Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Karlos wrote:
Whist I agree it's a bloody awful song to have to listen to, at least it actually can be called music. There's some chordal variation, structure etc. That's already way more than can be said for much of the crap today.
this I call a lousy argument. You expect a certain structure, and I think this is a very narrow view towards music (or other arts)
You have your own definition of music and I have mine.
It's not a lousy argument just because you don't happen to agree. I don't *expect* any particular structure and I listen to a very wide variety of music. However, I do expect some structure and there is no need to adopt the presumptious role of "your'e narrow minded because you think something must be a particular way to be defined as such." Now
that is a lousy argument :-D
As a hobbyist musician myself, I regard music as being more than a repetetive sound played over and over with no variation, progression.
The ideas/concepts behind popular music has been chewed on dozens of times before and are way too simple.
:lol: That's actually in direct contradiction of your first statement. How can it be too simple? Is that not expecting something in particular (eg a bit of complexity) of it in order for it to be acceptable?
BTW, don't take any of this personally, I'm just really fed up with most recent musical offerings ;-)