|
|
Post by Tiberius on Jul 21, 2002 0:50:44 GMT 10
My god. So you would classify Pearl Jam as pop music? they are more popular and have a larger fanbase than Kylie could ever dream of but it doesn't make them pop. 'Pop Music' has become more a term to describe a genre of music rather than a more literal definition. I suppose technically, by definition you could. However, the term "pop music" has lost a lot of meaning these days. People associate all popular music with overproduced teenybopper crap. Hence the criticism by some towards Something For Kate when Echolalia had a more mainstream appeal than their previous albums. If it's "popular" it must be crap right? Um, no. I think this is the reason why some bands don't like music classifications - because they're too limiting. I've seen Something For Kate reject the idea of being classed as "grunge" because of this. If everyone thinks they're "grunge" then they can't experiment and try different things. Same with Portishead who often get termed "trip-hop" or "trance". They too reject this label and say they're "just musicians" instead. So, yeah, I guess what I'm saying is, that genre classifications can be a little limiting and not all popular/pop music is brittneypop.  |
|
|
|
Post by Muzzy Pepped on Jul 22, 2002 11:34:15 GMT 10
"I suppose technically, by definition you could."
I would really love you to explain to me how the hell you could define Pearl Jam as pop.
"However, the term "pop music" has lost a lot of meaning these days. People associate all popular music with overproduced teenybopper crap. Hence the criticism by some towards Something For Kate when Echolalia had a more mainstream appeal than their previous albums. If it's "popular" it must be crap right? Um, no."
In Australia i think this has more to do with the tall poppy sydrome rather than a despising of all popular forms of music. And i don't think it has lost that much meaning. U2 are an amazing band, who would more than likely be labelled 'Pop' but that doesn't mean they are shit, which they certainly are not. This genre no doubt contains just about ever shit artist the record company creates and then spits out so of course it's going to get a bad rep. Backstreet Boys, Britney, Britney clone 1, Britney clone 2, Bardot etc etc etc etc etcd etc etc etc etc.
Genre classifications are limiting, yes. One of the funniest thing i can remember is seeing an 'Alternative' section as a classification in a CD store. The definition initially meant alternative to basically every genre around at the time, until alternative in itself became a genre. Scary. But they are necessary to some extent. When you go to a CD store and want to check out some new bands you haven't heard, you can go to the 'rock' or 'alternative' section. You don't expect that to be a really defining quality of the music, but more a guide as to the style - so you know if you may like it or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Jul 22, 2002 23:38:31 GMT 10
I would really love you to explain to me how the hell you could define Pearl Jam as pop. I said I could. Especially if they're "popular" which is what "pop" stands for right? Even so, I wouldn't call them "pop" because people are likely to misconstrue what I mean. In Australia i think this has more to do with the tall poppy sydrome rather than a despising of all popular forms of music. And i don't think it has lost that much meaning. U2 are an amazing band, who would more than likely be labelled 'Pop' but that doesn't mean they are shit, which they certainly are not. This genre no doubt contains just about ever shit artist the record company creates and then spits out so of course it's going to get a bad rep. Backstreet Boys, Britney, Britney clone 1, Britney clone 2, Bardot etc etc etc etc etcd etc etc etc etc. Hmm, so how do you define "pop" music then? Isn't its very definition, uhh... popular? |
|
|
|
Post by Muzzy Pepped on Jul 23, 2002 13:28:59 GMT 10
"Hmm, so how do you define "pop" music then? Isn't its very definition, uhh... popular?"
Uhh... no it isn't.
As i said before, the term once had that meaning, but nowadays defines a genre rather than having a more literal meaning. Just because 'pop' originated from the word 'popular' it does not mean that over time it's meaning hasn't changed. By that logic you would be classify ALL music that was 'popular' into that genre - which of course isn't so - Metallica, Pearl Jam, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Tool.............................................
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Jul 25, 2002 13:46:48 GMT 10
Eh, well how exactly would you define "pop music" then? It's such an ambiguous umbrella term.
|
|
|
|
Post by Muzzy Pepped on Jul 26, 2002 15:25:48 GMT 10
I think that Pop music has come to define styles of music such as Britney and the like, boy bands, stuff like Taxiride, and in the broadest sense bands like U2.
|
|
