Quote:
|
You can go on about not knowing you but you've posted your taste in music and acted on opinions that are basis enough for me and other posts to judge on, other regulars of this site in fact have judged them.
|
I thought you were interested in objective debate, and here you are pathetically trying to justify being judgemental, please just quit it now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill
You've frequently made comments in other threads about "rebelling against the corporate machine" and what not that are typical your nu-metal clique and you listen to bands typical to it. So yeah I'm going to call you a cliche because you are.
|
A. You're wrong
B. It doesn't matter it's an Ad Hominem.
Quote:
|
You can call it baseless name calling all you want and try and pretend you're so much more intelligent but you've displayed the arguing skills of someone who has horrible reading comprehension and your wannabe attempts at intelligence and being on the high horse here are ridiculous, it's pretty obvious you don't know much about music.
|
I'm still looking for the objective debate and all I'm seeing is hypocricy and nonsense. If your argument has no substance than just say it, you don't have to go through all this b.s.
Quote:
|
I mean wikipedia is your main backing for your argument,
|
A. Sourced article.
B. Wikipedia has been proven to be as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica. (if you don't believe me I'll source this claim too)
Quote:
|
a public site able to be edited by anyone.
|
It's heavily moderated and debated, they are also source nazis.
The thing about wikipedia, it can change and become more correct the moment things happen, it expands and grows, it corrects itself. UNLIKE static, decade old hardcover encyclopedias written during the Cold War.
Quote:
|
If that's your basis for your musical facts than you really need to reexamine your own knowledge it can be edited by ANYONE.
|
It's not that simple, if you change an article to some complete bullsh
it you made up, they will change it back immediately.
About time.
Quote:
|
pop is possibly the most versatile genre ever in the sense that whatevers popular is pop.
|
The phrase 'pop'
stems from the word popular, but that doesn't mean ANYTHING that is popular is pop music, nor does it mean only popular music is pop music.
Quote:
|
Meaning in the 60s and 70s Led Zeppelin, The Kinks, The Who, Pink Floyd, The Beatles were all basically pop groups.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by teshadoh
I don't think punk's primary issue was ever 'pop', but commercially over-saturated 'popular' music. Of course the Bee Gees & Abba, but also Led Zeppelin, Van Halen, The Who (1970's era), & Pink Floyd. The latter grouping would not be considered 'pop' music by most people's definitions here
|
No, Pink Floyd and Led Zepplin were not 'pop bands', not even pop-rock, not even 'basically', they were HARD ROCK BANDS.
Say, do you have sources for YOUR definition by any chance?
Quote:
|
Roger Waters even referred to Pink Floyd (including Piper) as a pop group.
|
Well I'm sorry to inform you, he was mistaken. Perhaps 40 years ago the word 'pop' meant something different, maybe your misquoting him, maybe you have the context wrong, maybe he was just plain wrong. But if you're going to say the phrase 'pop music' is DEFINED by literal popularity, than are you preparred to say 'Lil Jon, Beethtoven, and ACDC were 'Pop musicians'?
Quote:
|
Pop isn't "corporate enforcing" or anything like that
|
Quote:
“Commercially mass produced music for a mass market, and including the variety of genres variously subsumed by terms such as rock and roll, rock, dance, hip hop and R&B.”
-Shuker, Roy (1994). Understanding Popular Music. Routledge.
|
Quote:
“The new pop isn't rebellious. It embraces the star system. It conflates art, business and entertainment. It cares more about sales and royalties and the strength of the dollar than anything else and to make matters worse, it isn't in the least bit guilty about it.”
-Rimmer, D. (1985). Like Punk Never Happened: Culture Club and the New Pop. Faber.
|
Quote:
|
you're taking a small narrow-minded point of view and looking at the only facet of pop there is.
|
Maybe your view is conveniently too broad.
Quote:
|
The Sex Pistols share more in common with Pink Floyd then they do garage bands, they were both abrasive, shocking, banned by the BBC, etc.
|
Did the Sex Pistols *intentionally* do anything to perpetuate sales? Why were they popular? Same for Pink Floyd. They were popular, they sold, but did they sell thier music and nothing but thier music or did they sell an image, a commercial, etc?
Quote:
|
You don't know what pop is, I've pointed this out several times and argued this and posted arguments on it, which you choose to ignore and you're probably going to go on some irrelevant tangent that ends in you citing wikipedia or something to this as usual which only shows your ignorance really.
|
I didn't use wikipedia this time.