Music not the bling? Why not music AND the bling?

[JGD 11,752]

This thread is also two years late 

It is never too late to express one's opinion.  This thread provides an opportunity for other users to share their opinions as well (on this certain topic), and I have never thought of "music AND the bling" until after coming across this topic.  So, I find this thread interesting.

[PartySick 134,415]

Music that does not follow a conventional structure, length and is produced in an unconventional manner / state of mind. Adding an outro to a commonly structured pop song is not experimental, creating an album that is essentially rave inspired - lite yet gayish type of music is not experimental, infusing sub genres (such as : rock or trap for instance) onto pop music is not experimental, opening your song with a 40 second intro is not experimental, singing in wacked vocals on top of a pop melody is not experimental. The closest thing to experimental music that the gay audience is exposed to is probably FKA Twigs. Here's an example :

 

 

I would call that song "unconventional", not "experimental". A song is something auditory that conveys a meaning, message, emotion, or its purpose is just to dance or listen to it. For something to be "experimental" it'd have to not be that same formula, which all music is...so it's literally impossible for music to be "experimental".

At least that's what I think. I'm no producer or music degree holder  

[Jjang 2,262]

Why are you giving me 3 songs like all music is the same to begin with?

Applause for example has very unique lyrics and the whole concept combined with the imagery is very unique for Pop msuic of today. 

DWUW not much imo, it's an Aguilera-like song from the 00s but it remains a good pop song.

And I don't agree the word experimental as well, it's music. I think ''quality'' is the right word.

 

Anyway since you find this clever let me make you the question. Which Pop music do you find experimental? (Inb4 Madonna so I can go  and throw out in the toilet now)

I don't find popular music (meaning music that is put out by the vast majority of the artists that are signed to major record lables) to be experimental. There are pop indie artists that create experimental music that is not driven by pop hooks, though.

[Jjang 2,262]

I would call that song "unconventional", not "experimental". A song is something auditory that conveys a meaning, message, emotion, or its purpose is just to dance or listen to it. For something to be "experimental" it'd have to not be that same formula, which all music is...so it's literally impossible for music to be "experimental".

At least that's what I think. I'm no producer or music degree holder  

Music coneys a meaning and is based on emotions, of course. But the way you translate that through a soundscape determines whether the music is experimental or not.

[Stephen 29,415]

I don't understand how so many of you can still misinterpret that line, for god's sake.

[Jjang 2,262]

Why are you giving me 3 songs like all music is the same to begin with?

Applause for example has very unique lyrics and the whole concept combined with the imagery is very unique for Pop msuic of today. 

DWUW not much imo, it's an Aguilera-like song from the 00s but it remains a good pop song.

And I don't agree the word experimental as well, it's music. I think ''quality'' is the right word.

 

Anyway since you find this clever let me make you the question. Which Pop music do you find experimental? (Inb4 Madonna so I can go  and throw out in the toilet now)

Since I just noticed the Madonna comment, I do no think she's experimental. But definitely more adventurous. And if we're going by your definition of experimental in the pop parameters, then yes, she's more experimental in terms of sounds, structures and vocal approach.

 

[Optimus 298]

'Music not the bling' say the people  who think that Gaga is over

 

[VforVendetta 2,024]

I don't find popular music (meaning music that is put out by the vast majority of the artists that are signed to major record lables) to be experimental. There are pop indie artists that create experimental music that is not driven by pop hooks, though.

Yes I agree but indie music is not Pop. We are saying the same thing. 

It doesn't mean that Pop music is all the same quality though, far from it. 

[Jjang 2,262]

Yes I agree but indie music is not Pop. We are saying the same thing. 

It doesn't mean that Pop music is all the same quality though, far from it. 

Well, what defines quality? so many factors. ARTPOP surely wasn't acclaimed or anything.

[PrinceGaga 7,245]

"Because I just love the music not the bling" 

Having the whole line there makes it make more sense. 

[VforVendetta 2,024]

Well, what defines quality? so many factors. ARTPOP surely wasn't acclaimed or anything.

It had good reviews in the end even with all the Gaga backlash and eventhough the whole Era was a huge mess the sales were good for 2013. I think that when it comes to music the time is the best factor. Since (hopefully) Gaga will continue to be popular in the future her past works will be revisited at some points in her career. Many successful works have been deemed lackluster and forgetable when time has passed and many less successful ones have been reconsidered or stayed great peaces of work for their time. Since it's Pop music the main factor will always be how timeless and how enjoyable (and iconic) throughout the ages the song/album remains (more than the message like in Rock music for example). Look at a timeless disco track like Hot Stuff for example. It has no unique meaning, it's about a human need/thought, like Pokerface or Applause but it is still considered an amazing dance track and a quality song because it's pure and because it had a spirit and it's own touch when it was released (eventhough Disco was already at it's peak). What makes a good song is different in Pop, Rock and Indie music and they are all important and needed in music culture. The quality exists everywere though and this is the main problem of our age, we have lost the counter, we don't know how to contrast quality. In the 70s and the 50s the quality acts always stood out against the tacky and bad ones, today everyone is at the same bag.

[Jjang 2,262]

It had good reviews in the end even with all the Gaga backlash and eventhough the whole Era was a huge mess the sales were good for 2013. I think that when it comes to music the time is the best factor. Since (hopefully) Gaga will continue to be popular in the future her past works will be revisited at some points in her career. Many successful works have been deemed lackluster and forgetable when time has passed and many less successful ones have been reconsidered or stayed great peaces of work for their time. Since it's Pop music the main factor will always be how timeless and how enjoyable (and iconic) throughout the ages the song/album remains (more than the message like in Rock music for example). Look at a timeless disco track like Hot Stuff for example. It has no unique meaning, it's about a human need/thought, like Pokerface or Applause but it is still considered an amazing dance track and a quality song because it's pure and because it had a spirit and it's own touch when it was released (eventhough Disco was already at it's peak). What makes a good song is different in Pop, Rock and Indie music and they are all important and needed in music culture. The quality exists everywere though and this is the main problem of our age, we have lost the counter, we don't know how to contrast quality. In the 70s and the 50s the quality acts always stood out against the tacky and bad ones, today everyone is at the same bag.

ARTPOP is not timeless or aesthetically outstanding, though. It followed an already dated EDM trend that was pretty much over by the time it was released.

 

[VforVendetta 2,024]

ARTPOP is not timeless or aesthetically outstanding, though. It followed an already dated EDM trend that was pretty much over by the time it was released.

 

Neither was Nevermind (the Nirvana album) and it was released at a time that Rock had already past it's glorious days, it's still one of the best Rock albums. Gaga was an act that gave innovation is Pop music but it doesn;t meanshe has to do it with every album.

Music is not only about innovation, it's about many things. As I said time will tell, why do you try so hard to prove something there is no need for just because you don't like the album. 

[VforVendetta 2,024]

Since I just noticed the Madonna comment, I do no think she's experimental. But definitely more adventurous. And if we're going by your definition of experimental in the pop parameters, then yes, she's more experimental in terms of sounds, structures and vocal approach.

Yes, it's your opinion and it's respectable. I find Gaga more unique and more an artist than Madonna, my opinion as well.

[Jjang 2,262]

Neither was Nevermind (the Nirvana album) and it was released at a time that Rock had already past it's glorious days, it's still one of the best Rock albums. Gaga was an act that gave innovation is Pop music but it doesn;t meanshe has to do it with every album.

Music is not only about innovation, it's about many things. As I said time will tell, why do you try so hard to prove something there is no need for just because you don't like the album. 

Nevermind brought alternative rock to the mainstream and was a movement of its own that actually paved a valid legacy. It's incomparable to ARTPOP's case. It had no impact whatsoever.

I like ARTPOP, I think it's an alright album.