this is important
 

there are some people on this forum that understand what music is.

and many more that don't. for those that don't here are a few pointers.


1. Mainstream isn't code for bad music. Many mainstream acts bring talent and originality to the masses and act as gateway bands into the more underground forms of music. Simply because the radio started playing AFI or Coldplay doesn't mean they lose their talent. They are better than most of what you like. Deal with it.

2. Original doesn't mean better. City of Dis is a perfect example. Horns do not belong in a metal song. Nor does a clapper in a techno bit. Nor a breakdown with acoustic tinkling in the background. Sad thing is all that happened in one song. Point is just because something isn't groundbreaking, doesn't mean its not worth listening to. I'll take a good pop hook over a mediocre breakdown or some avant-garde art rock crap.

3. MTV is, and always will be, not be worthy of air time.

4. Not every band needs a keyboardist.

5. "Gangsta Rap" is not music. It usually consist of a petty thug recounting his "crimes" and sexual exploits over a simple boom-chik drum beat.

6. Technicallity overules flair. I'm not saying that a band can't be dramatic or anything but often times musical acts will focus more on the delivery rather than the musicianship. A life changing solo (such as the one found in Necrophagist's song Stabwound) will always outdo a smokebomb onstage.

7. Technically profuse does not neccessarily mean who plays fastest.


That is all for now I guess. If i think of more i'll add them. Feel free to post your opinions or possible rebuttals.

thanks for helping, dude :)

I LOVE YOU!!!!!!

*kisses*

1. Yes I agree
2. Depends , sometimes it does sometimes it doesn`t
3. Yes
4. Yes
5. Disagree , does that mean for instance that Led Zep is just some guy recounting his sexual exploits over some old blues song?
6. Nope , I`d take originality AND flair over technicality everytime.
7. Don`t really care about it

agree with all of your points

I concur.

My opinion is that he's right on with most of that. I'd agree with all of it except I need this cleared up. There seems to be a contradiction in that

You want technicallity over flair

yeah you'll take a pop hook over some avant garde peice.

That seems to cancel each other out in my mind.

But as for hatemonger. Are you ****ting me? Zeppelin to gangsta rap? It really is how awesome they am because they kill people and have emotionless sex with woman who are addressed in durogatory slang.

Gangsta rap is mostly who can out "man" each other and its for drunk people who want to try to **** women at clubs. And the fact thats its marketed to children who are corrupted by it (I work with kids) makes it less credible than ever before.

I really can't believe you made the comparison, or even insinuated.

Read it again , I never said it did.

I was suggesting that if gangsta rap is what he says " is not music. It usually consist of a petty thug recounting his "crimes" and sexual exploits over a simple boom-chik drum beat" Then the same arguement can be used against any music.

Songs without drums wouldn't qualify, so no it can't. And furthermore, You rely on the technicality of arguments to bail you out, I think you know damn well theres a massive diffrence between the two.

I can honestly say these are the only two points that I disagree with you on. I think horns can work beautifully with metal, and would like to see them utilized more often.
And although It would be an understatement to say that I'm not the biggest gangsta rap fan, saying that gangsta rap is not music and consists of a petty thug recounting is "crimes" and sexual exploits over a simple boom-chik drum beat is on the level with saying that emo is not music just a bunch of pansy boys with tight pants and eyeliner whining about how much they're heartbroken and want to cut themselves.

agree with pretty much all you said..however, i regularly use 120 minutes on MTV2 to discover new music..so i disagree with that comment.
and gangsta rap..no matter how **** you may find it is still music. it still consists of an arrangement of continuous sounds that create a basic rythmn.
and also, technicality can overule flair..but in other cases flair can convey a mood a lot more precisely then musical ability- that is what music is about at the end of the day- broadcasting emotion.

It wasn`t a technicality , it was the whole point of what I said.

oh boy i love it. "basic" :D thats classic.

I would agree with your post on the basis of your "basic rythmn" comments but as gangsta rap is based primarily on the artists rap ability, i will disagree. Because rap is not singing, and if the primary subject isnt creating a musical sound (i.e just talking really fast) then i wouldn't class it as music.

Maybe if the emphasis was on the allround layout of the "song" then you could class it as music. But when theres a tedious beat, that is only there to ease the coarse sound of the rapper, is just not music. It's talentless perfection.

Big3 - I was reffering to bands that try to hard (such as City of Dis) as compared to pop hooks. and bands with little skill (KISS, Greenday) relying on a stage show to make up for their lack of talent.

LedZepStu - MTV2 has redeeming moments. They still play music on occasion. the comment was directed at MTV, which is Real World reruns and the Andy Milohakis show.

Urban/SATCHMO - Gangsta Rap is a subgenre of the larger R&B music style. However I think that it cannot be called music due to it'ssheer lack of talent to create a rhythm in the song. While some would call that music and on a technicallity they are correct it in the larger sense of the word is not. And the Emo comment: I am not an emo aficionado but i do believe that is does take slightly more talent to do. But your point is well taken

SATCHMO - I have yet to hear horns done right in a metal song. Until that time i stand by what i said

Why isn`t it music?

Music isn`t just guitar, bass & drums you know. Just because you disagree with the context of the lyrics doesn`t make it any less valid as a form of music.

So what rap is mostly lyrically based rather than musically. You could say that about opera and scat too.Yet I don`t hear anyone saying they are 'music on a technicality'.

Basically what you`re saying is you don`t like it & you don`t understand it so it isn`t music.Which is the biggest load of rubbish i`ve ever heard.

Music means different things to differnet people. I consider music to be creative. I don't feel that Gangsta Rap is creative.

and Opera generally involves a pit orchestra.

I don`t find a lot of bands you rave about to be creative but I don`t say that they`re not a valid form of music.

I`ve seen opera done just as a solo act with no music before on a number of occasions & i`m not even a fan of it.

All together I play about 5 different instruments, most of them quite well, but Ive been playing guitar actively for 20 years and I don't mind saying that I'm very very good. I also create hip hop beats. All I can say is that there is no more talent required to create music with a conventional instrument than is required to produce a "beat" on a sequencer. They are different creative processes each with their own challenges. sure there are easier and more difficult ways to go about doing both, but producing beats can be EXTREMELY tedious work, and if you pay attention to some of the beats in "Gangsta' rap" its not all "boom chick" drum beats. There's definitely a lot of complexity involved in many contemporary beats. Believe what you will, Its music, It requires talent, and hip hop and gangsta' rap aren't going anywhere anytime soon so enjoy!

I like What's at Stake (a Slapshot cover) by the Mighty Mighty Bosstones. Its hardcore not metal, but lets not split hairs here. No, not a lick of ska in the song and its heavier than a lead vagina.

*gigles*....you said vagina......hihihhi....