Is music becoming more homogenized? - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-13-2014, 06:36 AM   #1 (permalink)
Ask me how!
 
Oriphiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: The States
Posts: 5,354
Default Is music becoming more homogenized?

I read an interesting article that brought up many points about music, and the science behind it. One point that was brought up was that music is becoming more standard, meaning that less artists are seperating themselves from each other. More artists than ever are using the same chord progressions, vocal patterns, etc. Do you all think the article is flawed, and missed something vital? Or is music really becoming more, to put it bluntly, "boring"?

Also, apparently the years of mid 1960s were the time of greatest musical variety. Makes sense, considering the garage and psych movements kicked off punk and metal, funk and motown went mainstream, and new genres from abroad like ska hit their stride. The Beatles championed the merseybeat, the Rolling Stones kept the blues kicking, Ohio Express kept pop interesting and just a little dirty, etc.

Here is the article: 5 Ways Your Taste in Music is Scientifically Programmed | Cracked.com

And here is the website that collected the data used to analyze the trends of music: Million Song Dataset | scaling MIR research
Oriphiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 08:04 AM   #2 (permalink)
Remember the underscore
 
Pet_Sounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The other side
Posts: 2,488
Default

Is he including independent artists in his analysis? 'Cause I agree that the pop of today is simpler than the pop of the '60s, but the indie scene is full of complex music.
__________________
Everybody's dying just to get the disease
Pet_Sounds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 08:21 AM   #3 (permalink)
Divination
 
Necromancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oriphiel View Post
Also, apparently the years of mid 1960s were the time of greatest musical variety.
Wouldn't that be the 1980s?
Necromancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 08:26 AM   #4 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oriphiel View Post
I read an interesting article that brought up many points about music, and the science behind it. One point that was brought up was that music is becoming more standard, meaning that less artists are seperating themselves from each other. More artists than ever are using the same chord progressions, vocal patterns, etc. Do you all think the article is flawed, and missed something vital? Or is music really becoming more, to put it bluntly, "boring"?

Also, apparently the years of mid 1960s were the time of greatest musical variety. Makes sense, considering the garage and psych movements kicked off punk and metal, funk and motown went mainstream, and new genres from abroad like ska hit their stride. The Beatles championed the merseybeat, the Rolling Stones kept the blues kicking, Ohio Express kept pop interesting and just a little dirty, etc.

Here is the article: 5 Ways Your Taste in Music is Scientifically Programmed | Cracked.com

And here is the website that collected the data used to analyze the trends of music: Million Song Dataset | scaling MIR research
Looks like the article is about pop music specifically rather than music in general.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 08:44 AM   #5 (permalink)
Divination
 
Necromancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,655
Default

I would think the 80s contained a much larger variety a pop music to choose from than the mid 60s did.

Just saying.
Necromancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 08:52 AM   #6 (permalink)
Ask me how!
 
Oriphiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: The States
Posts: 5,354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
Looks like the article is about pop music specifically rather than music in general.
It included all of the major genres (pop, rock, metal, hip hop, etc.).
Oriphiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 09:27 AM   #7 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oriphiel View Post
It included all of the major genres (pop, rock, metal, hip hop, etc.).
According to article:

"The Million Song Dataset uses algorithms to analyze pop songs recorded since 1955."

This says to me they're only talking about pop music—which of course includes pop rock, pop metal, pop hip hop, etc.—so only really a sliver of all music being produced. I also question their claim about the 60s having the most musical variety. The data they used only starts in 1955 so they're looking at a fairly small window of time.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 10:48 AM   #8 (permalink)
.
 
grindy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: .
Posts: 7,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oriphiel View Post
I read an interesting article that brought up many points about music, and the science behind it. One point that was brought up was that music is becoming more standard, meaning that less artists are seperating themselves from each other. More artists than ever are using the same chord progressions, vocal patterns, etc. Do you all think the article is flawed, and missed something vital? Or is music really becoming more, to put it bluntly, "boring"?

Also, apparently the years of mid 1960s were the time of greatest musical variety. Makes sense, considering the garage and psych movements kicked off punk and metal, funk and motown went mainstream, and new genres from abroad like ska hit their stride. The Beatles championed the merseybeat, the Rolling Stones kept the blues kicking, Ohio Express kept pop interesting and just a little dirty, etc.

Here is the article: 5 Ways Your Taste in Music is Scientifically Programmed | Cracked.com

And here is the website that collected the data used to analyze the trends of music: Million Song Dataset | scaling MIR research
Ah, yes...Cracked. So many hours blissfully wasted there.

I think music and tastes are actually getting more diverse and because of this pop music, which is the lowest common denominator, has to get even lower to still attract customers.
grindy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 10:49 AM   #9 (permalink)
Born to be mild
 
Trollheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 404 Not Found
Posts: 26,992
Default

Surely that's the whole point of progressive and experimental music? Aren't artists like, say, Tom Waits or Philip Glass or David Byrne always experimenting with new ways to make music, trying out new instruments and rhythms? Didn't Peter Gabriel, Sting, Paul Simon and others introduce the world at large to African and other ethnic music, and incorporate it into theirs? Surely not all artistes did or do this?

You CAN be generic I guess, just follow a formula if you want hits, but many artistes outside the mainstream are doing their best to stay well away from anything that sounds contrived or copied.
__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018
Trollheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 11:11 AM   #10 (permalink)
Maelian
 
ladyislingering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 695
Default

basic ingredients of a modern pop song:

- party party party
- mention of "dance floor"
- distorted vocals
- loud electronic noises
__________________
You and I,
We were born to die.
ladyislingering is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.