Justin Bieber Breaks Record Fastest Single To Re

[VforVendetta 2,024]

Music always changes. Beethoven or Mozart would cringe if they hear Beatles for example. Music is always changing over the time. I mean what is Quality in the first place?? And who are you tell people they don't listen to "quality" etc? 

Beethoven and Mozart are not acts of Popular music or music that talks to thee masses. They put the fountations on musi citself. Calssical music is a thing on it's own cause it's for everyone and for the fewer at the same time. It's not a good example at all...

And Quality is the integrity of the artist and the song, the background, the meaning, the musical journey. Even a dance song can and must have quality. Most of the Pop acts od today just products, the are like" you have an ok voice, you have the looks, we have the means to create you status so you will sell and we will become rich". Music is not burgers at Starbucks though.

[Harry 26,836]

I am not talking about level, I am talking about background. If you want to distinguish a good wine from a bad one you need to have background on the drink, it's secrets and experience in quality as well. If your background is low you will drink everything they give you. The same happens in music. Of course you can find good music yourself but you first need to have the background to know what is good music. It's not like all these people that fandom for all these Pop Stars know what they are, they think that this is what music all about and that's why so many people are offended by this, because you destroy their whole identity when you tell them that the musi cthey think is great. To sum it up it's not understanding, it's ignorance.

Absurd.

I think you just need to understand that some people like that cheap/easy kind of music. It's really that simple and I don't know why you find it so difficult to comprehend that. Or why you care so much that some kid might just really love One Direction.

[Melech 9,900]

Beethoven and Mozart are not acts of Popular music or music that talks to thee masses. They put the fountations on musi citself. Calssical music is a thing on it's own cause it's for everyone and for the fewer at the same time. It's not a good example at all...

And Quality is the integrity of the artist and the song, the background, the meaning, the musical journey. Even a dance song can and must have quality. Most of the Pop acts od today just products, the are like" you have an ok voice, you have the looks, we have the means to create you status so you will sell and we will become rich". Music is not burgers at Starbucks though.

Classical music once was popular as well. The what about Klezmer music? It is music to dance on and is even happy music. It's folk music and don't have a deep meaning mostly   So it doesn't have quality then?

[Raikov 183]

I am not talking about level, I am talking about background. If you want to distinguish a good wine from a bad one you need to have background on the drink, it's secrets and experience in quality as well. If your background is low you will drink everything they give you. The same happens in music. Of course you can find good music yourself but you first need to have the background to know what is good music. It's not like all these people that fandom for all these Pop Stars know what they are, they think that this is what music all about and that's why so many people are offended by this, because you destroy their whole identity when you tell them that the musi cthey think is great. To sum it up it's not understanding, it's ignorance.

I take issue with your comment that "rock was the pop of its day." Rock was popular, not pop. That's an important distinction to make. There were people who listened to popular music but not rock. You can only compare rock music to other rock music. If you want to compare Pink Floyd to Imagine Dragons or the Black Keys (idk what rock bands are popular nowadays, I actually dislike most rock past the 80s lol), that makes sense. But comparing Pink Floyd to Miley Cyrus when they never had the same musical goals is just silly. Pink Floyd didn't play on the radio, unless you listened to college radio, so by your own standard of the most accessible music, they should be excluded.

And you've still failed to say precisely what makes a song a quality song. You've listed a lot of vague qualities, but no hard standards I can use to determine if a song is good or not. There are people who love the music of the 60s who think the Beatles are just popularized and whitewashed versions of the more subversive music that they listen to. So who is correct? What is real quality music? Where is the rubric I can use to say "Led Zep is good, but Katy Perry isn't?" There is no such rubric. If I want cute, fun music to jump around to in my pajamas, I'm not gonna play Led Zep because they're not cute. They don't meet that standard of quality. But I would never say they're not a quality band. I won't spit at a hammer because it doesn't connect to the internet.

Let me tell you this: I looked at the #1 hits of the Billboard chart from its inception to the modern day for a project. That's right, all of them. Do you know what I found? A lot of artists I had never heard of. The bands I expected to dominate, which would be the same bands you mention, were not as prevalent as I thought. There were a lot of bubblegum pop acts, lots of ballads. And I had to listen to this stuff, too, because I had to musically a--lyze it. It was all very normal, average music. I can't say, in good conscious, that the pop acts of the 70s were better than today. The majority of the stuff on the Top 40, was okay music. Just like today. It was not filled with the Beatles and Pink Floyd and Bob Dylan. It was filled with Debby Boone and the Archies and awful ballads and more irrelevant, forgotten acts than I care to list. The majority of Top 40 stuff from that era was bad. In some ways, I'd say it was worse than today. Truly formulaic.

The truth is that pop music, the genre pop, hasn't changed. From 1899 to 2015, it's been doing the same thing for more than a century. It absorbs the influences of other genres. Pop took on some jazz and blues influences in the first half of the century. It borrowed from rock starting in the 60s and 70s. It borrowed from electronic music in the 80s. But the core was always the same - make catchy melodies with relatable lyrics. That's what pop music has always been about and will always be about. You can't expect pop music to be rock or jazz or classical or electronica or anything else but what it is. If you don't like today's pop music, check out today's rock music, since other than Michael Jackson and potentially Bruce Springsteen, it doesn't seem like you actually like the pop (not popular) acts of that era.

[Bleachella 2,932]

Congratulations, even though I dislike the song, still an impressive feat

 

[Yanko 9,860]

Yes I mean my parents had The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Micheal Jackson, Bruce Springsteen

 

and I have the spoiled brat that tries to be swag instead of making music and his horny fangirls, the freak with the tongue that is expert in every from of sellout, the wannabe rapper with the plastic butt that raps about Michael's d1ck and the Queen of the boobs and tackiness bring #1s.

 

Why god, why?

 

ok listen to pink floyed than and stop being such an obnoxious human being

-

i dont like the song but congrats to jb 

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

What's sad is that charts give a song praise more than the actual quality of the song itself...the song is boring and terrible as a comeback single yet nobody cares cuz "Omg he broke records and it went #1" 

No...I'm not hating but I see where people put their focus...

[djBuffoon 12,102]

Honestly, Justin Bieber, Miley Cyrus, Nicki Minaj, Katy Perry.

 

What is going wrong with my generation? 

What??? *major meltdown*

MTE

[Yanko 9,860]

Yes I mean my parents had The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Micheal Jackson, Bruce Springsteen

 

and I have the spoiled brat that tries to be swag instead of making music and his horny fangirls, the freak with the tongue that is expert in every from of sellout, the wannabe rapper with the plastic butt that raps about Michael's d1ck and the Queen of the boobs and tackiness bring #1s.

 

Why god, why?

 

1.reported for slut shaming and flamebait

2. "wannabe rapper"

she writes her lyrics 

she has a great flow and delivery but continue focusing on anaconda and stupid hoe i guess

and the slut shaming is disgusting  

[Rabbit Heart 617]

I can't believe he's still in... 

[Supersonic 49,376]

No big surprise, the song sounds like a mashup of all the trendy Deep House songs that are currently sitting atop of the charts everywhere.

[Dawson 9,485]

Goes to show that sometimes if you throw a massive amount of promo at something with a big enough fanbase, anything will do well

[sipthistea 21,099]

Who? 

[Creyk 17,789]

Although I don't like the song, congrats Justin. It's nice to see an older act still slaying, there are so many new and upcoming artists these days that I just don't care about (fetty, fifth harmony, marina, little mix, the list goes on) It's nice to see an older popstar make a successful comeback, and gives me hope that Gaga will do the same next year. (and well, hopefully her lead will be better)

[LeoFameMonster 1,592]

I don't like the song. So highly doubt it will last at number 1