truth. I'm not seeing the correlation. some creatives are filled with envy

 

How the hell is singing comprised of rhythm machines?

 

The correct title for the thread should be:
99% of all time music is a pile of steaming garbage
then I would completely agree

 

really?
why you so invested in something you see that way

 

Is the problem just singing? Does music need only voice and singing? It doesn't need anything else?

Could someone name other things please?

 

of course not
bruised ego speak: why doesn't the world care about my thoughts, I thought they were great?
world says: no

 

I really listen to a lot of music, I'm a lover of sound that I've never heard before (it doesn't matter if it came out yesterday, 60 years ago or even 200 years ago). Unfortunately, good music is not easy to find: the percentage of garbage is very high.
But I don't give up, when I find the unknown artist who enlightens me, that's the moment of the reward

 

do you like people you've never met before more than people you already know?

 

Why are you falling for this?.. not one comment from the bomb chucking poster to back up his ridiculous assertion?
Discourse is fine and welcome but they're
Either an attention whore or single-digit IQ.

 

Actually I don't quite understand the meaning of the question. I listen to music that I don't know because I like to expand my cultural knowledge. I am interested in non-conformist points of view, they make me feel the complexity of the universe

Are you psychoanalyzing me?

 

no not at all.. just point out the human element of the subject at hand and that perhaps 99% of music of all time is trash is a more about your interests and not a true representation of music on a world scale

 

I understand what you mean, in my small way I can judge the music I listen to with an absolutely subjective parameter, which you do too.
It would be nice to be able to say 100% of the music is great, but it's unreal

 

true.
all I wanted to say was humans are a particular way, which means it probably seeps into all things

 

Music and sounds ≠ People

They are not of the same kind to be comparable. You can love people or their cultures from any time, but you don't like their music or vice versa.

 

he that has ears, let him hear

 

There is a sense of clarity, definition, skill, musicality, great writing or composing, great arranging, depth, light & shade/dynamics and sparkle that is present in every great style of music ever written, and in each tune that is still highly regarded by all performing and composing musicians. This has been true for centuries since before Johann Sebastian Bach, even through to some tunes by Billie Eilish. The music that has all of the above will always stand out and always has.

Age has no meaning, a piece of music is good or it is crap no matter what style, genre or generation it comes from. Anything that is undynamic will never rise above music that is dynamic full-stop. Only one emotion can be stirred by any music that is undynamic at the identical volume and identical intensity when neither changes. When both change in a single work, multiple emotions and feelings can be stirred.
As for typecasting the thread title "99% of music today is made with auto tune n it's still a pile of steaming garbage." - Similar sentiments have been stated pre-technological advances in case nobody knew - Probably by your parents and their parents and their parents before them. Some is prejudiced but on a purely musical level, if it is undynamic, then it is missing a lot of important ingredients that go into making a truly great piece of music. So the thread author is not totally wrong.

P.S. - As an example, my Dad (RIP) thought Pink Floyd were a pile of crap and just noise. Then he heard "Shine on you crazy diamond" and liked it. It was dynamic (light & shade). Anyone who wants to reach a broad audience should never forget the dynamics and a lot of today's EDM has completely forgotten it, as have more singers than I thought possible.

 

Last edited: Jun 2, 2021

I agree with above - but the word 'dynamic' might still get misinterpretted. So I'm just repeating your conviction (I think)
that 'dynamics' means a lot more here than just "volume range and change - as in audio engineering"

e.g., dynamic means not static; dynamic means contains interesting variety and changes in...
- structure (chord progressions)
- melodic features
- arrangement
- texture
- chord voicings, harmonies
- tempo
- rhythm
- timbre
- mood
- volume
... and many other (overlapping and subtle) aspects that I didn't bother to think of

i.e., variety and change as the exact opposite of dull, monotonous, repetitive and boring!
or as you implied 'light and shade' in every musical aspect we can think of.

 

Last edited: Jun 2, 2021

Thanks for the reminder to be more articulate. You probably saved me from a barrage of misinterpretation, so thank you.
Yes - the techniques I did not wish to delve deeply into but reading your post you mentioned many of the things necessary to achieve the light and shade. Variety is truly the spice of life and definitely in music - people sometimes are not aware that while volume dynamics are great, intensity dynamics are equally important. We can play softly with intensity or loud with intensity and similarly without any.
Thanks again.

 

Last edited: Jun 2, 2021

ya Artic! try it on some closed high hats!! it will take you to another level!!

 

Exceptional music can seldom be planned, it is created in a magical way. Take a look at the Beatles, first of all 4 people had to meet and get to know each other, then over a longer period of time a musical sytle developed that did not exist before. How does the new music sytle come into the world? You applied to a record label and one of the producers recognized the potential of the Beatles. One had the idea of the mushroom caps with a suit. This made them suitable for the masses. And the music of the Beatles came at the right time, it was time for a change in society.

Abba - Take a Chance on Me
The song was written around the headline that Björn Ulvaeus came across while jogging. While running, he became aware of a constant "t-k-ch" sound, a rhythm that arose from his steady running movement. The search for the right words for this rhythm followed.

“I thought, if the music sounds like 'Chuck-a chuck chuck chuck', which English sentence could match the rhythm of a chorus? The first notes of the chorus are very short and only the last note is long. And so I came up with the line: 'Take a chance on me'. "
- Bjorn Ulvaeus

This rhythm is one of the characteristic elements of the song, which is used at the beginning of the song. Take a Chance on Me begins directly with the chorus in a cappella version, in which the piece gets by without instrumental music thanks to the polyphonic singing. The recurring phrase "Take a Chance, Take a, Take a Chance Chance ..." that occurs throughout the playing time in the background had to be recorded in several attempts because the technology at the time meant that it was not possible to copy the sound elements. Above all to take a breath, the singers Andersson and Ulvaeus had to start over and over again the lines of text and then overlap the individual recording snippets in order to achieve a consistent rhythm.

Source: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_a_Chance_on_Me

 

Last edited: Jun 2, 2021