Taylor Momsen speaks her mind about modern music

[giskardsb 12,565]

Tell em Taylor.   People tried to drag her into being a pop star but she stuck to her guns and The Pretty Reckless has put out some of the best rock music in a long long time.  

 

 

 

[Economy 46,786]

ummm... music has always been manufactured... at least ever since it became an industry with labels

 

Think of artists from the 60s and 70s... u think they all wrote their own songs and determined their own career? groups perhaps more so... but single artists not so much

[Chromatislaps 34,755]

ummm... music has always been manufactured.

​she means to say, these days a lot of music has been McDonalds type of product placement, there is nothing artistic about it...its all fast consuming oriented. Very few "artists" these days are actually original...I mean the decades up to the early 00s were all very different sounding, but these days there is hardly anyone really trying to push the envelope... just look at musical sheets of pop songs of the last few years, 40-60% of the songs almost have the same chord progression, hardly anything groundbreaking..

[DrewStevens 5,249]

To be honest I hate this attitude of feeling like a little special snowflake. Music has always had manufactured artists since the big labels started to be important. 

There are many artists out there pushing boundaries but some people only focus on the bad stuff. 

Also there's nothing wrong with pop stars. 

[Economy 46,786]

​she means to say, these days a lot of music has been McDonalds type of product placement, there is nothing artistic about it...its all fast consuming oriented. Very few "artists" these days are actually original...I mean the decades up to the early 00s were all very different sounding, but these days there is hardly anyone really trying to push the envelope... just look at musical sheets of pop songs of the last few years, 40-60% of the songs almost have the same chord progression, hardly anything groundbreaking..

Well, each year that passes is harder and harder to be original cause so much has been done

 

As for music sounding simmilar to eachother, yeah perhaps. I find it quite distinguishible but... By technicalities perhaps

 

but im also about the visuals arts part of it too. You could argue  music vidos and story concepts are much more interesting now than even just as early as 2000s when music videos were like all the same

 

industry better in some ways worse in others

 

Also when u look back 20-30 ull forget a lot of non-impactful un-iconic music... The standout artists and songs are what will be remembered more. That alone always paints a prettier picture of music in the past than it truly was

 

Decade after decade people always have said "music nowadays sucks, it isnt how it used to be". And they are gonna keep saying that. I dont exept that to change  

[giskardsb 12,565]

ummm... music has always been manufactured... at least ever since it became an industry with labels

 

Think of artists from the 60s and 70s... u think they all wrote their own songs and determined their own career? groups perhaps more so... but single artists not so much

True, there have always been label generated or producer products especially in pop, and in early R&B as well. There was however a much larger percentage of artists that wrote and arranged their own songs.  Today that is rarer, and in pop with electronic production and auto tune musicality and vocal ability are not even necessary.  Its worse now than ever.  Good artists do still pop through at least.  

[barcodemonster 3,525]

Hipsters 

*vomits

[TailoredGuilts 349]

Hipsters 

*vomits

​

[Miker 5,683]

I don't think Taylor Momsen is telling anybody with a wide music knowledge anything new. The music back in the 60's for the most part had some excellent songs and they stand the test of time. Often you will hear good covers of these songs and people get all excited only to find out it is a cover of something produced many years ago.

I do like the Pretty Reckless and they bring a good sound. I wish them success.  

[RAMROD 103,771]

sounds like every other indie snobs, but the problem with Pretty Reckless is, the indie community takes them as poser and sell out, and shunned them out, so I guess they stand in between, as alternative choice for the people that need to feel cool in school but with compromised "rock" music.

[giskardsb 12,565]

sounds like every other indie snobs, but the problem with Pretty Reckless is, the indie community takes them as poser and sell out, and shunned them out, so I guess they stand in between, as alternative choice for the people that need to feel cool in school but with compromised "rock" music.

​there is nothing "compromised" about The Pretty Reckless.  They are more rock than what most indie bands can claim these days.

 

 

[Dorothy Gale 7,575]

The Pretty Reckless sounds really regurgitated too me though.

[PopBitch 1,218]

Hipsters 

*vomits

​She's a rocker, not a hipster.  Big difference.

I think she's thinking back to a lot of people like Bob Dylan, etc.  I think if you read music biographies on bands and singer/songwriters from the '60s, '70s, and '80s, the bands/singer-songwriters were very supported by their label.  Sure, back then some acts were given songs, but I think the recording process was very organic and experimental.  They were given much wider berth to create their music without people insinuated into the mix telling them what their music should be.  And they weren't treated like now , sign a young act,  get a hit or two out of them, and then drop them and move on to the next  act, once they aren't the mega hit they were.  

Back then labels really supported the bands and had a much longer relationship with them, which gave them that creative freedom they needed to just go in the stuido, not the pressure to repeat a mega hit or you're out because in this media saturated society everyone is on to the next thing, and it's not a record-buying experience anymore  It has become a singles download market also.  Acts are disposable now days and that harder to get the big sales in this climate so there is more of a pressure to not be really relaxed and creative on your next album once you've had a hit record.  I've read many interesting articles on this.  I think she's talking about the organic nature of writing and making music was much more free form back then, where artists were left alone or nurtured.  And I hear so much acts that sound the same, nothing that makes them stand out, and nothing distinctive about their auto-tuned to death vocals.  Back then I think Taylor Momsen likes it because you had so many truly distinctive artists, a sound of their own, all different tones of vocals, and a lot more to say.  Artists don't really stand for much anymore like they did in the period she loves, the '60s.   No so much these days, truthfully, as far as true original sounding artists that are bringing something new and organic to the table.  It's why Lorde resonated with the public.  The thirst was there and ready for someone like her.  It's why Gaga is a standout in that way, vocally and as a songwriter.  It's why Arcade Fire broke out of the indie world commanding larger artists. 

And here's no nurturing going on these days if your second album didn't do as good as your first and I think the songwriting and creative process was more organic, even in the electronica world, just because of technology alone not as advanced back then.

Gaga has made many of these comments, actually. 

[Jase 13,042]

Love Taylor and the band <3

[KaanBTW 5,238]

I read Taylor's mom.