Is Pop Music Innovative Or Good Anymore?

i think the question is phrased badly the real question should be: is the innovative approach to music can be popular? and answer for that question is big, tasteless "no" the innovative musical approach and pop sesibilities has merged somehow from the late 60's to late 70's there was a big experimentalism floating around, every band was eager to experiment with new musical forms, techniques, electronics and other stuff actually that was the road that popular music take and i mean i'm not offering some deterministic approach here but that was something that happened in the way of improvement of the music(improvement can be good or bad in this case that "improvement" will cause the worst kind of disfiguration of music...ever!!) i think that peter gabriel recalls that era(in some documentary i think) as a "age of childhood" and that was a very right definition of what was going on around that time it was pure experiment and discovery for both fans and the musicians that was the main reason why that experimentalism finds mainstream attention but right now music endustry having a different kind of direction and changing as well so no we can't expect innovative works from popular music but it can produce some good music there is no doubt about that.

ps. i use the term "pop" not as a singular musical genre but as a whole idea of mainstream music both rock and the all the other crappy music out there.


Edited by ourlawisliberty - February 06 2011 at 00:22

Hmmm. My memory isn't so great then. The only thing I remember spoken is the Dune reference. 

Dean wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: Here's a related question.  When's the last time an instrumental became a pop hit?  Because believe it or not it used to happen before prog. Off the top of my head - William Orbit - Barber's Adagio For Strings, though I'm sure one of those tv themes for the Olympics or The World Cup (rugby, football or cricket) has charted in the recent past.

rogerthat wrote: boo boo wrote:   Cooper, Bowie and Bjork all had eccentric music to back up their eccentric appearance. Gaga doesn't. And so what if she doesn't, provided it works as good pop music? I am not familiar with LG, mind, and what I heard I put away as pretty much regular pop and nothing worth looking at more closely but so what if her music isn't eccentric?  By no means is it easy to write a simple but appealing pop song and, of all people, some prog musicians who tried and burnt their fingers in the 80s should know.

Edited by boo boo - February 05 2011 at 07:59

Slartibartfast wrote: Here's a related question.  When's the last time an instrumental became a pop hit?  Because believe it or not it used to happen before prog.

Off the top of my head - William Orbit - Barber's Adagio For Strings, though I'm sure one of those tv themes for the Olympics or The World Cup (rugby, football or cricket) has charted in the recent past.

Here's a related question.  When's the last time an instrumental became a pop hit?  Because believe it or not it used to happen before prog.

The Beach Boys using a Theremin comes to mind as innovative.  (If you don't know what song, don't make me have to smack you upside the head. )

Today there's that annoying vocal altering thingamobob that everyone seems to be using.


Edited by Slartibartfast - February 04 2011 at 21:27

Just cuz her music attracts more people doesnt mean it IS better, of course it's subjective and if you think Gaga is better that's fine, it's your right just as much as it's my right to think you are totally insane for having such an opinion.

And by the way since when did ALICE COOPER become the standard-bearer for quality music? Last time I heard his songs are rather simple rock songs, no more complex in harmony or structure than Lady Gaga's song, but with much, much poorer melody.  You know how many atrocious performers have tried to gain the spotlight with their strange antics? Many. How many succeed? Only a few. Usually, their music, simple and pop as it might be, catches the ear of quite a lot of people.

The T wrote: boo boo wrote: The T wrote: ^That's all I've been trying to say and all Overmatik has trying to deny, yet you jumped ready to fight because Alice Cooper and LAdy Gaga were compared...    I jumped ready to fight because of the completely ignorant way you've written off a 40 year music career (one that's more diverse than people think) based on a few hit singles.   Just to defend Lady goddamn Gaga. No, you jumped because you like Alice Cooper. Would you have jumped so quickly if someone would've written off another 40 year music career like, say, Elton John's (I'm not sure you dislike his music anyway... pick any 40-year career musician you don't like and see).  And yes, I'm not the biggest Alice Cooper expert ever. And yes, what I heard from his music is quite irrelevant to me.  And yes, I would defend even Justin f**king Bieber if the arguments were so poor as those used to talk about Gaga, West, or mainstream music in general.

harmonium.ro wrote: The T wrote: boo boo wrote: The T wrote: ^That's all I've been trying to say and all Overmatik has trying to deny, yet you jumped ready to fight because Alice Cooper and LAdy Gaga were compared...    I jumped ready to fight because of the completely ignorant way you've written off a 40 year music career (one that's more diverse than people think) based on a few hit singles.   Just to defend Lady goddamn Gaga. No, you jumped because you like Alice Cooper. Would you have jumped so quickly if someone would've written off another 40 year music career like, say, Elton John's (I'm not sure you dislike his music anyway... pick any 40-year career musician you don't like and see).  And yes, I'm not the biggest Alice Cooper expert ever. And yes, what I heard from his music is quite irrelevant to me.  And yes, I would defend even Justin f**king Bieber if the arguments were so poor as those used to talk about Gaga, West, or mainstream music in general.  Except for Dowsing Anemone