What makes some music acceptable

[Funkyfairy!]

I got to wondering over the weekend what makes some music acceptable in peoples minds and other stuff open to ridicule

Over the weekend I was away with a very good girlfriend for her birthday weekend and as she loves Scouting for Girls I bought her tickets and we went to see them. Now SFG are often (always maybe) ridiculed on this board - and are seen as 'non' music- not worth seeing/talentless (and much worse)

I really enjoyed the gig, the guys play their own instruments, write their own songs and actually rock a lot more in real life than they do on their recorded tracks. The invoked singalongs, emotion and pure fun and took a great deal of the audience on a journey for a few hours ...... surely thats what any music is all about (and the audience was not full of 14 year old schoolgirls).. I was pleasantly surprised

It got me thinking about why people think some music is acceptable and other stuff not, or are peope natually like lemings and follow other peoples idea's and the media's thoughts without actually experiencing stuff and making up their own mind

I'd like to think I'd try anything (musically) once and then make up my own mind ... hopefully with the guts to say what I'm really thinking rather than what I am told I should think !

[smiley33]

I went to the N.E.C. with my best mate for his birthday to see Mary J Blige - I wasn't looking forward to it at all, didn't know any of her music really...well, I was absolutely blown away by her - that gig is in my top 5 gigs of all time...was brilliant...would pay good money to see her again...she had me crying my eyes out...in a good way...

[4AssedMonkey]

Totally agree with your sentiments about keeping an open mind on these things. I also try not to pre-judge and will let my ears tell me what I like and don't like. That said, I really hate certain aspects of the music industry almost regardless of the music itself. The manufactured, big business acts of the Cowell empire et al for me lack any credibility and I almost hate them on principle. I don't like the fact that it's about fame and not music. I don't like the fact that they have huge teams of faceless songwriters, choreographers etc telling them what to do and sing. I don't like the fact that they are so pervasive in the media that gullible Joe Public often think that there is no other music out there, and the smaller struggling talented people get a smaller share of the spotlight. Luckily for me, they always release utter gash so I feel justified.

However, what I dislike about SFG is the fact that every song they release sounds like exactly the same happy, bouncy sing-a-long song with different words. One dimensional IMO. They are by no means my most loathed but I don't like their output.

[robalotalob]

It depends on what you see as music's purpose. If you see it as purely a form of entertainment then you'd be happy with most chart music/SFG/whatever. If you see music as having more depth that can inspire, motivate and push things forward then acts like SFG would really grind you gears.

[Serj Trouserdale]

I got to wondering over the weekend what makes some music acceptable in peoples minds and other stuff open to ridicule

Over the weekend I was away with a very good girlfriend for her birthday weekend and as she loves Scouting for Girls I bought her tickets and we went to see them. Now SFG are often (always maybe) ridiculed on this board - and are seen as 'non' music- not worth seeing/talentless (and much worse)

I really enjoyed the gig, the guys play their own instruments, write their own songs and actually rock a lot more in real life than they do on their recorded tracks. The invoked singalongs, emotion and pure fun and took a great deal of the audience on a journey for a few hours ...... surely thats what any music is all about (and the audience was not full of 14 year old schoolgirls).. I was pleasantly surprised

It got me thinking about why people think some music is acceptable and other stuff not, or are peope natually like lemings and follow other peoples idea's and the media's thoughts without actually experiencing stuff and making up their own mind

I'd like to think I'd try anything (musically) once and then make up my own mind ... hopefully with the guts to say what I'm really thinking rather than what I am told I should think !

[frodoisdead]

Don't let people dictate what you can or can't like. I like lots of folk and bluegrass which lots of my mates and my girlfriend think is really 'uncool' but I don't really give two hoots. As you say, everyone should try things at least once.

[ukslim]

See, I don't think writing your own songs is that important.

I'd rather see Dionne Warwick singing Walk On By, than singing something she wrote herself. She's a better singer than she is a songwriter.

I'd rather see Dionne Warwick singing Walk on By than see Burt Bacharach singing it. He's a better songwriter than he is a singer.

It doesn't bother me that, say, Britney Spears' Toxic is a concoction by a team of publicists, songwriters, producers, image consultants, etc. No matter how it came about, it's one of the greatest pop songs ever made.

What bothers me about Scouting for Girls -- from what I've heard, which is just a few singles -- is that there's nothing there. I just don't get it. There's no invention in the tune. There's no invention in the words. There's no invention in the arrangement. Nor is there any intensity or joi de vivre in the performance. So you've got songs that are more or less nursery rhymes, performed with neither novelty, spirit nor charisma.

Writing your own songs isn't a virtue if they're crap songs.

Playing your own instruments isn't a virtue if you only play competently.

Perhaps it would be better if SFG did get songs from somewhere else, and bring in some musicians with a bit of flair.

Having said that, if you enjoy it, go ahead. I don't want to be snobby about it...

... alright, a little bit of snobbery: what saddens me is that if people are genuinely enjoying the music of SFG, it might mean they're blind to the elements of other music that makes it better. I guess I'd like people to feel what I feel when I hear, say, Radiohead, SFA, The Decemberists, Cake. It may be a matter of maturity (not that mature necessarily equals good).

Some people prefer a Big Mac to steak.

[ukslim]

However, anything made purely for the purpose of profit and performed by monkeys who have been told what to wear and what to believe, I wouldn't class as music. Examples of this N-Dubs, Chipmonk, Saturdays etc etc.

[st dan]

I think a lot of people tend to dislike bands who make music that they know will sell, and make nailed-on hits that will get them all over Radio One, and appealing to 14 year old girls.

But who can blame an artist for doing this? Music is a career, and people need to make a living and sell records more than they need a cult following.

Its happened with KOL, who have gone from Gods in the pre- Sex On Fire era, to a band who it is now cool to hate.

People just won't like tend to admit to liking bands that are all over the radio, and whos songs are blazing from teenagers phones on the back of the bus.

Edited May 17, 2010 by st dan

[Funkyfairy!]

See, I don't think writing your own songs is that important.

I'd rather see Dionne Warwick singing Walk On By, than singing something she wrote herself. She's a better singer than she is a songwriter.

I'd rather see Dionne Warwick singing Walk on By than see Burt Bacharach singing it. He's a better songwriter than he is a singer.

It doesn't bother me that, say, Britney Spears' Toxic is a concoction by a team of publicists, songwriters, producers, image consultants, etc. No matter how it came about, it's one of the greatest pop songs ever made.

What bothers me about Scouting for Girls -- from what I've heard, which is just a few singles -- is that there's nothing there. I just don't get it. There's no invention in the tune. There's no invention in the words. There's no invention in the arrangement. Nor is there any intensity or joi de vivre in the performance. So you've got songs that are more or less nursery rhymes, performed with neither novelty, spirit nor charisma.

Writing your own songs isn't a virtue if they're crap songs.

Playing your own instruments isn't a virtue if you only play competently.

Perhaps it would be better if SFG did get songs from somewhere else, and bring in some musicians with a bit of flair.

Having said that, if you enjoy it, go ahead. I don't want to be snobby about it...

... alright, a little bit of snobbery: what saddens me is that if people are genuinely enjoying the music of SFG, it might mean they're blind to the elements of other music that makes it better. I guess I'd like people to feel what I feel when I hear, say, Radiohead, SFA, The Decemberists, Cake. It may be a matter of maturity (not that mature necessarily equals good).

Some people prefer a Big Mac to steak.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

I got to wondering over the weekend what makes some music acceptable in peoples minds and other stuff open to ridicule

Over the weekend I was away with a very good girlfriend for her birthday weekend and as she loves Scouting for Girls I bought her tickets and we went to see them. Now SFG are often (always maybe) ridiculed on this board - and are seen as 'non' music- not worth seeing/talentless (and much worse)

I really enjoyed the gig, the guys play their own instruments, write their own songs and actually rock a lot more in real life than they do on their recorded tracks. The invoked singalongs, emotion and pure fun and took a great deal of the audience on a journey for a few hours ...... surely thats what any music is all about (and the audience was not full of 14 year old schoolgirls).. I was pleasantly surprised

It got me thinking about why people think some music is acceptable and other stuff not, or are peope natually like lemings and follow other peoples idea's and the media's thoughts without actually experiencing stuff and making up their own mind

I'd like to think I'd try anything (musically) once and then make up my own mind ... hopefully with the guts to say what I'm really thinking rather than what I am told I should think !

[Serj Trouserdale]

I don't know much about this kind of music, nor do I like it -- but I believe you're misrepresenting N-Dubz.

From what I an tell, N-Dubz make the kind of music they themselves like, on their own terms. Although I stand by what I said above about the non-importance of writing your own songs, it's significant that N-Dubz do write their own songs because it's evidence that they're not puppets.

[cejx]

I believe you should be open minded about all music.

However, anything made purely for the purpose of profit and performed by monkeys who have been told what to wear and what to believe, I wouldn't class as music. Examples of this N-Dubs, Chipmonk, Saturdays etc etc.

[cejx]

It doesn't bother me that, say, Britney Spears' Toxic is a concoction by a team of publicists, songwriters, producers, image consultants, etc. No matter how it came about, it's one of the greatest pop songs ever made.

Some people prefer a Big Mac to steak.

[Serj Trouserdale]

Aside from the Saturdays who are talentless, that statement is totally untrue. N-Dubz and Chipmunk write their own stuff, and love them or loathe them - they've both been pretty successful. And as being told what to wear - I think N-Dubz management would tell Dappy to remove his daft hat collection! Just because they appeal to the mass yoof urban street markets (sadly I ain't in the yoof category anymore) doesn't mean they are shite. Bands have to make a profit - the days of doing things just for the love of music can't exist any longer... and quite clearly, you are not being open minded about music!

[ukslim]

I stand by Toxic. I think it's a wonderful record.

As for N-Dubz only being in it for the money, I'm not going to argue that they're not in it for the money. But I think if you were ask them "Do you like the music you make?", those three kids would say that yes, they do.

There *are* cynical people in the music industry making stuff they themselves hate, aimed at a demographic. That's largely what Stock, Aitken and Waterman did with their 80s "Hit Factory". I'm absolutely sure there's urban/R&B being made today on that basis. I'm also certain there's landfill indie being made on that basis.

But I don't think N-Dubz fall into that category. I base this opinion on snatches of interview I've seen with them, and some footage of them doing an acoustic version of one of their hits.

I'd agree that the 'street' thing is a bit contrived. Stage school kids the lot of them, innit?

And for the record, I hate N-Dubz' music. I just don't believe that they do.

[cejx]

I'm really surprised how many people don't see through the bullsh*t. If the media tells you something you should usually question it.

As for profit making. I hate the fact "music" is made purely for the purpose of profit. There are bands/artists out there that can create a song because of their love of music and not for greed. They should be celebrated and people like you should stop tolerating sh*t like N-dubs.

[Felna]

What bothers me about Scouting for Girls -- from what I've heard, which is just a few singles -- is that there's nothing there. I just don't get it. There's no invention in the tune. There's no invention in the words. There's no invention in the arrangement. Nor is there any intensity or joi de vivre in the performance. So you've got songs that are more or less nursery rhymes, performed with neither novelty, spirit nor charisma.

[GingerRock]

I got to wondering over the weekend what makes some music acceptable in peoples minds and other stuff open to ridicule

...

[SteveTLizard]

Music is a subjective medium and as such you're free to like or dislike any band. Personally I think SFG are shite but that doesn't invalidate your opinion that they're good.

What really pisses me off is when people like a band when it's "cool" to like them, then when they get a bit of notoriety they change thier minds. Something along the lines of "yar, like they were totally awesome when I saw them at the frog and bedger, back in the day. It's a shame they got so popular coz they're, like, totally lame now". These people must get very dizzy being buffeted about on the winds of fashion.

More power to your musical taste, and carry on enjoying whoever you like and ignore the too-cool-for-school crew.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

I'm really surprised how many people don't see through the bullsh*t. If the media tells you something you should usually question it.

As for profit making. I hate the fact "music" is made purely for the purpose of profit. There are bands/artists out there that can create a song because of their love of music and not for greed. They should be celebrated and people like you should stop tolerating sh*t like N-dubs.

[Serj Trouserdale]

blimey - you're an angry thing aren't you! Relax, it is only music, and if you don't like N-Dubz or whoever, turn them off, or don't add to the 'immense' profits by buying their music.

Artists can make songs for the love of music, but its the way of the world, that they have to feed, house and clothe themselves - hence making a profit - I suspect that N-Dubz profits are miniscule compared with those of say Radiohead - have they sold out too?

Additionally, a sign that your music is liked, accepted and enjoyed will show through in profits - thats your reward for making a success of what you've created.

[ukslim]

So people are not allowed to profit from their work then? That is just utter nonsense.

[BlackHole2006]

I think it's all down to taste really.

Most of my mates listen to stuff like N-Dubz but I have the occasional friends who listen to alternative bands like I do and one friend who is a huge Beatles fan, you know, one of those culty types who literally wont shut up about them. I just hate it when people generalise teens of my age as people who listen to the stuff that get's played on Radio 1 and NME indie bands. There are people my age who appreciate decent stuff too.

I think that music is all down to taste and if some of my friends want to lisen to N-Dubz etc then that's fine by me as long as they don't subject me to that dreadful music. I think all art is very subjective and you can't really categorise any artist as "acceptable" music.

[ukslim]

I think you're completely missing the point. Radiohead make the music they want to make and don't write their music with the goal of maximising profits.