Prisoner axiom "Questions are a burden to others." I'd make a terrible interviewer, but I don't like interviews, I like dialectic. Edited by Logan - April 18 2020 at 10:43 |
|||
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
(I think) I'm in broad general agreement with you but I'm unsure if I completely understand your argument. Reductio ad absurdum: By your criteria Garth Brooks would have been considered avant-country in 1989 and by extrapolation, the Pop in Pop music does NOT denote popular but is merely a rather lazy shorthand for music that 'falls within familiar stylistic tropes and structures' I guess this is where my confusion (and that expressed by Cristi) arises as I consider practically every artist listed on PA as Pop music, (which does not diminish their artistic worth in the slightest) albeit they are made to inhabit different filing cabinets at Bean Counter Central HQ
|
|||
Icarium
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34055 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Pop music is anything and the variations of music that came out of Irvin Berlin / Cole Porter / George Gershwin and any bumps, scratches, stylings, drugs, antidotes and streams of thougths and ideals they have gatherd under their nails. If i got to summerise a theory
Some of it inspired by Howard Goodals documentaries. Edited by Icarium - April 18 2020 at 09:03 |
|||
|
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Sure, or experimental progressive art pop, and I count Slapp Happy and Art Bears as having made Avant Pop music, and a a fair amount of Japanese music such as After Dinner, music by Charming Hostess. |
|||
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Online Points: 36049 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I was trying to say before that pop can mean more than one thing. There is more than one definition and it can be a very nebulous concept. There is not necessarily any difference between mainstream music and pop. The two can be synonymous. It depends on the usage. Mainstream is easier to define, since pop need not necessarily be mainstream but that which is more "out there" for instance adopts and adapts mainstream qualities in the music. I find certain qualities, such as verse/chorus structure in pop that I might not find in all mainstream music. For the way I think of it, not all pop is mainstream and not all mainstream music is pop, but there are different working definitions and parameters. You're not wrong to use the term in one way, just recognise that it can be used in different ways. Terms often have multiple definitions, and some can be very amorphous indeed. EDIT: By the way, some define pop specifically by the structure of the songs: the verse, chorus, bridge structure and so will ague that, say, a particular long Prog song is really just an extended pop song because it follows that structure. What is pop to me is less rigorous, or systematic/ structured, and involves my pop music associations to a considerable extent (my sense of it is at least not so conscious and rigid as with others). But what sounds like pop to me, you might not associate with pop/ popular music. Still thinking about this: I would suggest instead of thinking, "I don't know what pop music is anymore", think "I still know what pop has meant to me and it can continue to mean that, but I see that it can mean more than that to others even if I don't get understand it yet, or I never will". With an open-mind and exposure, and bit of research, you might get to understand how diverse it can be. You might stick with your parameters and that's fine. Like I said, it doesn't make you wrong, you are just working with different parameters. Being here here should hopefully be a learning experience and a means to grow for all of us. That's been one of the joys of being at this site, and having debates and discussions, it's opened up my world a bit and made me re-evaluate what I thought I knew. There is huge amount that I don't know about pop music or music generally, and I don't claim to be an authority on the subject. I've formulated ideas over many years, but those ideas are always subject to change when presented with new evidence or a compelling argument.... I'm no absolutist, and I am ultimately agnostic when it comes to all things. Edited by Logan - April 18 2020 at 09:05 |
|||
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
What do we call something like Kate Bush's Sat On Your Lap? Avant-pop seems like a good slot. Much of that album (The Dreaming) as such.
|
|||
Post Reply | Page <12345> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |