But basslines are comprised of notes, unlike hits on a hi-hat. And melodies are made of notes.

Fair enough. My point still remains that they are all elements of the beat as a whole, correct? Idk, how it is for other genres but when you hear people say "That's a dope beat" they are talking about the entire product. They might go on to say "The bass line is sick" or "I love the snares" or whatever else but the "beat" is all inclusive.

Not to mention that he completely ignored my question, accused me of something I didn't do, and then acted like the condescending ass he usually is. I asked a question to promote discussion and admited in the very first sentence of my post I am naive to the topic.

My question is why he insists on this conversation in the first place. If there's one thing this forum seems to hit people on the head with, it's that arguing why a particular form of music sucks donkey balls is fine, but trying to invalidate it as music is just arrogant close-mindedness. Trollheart regularly toes this line, but he's always clear that he's arguing his own subjective opinion and not objectively attacking it's relevance as music.

How the hell was I condescending?
I wasn't questioning his or anybodies definition of the meaning of the word melody I was just curious as to why in DYCDTTS case when he talked about it he didn't mention what I considered for the most part the most melodic part of that music.

If I didn't have an answer your question it's because I wasn't disagreeing with you and felt that if his definition of 'beat' is what you say it is and different to mine then DYCDTTS can tell me that if he wants to and clarify my question himself.

And I don't recall criticising you for saying anything, all I said was that the dictionary definition wasn't needed in this case because I wasn't arguing that point.

Well if you didn't mean to be then that's my problem and I read it wrong so I apologize, but in my limited experience you have a tendency to come off sounding cranky so I immediately read it that way. I've been sick and miserable for the past couple days, my fault.

You're right that it is used that way colloquially in hip hop circles, but that's not what the word "beat" means in a general musical sense. The beat is what you bob your head to, it's simply the underlying pulse of the song. Melodies are sequences of notes that work with the framework of the beat, but that doesn't mean the whole shebang is all "the beat".

I never said anything about rap being minimalist, it was you who first used the term.

Right, and I already said it is the lack of melody in the vocals that I do not like.

Bump.

I said in response to a couple of the videos on previous pages that the background instrumentations of the songs were actually OK. But if I wanted to listen to an instrumental melody, I'd just listen to an instrumental.

IMO something is lost if the person singing (or, "singing") a song does not actually sing notes but just "talks" some words (to a beat/instruments). It eliminates an entire avenue of emotional content and richness.

Imagine, for example, a song like the one below "sung" without notes - just reciting the poetry as in a poetry reading. Even keep the background instrumentation if you want. It might still be nice, but by not singing the melody so much would be lost. Notes add texture and emotional depth. You might still get a sense that it's a sad song, but it's just not the same. It would just be a guy talking, even if it's kinda nice talking.



So when I'm listening to music I don't just want some guy reciting poetry to me, I want something more than that. As I said before, rap is basically just poetry spoken to a beat (and instruments). If I wanted to listen to poetry, I'd go to a poetry recital. But when I listen to music, I want ... music. As in someone singing notes (presuming it's not an instrumental, of course).

I never said you did. I was just responding to the fact that you seemed to be equating "simple" with "primitive" here: