Radio songs these days are full of pomegranate

This video is awesome. [video=youtube;qjtVr_qNb7M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjtVr_qNb7M[/video]

I don't understand why he is pissed off.

Artists make money by mainly promoting one or two songs as singles to draw attention to their name and put them on the market. Sure, each CD might have a few gems, but do you really expect artists to produce every song as a hit? This guy is overly opinionated and enjoys indie music. If you don't like radio, don't listen. If you like radio, great for you, it's a free service and makes a lot of people happy. I enjoy "HIT" radio because I enjoy having people "suggest" music to me, instead of hunting down artists and trying to discover a piece I like. On his Justin Bieber rant, lolwut? Are you serious? How is a kid going to make it into the music industry making acoustic covers? He wouldn't EVER succeed. Artists NEED to collaborate and branch out in order to make money. Have you not ever heard of a starving artist? You can be the best fucking harp player out there, but if you aren't able to market yourself, how the pineapple are you going to provide for anyone in your life. Dear God, maybe you should think about stupid people on YouTube who blindly listen to your arrogant opinion and spew it across the Internet and start hating them.

At OP, this is not directed to you, this is simply my feedback to the video and "MUES".

Kurtle,

I love you.

Also, he really needs to shut his mouth.

This leads to the debate on what defines art.

Not exactly the same.

Man looks like a douche is the end of story.

Too bad Kurtle, you won't get an adequate rebuttal from that video.

All we hear is radio gaga, radio googoo, radio gaga...

Here in Singapore we have an entire radio station specialising in the classics, so I don't get that much pomegranate. Except for when there are absolutely horrendous covers of the some of the best songs...

All we hear is radio gaga, radio googoo, radio gaga...

Here in Singapore we have an entire radio station specialising in the classics, so I don't get that much pomegranate. Except for when there are absolutely horrendous covers of the some of the best songs...

I listen to RIA or 987 most of the time. most of the time i here is 'oh oh oh ohoh my gooood' and 'can we pretend that that airplanes in the nigthsky are like shooting stars ?' and then theres 'im a million, million.... dollar girl'

I WANNA BE A BILLIONAIRe, SO FUCKING BAD!


... no

I almost always listen to GOLD 90.5 FM. I grew up listening to it, so I kinda got used to the oldies. x.x

While everyone else talks about Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber, I talk about ABBA and Queen. >.>

On a side note, Asiasoft Forums is lagging like heck now.

Wait, people listen to music on the radio?

NPR. News and high-brow arts. What more could anyone want?

I listen to a radio station from brazil through the internet. They play hit music, of course, but it's nice hearing what's hitting in Brazil from here in France. They also do comedy shows that are fun (mostly just speaking pomegranate for 1 hour twice a day).

Too bad Kurtle, you won't get an adequate rebuttal from that video.

LOL. This. And I agree with you 100% Kurtle.

Wait, people listen to music on the radio?

NPR. News and high-brow arts. What more could anyone want?

> "I sip my French wine with my pinky in the air."

<3.

OT: Agreed, but it's nice to just listen to things every now and then when you're in the car. And like Chompy said, it all comes down to the definition of art, or rather, what one likes and appreciates in art, which is extremely individual and leads people consume the work of different artists. You said yourself in your FAQ that the more complicated, the more you like it, so it's no wonder you love NPR, news, and high-brow arts.

 Spoiler

Don't get me wrong, I love all those, too (> listens to NPR podcats while eating meals if I happen to dine alone), but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate mainstream (definition here meaning NOT XM Satellite/Sirius/Internet) stations for playing things to just half-listen to, or whatever. I'm not phrasing this correctly, so I'll use a fashion metaphor: mainstream radio stations, for myself and others, can be like the bum-around sweats or jeans for a lazy weekend. Don't love them and wouldn't wear them to a formal event, but they're nice to have around when the mood is right.

I listen to a radio station from brazil through the internet. They play hit music, of course, but it's nice hearing what's hitting in Brazil from here in France. They also do comedy shows that are fun (mostly just speaking pomegranate for 1 hour twice a day).

This too, in the general sense that internet radio is phenomenal. For those looking to discover new artists, my favorite is always Pandora (now that I've finally gotten an account and am obsessed). While we all don't have smartphones that can just play Pandora endlessly while on the go, it's a great place to listen whenever you're at a computer.

That, and "this" @ your comment about comedy/talk shows. My local KISS FM station does a morning show every weekday that's just fun to listen to.

Wait, people listen to music on the radio?

NPR. News and high-brow arts. What more could anyone want?

Wait, Wait... Don't Tell Me. /thread.

@Chompy. Yes I agree with you, music is all relative to whoever is listening to it. Although there are some characteristics you can use to define a *bad* song, generally for the most part, what music one enjoys is subject to the listener. I think a point can be made though, is that upbringing and culture/race (not trying to be racist. It's true) play a huge part in what type of music you enjoy best, and also I believe there is a correlation between what medium of art you find interesting and what type of music you enjoy. IE People who like graffiti as a medium of art are generally (not in all cases) going to enjoy rap/hip-hop music more than others.

ItachiPower, popular hit radio stations, by definition, are popular hit radio stations for a reason... and it's not because they play unpopular music. The radio stations generate revenue by selling songs that a majority of individuals want to listen to on the radio. Granted, certain individuals dislike the songs that are placed on the station, yet this obviously does not constitute the mass opinion as radio stations still continue to do what works. This doesn't mean that people can be disgruntled with popular hit radio stations. However, it's just silly to hate a popular hit radio station for being a popular hit radio station.

Wait, people listen to music on the radio? NPR. News and high-brow arts. What more could anyone want?

Silly Fiel, National Public Radio is for adults!

I've noticed that their music selection consists strongly of slow jazz with a dash of blues.

@Chompy. Yes I agree with you, music is all relative to whoever is listening to it. Although there are some characteristics you can use to define a *bad* song, generally for the most part, what music one enjoys is subject to the listener.

I don't understand. You believe that there are characteristics behind "bad" music that can be recognized on some absolute level by all humans. Yet you also push the fact that music is subjective to every individual. Absolute + subjective interpretation by definition are not supposed to mix together at all. When you introduce a subjective element to an absolute, then you usually just get a subjective result. Absolutes are absolute for a reason.

I think a point can be made though, is that upbringing and culture/race (not trying to be racist. It's true) play a huge part in what type of music you enjoy best, and also I believe there is a correlation between what medium of art you find interesting and what type of music you enjoy. IE People who like graffiti as a medium of art are generally (not in all cases) going to enjoy rap/hip-hop music more than others.

Eminem in many of his songs, like "Sing for the Moment", frequently address his audience as being spoiled middle-class suburban kids. I personally have a mixed taste ranging from classical to electric pop to hip-hop. I think that the internet has been crucial in helping me develop a diverse taste in music that I would not normally access without online services. If I could propose another theory on how socioeconomic factors affect music, I would argue that the economy plays a role in determining the preference to certain music pieces.

As observed, Lady Gaga is able to take the electric thrills from her arrangement and play them as semi-classical arrangement. Why doesn't she? The New York Times in their article, "Girl Pop's Lady Gaga Makeover," the author notes that artist Sarah McLachlan attempted to set on tour with a series of introspective and thought-felt songs for her 2010 tour. The concert flopped and the article quickly compared her results with the Lady Gaga extravaganzas. In short, the author didn't note this, but it has been stated that Lady Gaga's loud electronica beat was the bourbon to nurse the wounds of a bad economy and hard times. The last thing people wanted to listen to was music that tried to encapsulate feelings, emotions, and inner introspection. When times are tough, no one has the heart to... well, listen to their heart. After all, if you're going to waste time listening to something when you're already being worked and pushed 24/7, it might as well be something loud, flashy, and entertaining. Hence Lady Gaga.

I don't understand. You believe that there are characteristics behind "bad" music that can be recognized on some absolute level by all humans. Yet you also push the fact that music is subjective to every individual. Absolute + subjective interpretation by definition are not supposed to mix together at all. When you introduce a subjective element to an absolute, then you usually just get a subjective result. Absolutes are absolute for a reason.

Eminem in many of his songs, like "Sing for the Moment", frequently address his audience as being spoiled middle-class suburban kids. I personally have a mixed taste ranging from classical to electric pop to hip-hop. I think that the internet has been crucial in helping me develop a diverse taste in music that I would not normally access without online services. If I could propose another theory on how socioeconomic factors affect music, I would argue that the economy plays a role in determining the preference to certain music pieces.

As observed, Lady Gaga is able to take the electric thrills from her arrangement and play them as semi-classical arrangement. Why doesn't she? The New York Times in their article, "Girl Pop's Lady Gaga Makeover," the author notes that artist Sarah McLachlan attempted to set on tour with a series of introspective and thought-felt songs for her 2010 tour. The concert flopped and the article quickly compared her results with the Lady Gaga extravaganzas. In short, the author didn't note this, but it has been stated that Lady Gaga's loud electronica beat was the bourbon to nurse the wounds of a bad economy and hard times. The last thing people wanted to listen to was music that tried to encapsulate feelings, emotions, and inner introspection. When times are tough, no one has the heart to... well, listen to their heart. After all, if you're going to waste time listening to something when you're already being worked and pushed 24/7, it might as well be something loud, flashy, and entertaining. Hence Lady Gaga.

I'll respond to each paragraph separately:

1. What I meant by the "bad" song, is that you can pick out characteristics of a song that aren't good. For example, you could catch someone singing off pitch, or one of the instrumentalists not being very good/missing notes, etc etc. I guess I should have clarified.

2. I don't see the point you are trying to make. Were you agreeing with my statement? The reason that some spoiled middle-class suburban kids might like Eminem is because, well, they were raised as spoiled middle-class kids living in a suburb.

3. This is defying all logic though. If you were stressed and being worked from all levels, wouldn't the most efficient solution be to listen to something to make you relaxed? Like something calming, IE Classical music? I would hardly consider loud and flashy music soothing. In fact, it would just make you more worked up.

Edit: I guess it's really just about how your brain is wired, and also how you act/personality. I'm, for instance, a hipster/indie kid and I generally gravitate towards indie music as a result. I'm sure that you would find skaters tend to gravitate towards punk music, and so on. I believe it's the person that makes the music, not the music that makes the person. It's also about how you interpret and hear music, and what emotions certain chords evoke in you. Just my two cents.