Pop music...What happened?!

And yet Stax thought Disco Duck was more worthy than Big Star? The hell?

And I can defend "Rolling in the Deep". The song works because it's a throwback to 1960's soul by an artist that actually has talent (instead of using looks to succeed). It is not an autotuned dance song designed to appeal to 12 year old girls and their moms.

"Disco Duck" wasn't actually put out by Stax; one of the founders of the company (Estelle Axton) released it on the new label she started after vacating her position at Stax.

As for why Stax underpromoted Big Star, I imagine it was because of company politics. They'd taken some pretty serious blows in the late 1960s; Otis Redding died and Sam & Dave were removed from the label by the distributors, who also took more or less the entire Stax back catalogue.

To recover, the label bosses decided they'd flood the market with a glut of new R&B albums (the "soul explosion" plan) and focus very strongly on appealing to the black audience in accordance with their new commitment to the civil rights movement. I guess Big Star were tough to market under this policy.

It's ironic the % of good pop songs nowadays are throwbacks, like Forget You (which was the Song of the Year, fuck you Grammys).

1. That's not ironic
2. Good is very subjective
3. "Fuck You" (which is the actual name of the song) isn't a throwback just because Cee-Lo Green can sing soulfully.

I think there are fewer such songs than one might assume. The only retro-themed songs I can think of that have become very significant hits in the last year are "Fuck You!", "Rolling In the Deep" and "I Need A Dollar".

To be honest, pursuing a retro style isn't really anything new. For example, you've got Billy Joel's An Innocent Man album, or the entire discography of The Specials or Showaddywaddy.

edited 11th Nov '11 1:37:26 PM by TheGloomer

Adele, a throwback? Um, here's a partial list of artists she felt influenced her while recording 21: Kanye West, Rascal Flatts, Mos Def, Elbow, Dolly Parton, Andrew Bird, and Sinead O'Connor.

Adele as an artist isn't really a throwback, but I think it's easy enough to see how "Rolling In the Deep" as a song could be considered "retraux".

The problem is that it's the hugely popular hit single (even moreso than "Someone Like You" and "Set Fire To the Rain", which are fairly different-sounding songs) so everyone judges what she must sound like based on that.

edited 11th Nov '11 3:05:00 PM by TheGloomer

Guys.

"Baby" is an amazing song.

I think it's all a matter of opinion. I'm not saying that pop music now is great, but a lot of people have a Nostalgia Filter and only remember the best from the past. There are plenty of crappy songs from the past that nobody chose to remember, but now we have the internet to complain.

The most entertaining proclaimation I've ever observed on this issue was probably a typical You Tube comment which declared something to the extent of, "MODERN CRAP IS ALL MANUFACTURED! MOTOWN IS AWESOME!"

Somebody needs to read up on their music history, obviously.

99% of today's teenagers listen to crap like Justin Bieber, Brokencyde, Rebecca Black and stuff like that.

I listen to everything*

I am the 1%.

wait what

Nah, it'd say, "X% of teenagers have turned to Genre X". It's always prefaced with that inane "You say X I say Y" bullshit.

Also, fyi, most teenagers hate Rebecca Black as much as the next person.

Yeah, Rebecca Black and Brokencyde are kind of weird artists to bring up in that context - Justin Bieber has a sizeable hatedom but became well-known because his music was genuinely popular, whereas the only reason anyone knows who Rebecca Black and Brokencyde are is because of their hatedom. It's sort of like talking about how bad the general public's taste in movies is and bringing up Uwe Boll as an example.

edited 12th Nov '11 1:06:11 PM by MikeK

I didn't really put much effort in remembering what artists those brats' You Tube comments mention these days.

Besides, when it's "us vs. them", you make sure to mention the worst representatives possible.

As bad as popular music may seem at the moment, I think it's better than it was about a decade ago. Based on what I've read about what songs became hits at the turn of the century as well as my own recollections of listening to music when I was nine or ten, I'd say that two years on either side of 2000 were pretty bad for pop.

I'll be honest, the past few years I was that guy who hated all current pop music/thought that older stuff was just better. I got over that I don't know when, but all I know is that a few months ago I looked up some hits from the past decade and found a hell of a lot of songs I'd already liked (and even more that I hadn't given a chance but found I liked).

Perspective is an interesting thing.

edited 12th Nov '11 8:44:47 PM by 0dd1

Come to think of it, if I had to come up with a proper answer to the question of "what happened" to pop music, I'd probably say, "Television talent shows".

I don't think much of them, to be honest. Certainly, they produce some good singers, but in Britain especially they don't seem to come up with sustainable artists. I mean, compare the plaudits earned by American Idol contestants like Chris Daughtry or Jennifer Hudson to the response to people who won The X Factor in the UK. There's a bit of a contrast, isn't there?

The answer to "what happened to pop music" is "the influence of the more party-driven genres of electronica, and the wildly hedonistic ethics coming from those scenes", IMO.

No, the answer is "nothing, you stupid bastards."

well, yeah, pop isn't that much worse compared to other decades, but it's different.

Normally I'd be inclined to agree; that was just what I'd probably say if I was pressed to come up with something.

I think that the appearance of television contests which purport to be seeking out the next big thing are something a bit different from simple changing trends in music; they're a reflection of what's popular and for better or worse they've helped to define the past decade of popular music.

One thing I think is pretty interesting is how musicians seem pretty divided on the like of The X Factor. You get some who support it, but there are others who say it's fostering the belief that stardom is easily achieved; you don't have to gig or write or even sing particularly well, you just need to be photogenic and possibly have an "inspiring" story.

Though I'd say that's more or less always happened, all the way back to the jazz age.

I raise against your X Factor Leona Lewis. Then again, I've only heard that one song by her, and I like Jesse Mc Cartney's original demo of it better anyway.

...either way!!

YES

If you want to know what happened, nostalgia goggles happened.

I would've said that myself, but I think saying that is just about as tired as saying what it's a response to.

Really, this whole conversation is just an endless loop. When one ends, another person starts it up again X time later, and of course the same responses on both ends come up.

Not that it's a pointless topic, just that it seems really cyclic.