People don't have a very sophisticated taste in music. Have u listened to Schubert? it pretty much blows anything out of the water. Even modern composers now a days are better then what Mozart and Beethoven ever were. Do any of you know any of their names? Like i said Its all up to taste. As for adele we have to acknowledge that it takes a special form of art for it to be appealing to the masses. This an art form within its self, and it deserves respect.

 

Why GOOD MUSIC isn't popular. The answer too this is, musician or
people who will take risk are not on top in the record companys, it's dj's. Here today,Gone tomorrow. Money Honey.

 

The human society today is built around egoism, lies, wars. The music business is worst than prostitution, because the guys who run the main business are selling tits, buts but certainly not music. Few years ago the famous pornstar little Lupe Fuentes become a DJ. First I laughed, but now she's the hottest tech house act in USA... This is really crazy, just watch the kids who go to see these acts!

 

I think its everything about individual taste. It happens with music, art, movies, colors, cars, women, men, whatever. Theres no good or bad when it comes to taste, sure, there will be things you hate and others you love, but that doesnt make them good or bad.

And im saying this being part of the minority who likes music most people often overlook.

 

MarianoNM, what you are saying is true, but when there is only PEPPER out there the young people today don't know the taste of
salt and pepper. This has killed good true music, not the COMPUTERS, but real music good music will return!!! With computers!

 

i think this beautiful woman said enough why good music in todays industry is behind the door!

 

I'm truly saddened to see the general populous thought of as idiots, unintelligent or uneducated. The fact is that that 'the people' have not been educated properly, have been herded, mind-manipulated by media and mis-informed by governments and institutions for a few centuries now. We should understand that it is not 'the peoples' fault. Yes we have all have free choice but very few of us have the will or confidence to dare to brreak away from the mainstream herd-mentality. The powers that be have had 'the people' inprisioned in a sinister, low intelligence, low self-esteem grip for a long time.Next time you think of accusing people of being idiots for liking mindless pop consider your accusations carefully. I'd like to think that we all have the potential and ability to appreciate good music, whether we have all had the opportunity to learn to recognise it is another matter entirely.

 

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart what a master. Not that the other weren't great, but wholly cow was he amazing at his age.

 

It's her voice. From what I understand which I can be wrong most pop tune are wrote by about 3 or 4 people and that is why they all sound the same.

 

Really a good video, but I knew this. It's hook , hook or no sell, and music is just not the same as it used to be.

 

Because music are emotions

To me this is best response that actually make make sense. Music started out of emotions in first place. That's why good easy listening tune will always beat technical mumbo jumbo, which may be good in it's own technical way, but lack and fall short to provoke emotions with it's tune character, rhythm or both. Classical music is not exception in any way. The most listenable pieces are those, that contain tune, which have the biggest potential to provoke emotions. And those tunes are not in any way the most technically advanced, but rather easy and effective, because that's how are our emotions, very simple by nature. Of course that doesn't mean those tunes are any easier to create, actually are harder than most technical pieces. To make hard art sounding easy, that is real art for me.

 

Last edited: Apr 9, 2016

I happen to have many friends that I can easily say are intelligent, yet they are into totally different styles of music than me.
In fact I don't know a single guy who likes a stylistically comparable combination of artists that I do.
I'm sure that what Thankful said about (musical) education plays a major role in developing your own musical taste - combined with countless situations in life that certainly influence just as much what you end up liking or not.

 

Basically, however, as my favorite songwriter (myself) put it in regard to this matter: "It's not enough to behold / you have to be told." From the earliest age, "we" are encouraged to adopt the tastes and sensibilities of those essential to our social survival ("adopt or die"). There is also the phenomenon whereby one gets used to, then learns to like, music by dint of repetition - as well as the "soundtrack to your life" thing, with a certain song or singer accompanying memories of a good time in one's life or some other significant nostalgia.

"It's not enough to behold / you have to be told" came to me from observing that people would hold in higher esteem artists about whom they've been preadvised as to the artist's significance (i.e., a "buzz" about them) than if they hadn't. I have seen people's attitudes change toward a musician after they've been informed of his associations with famous people or some hipster-cred qualifications. That quirky and talented but unassuming musician who lives a couple blocks from you is just "that guy," but to people hundreds of miles away, he's "that living legend" because of some mystique that's been generated in the underground. When NPR tries to seem hip by featuring him in a story, then you'lll be goosed into listening to - and "appreciating" - the music of "that guy" who lives a couple blocks from you but whose music had been difficult for you to "give feedback on" because it wasn't by, say, Lana Del Rey or Marilyn Manson.

A lot of those considered "greats" in popular music (to avoid contention, I won't name any names) owe their status to saturation in mediated culture, and to the myth-making publicity generated about them. There is one singer-songwriter who is considered the "greatest poet of his generation" or some such, but after my lifelong social programming finally wore off a few years ago, I realized that he'd always sucked, and if I were to hear him playing in a bar, I wouldn't find him worth staying for his whole set.

There is this filtration-sytem in the media, whereby the public feels musicians vetted in a process of official approval all the way to the top, and so the public accepts the shit that floats as "what's good." It's as simple as that, really.

(Adele is pretty good, but I'd rather hear a real Black woman sing.)

 

It's about maturity above anything else. The EDM and Pop that's on the radio is for the young population. It suits the nature of dancing, having youthful fun, and acting silly. When you speak of art.. a masterpiece that is worthy of a person holding still, focusing, and appreciating it is a theme suitable for a museum and not a night club where everyone is under 30. The younger audience has always been the predominant target of commercial media because they are more susceptible and overwhelmed by the ideology of fame. To patch in one's level of comprehension with the music they create or listen to doesn't hold well. If the kids want a cheese pizza because they've "yet" to acquire a taste for the jazzy one with everything on it.. it would be a waste of extra time, talent, and effort to try and force one with anchovies on them. It's common for some of us adults to ridicule the interests and behavior of the youth if we fail to reflect upon our own youth on a day someone told us "That shit you're listening to aint music". However, a large sum of people's interests still manage to evolve from Rap, Heavy Metal, and EDM to Jazz and Classical at some point in their life. The youth are already able to distinguish whether a song is more complex and exhibits more musical talent than their favorite club song. They comprehend just fine. It's just that it's not in accord with their lifestyle at this time.

 

Last edited: Apr 10, 2016

agree on that everything changed rapidly but bad, music industrie in general became meat industry with same product! time to time something good pop ops from the machine

 

Most people listen to music when they drive, cook, dance, flirt, work, go shopping...
What most people call music is actually entertainment.
If you ask ANYBODY to seat down, put "shake it off" in loop and ask them to listen to the music, then... EVERYBODY will get a headache (or worse). Then again with some vodka, too-loud loudspeakers, lighting, and half-naked young people dancing around you, you might find it more suitable than Chopin...

 

Depends on what your definition of "good music" is. But seriously, the landscape of recorded music has changed drastically within the last 16 years or so. New music released on whatever passes for radio or MTV is limited to whichever 10 artists or so the few remaining record companies are willing to invest development and advertising money in. Everybody else is on their own. Compare that to times as recent as the Eighties or Nineties, where new artists were invested in by the hundreds -- sometimes, to the tune of millions of dollars per artist -- and there was a wide variety of music released all the time. Those days are way over. The bands and artists released commercially now are only the "safe investments" (and therefore, the least-risky and pop-sounding), and even those guys are only getting a small percentage of the millions and millions of dollars top-selling artists used to receive. It's also killed new styles of music (EDM being the last significant "new style" that has emerged, and only because it came from the club scene, not the Top 40 radio scene).

The ability to get something new heard, out there and invested in by the labels still exists, but it's a much, much steeper climb than it used to be. An artists can still put their stuff out there on Bandcamp or Youtube or Soundcloud and get labels' attention by garnering a huge amount of listens, or by touring and touring (something the big acts are forced to do now, as well).

(Edit: I should add that new and possibly even groundbreaking music is actually more prevalent than ever, due to the digital audio revolution putting top-quality recording capabilities in everybody's hands, not just the people who can scrape together a potentially thousands of dollars to record in a studio. It just isn't being promoted or played on a grand scale like the old days. In some ways, it's a bad thing -- that fewer musical acts than ever will get wide airplay or promotion. In other ways, it gives a lot of freedom for artists to create art, and for the sake of art, not just financial gains.)

 

Last edited: Apr 10, 2016

Music is a purely cultural & trendy. "Cultural" = people need a solid previous experience in order to enjoy the new sounds. "Trendy" = the whole lot of circumstances that add value to the music (newly discovered rhythm patterns, chords etc.). Mozart's or Bach music was trendy. Same as Michelangelo's art was trendy. Try to sell the best music or best paiting to a tribe living somewhere on the Earth or to the old man living without radio or tv or newspapers on the top of the hill near my grandparents' village for that matter. For them all our precious art worth nothing. So yes, for the occasional listener I-V-vi-IV is enough. By the way, how many of us have a listening room with some audiophile-grade amps & speakers to properly enjoy music? (I don't).

 

Totally agree. Same boom, boom, boom, crap.

Look ma I can play a turn table aren't I a genius.

 

One man's rubbish is another man's treasure?
Music is an art form that should be enjoyed, right? At least that's why I listen to, as well as produce. There are times when I go from Bach's Cello Concertos to Hendrix to Eminem....depends on my mood and my mood DOES change.
I enjoy Adelle's music but can only take it in very small doses..much like Bluegrass. She's fat and she's sassy and she definitely has some soulful tubes but I can't listen to Aretha Franklin all day either...